Jump to content

Psystar sued!


Recommended Posts

[newsimg]http://www.aqua-soft.org/media/news/b3ff35abd06f74a7ce7f4fbf58a553dd.jpeg[/newsimg]Apple Inc. is fed up with a small Florida-based firm that has been selling its own brand of computers running hacked versions of the Mac OS X operating system and has finally slapped the company with a lawsuit.

The Mac maker filed a formal complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on July 3rd, just one day after Psystar began distributing a modified version of the Mac OS X 10.5.4 Leopard update to customers who had previously purchased one of its unauthorized Mac systems.

While details of the suit are unclear at this time, AppleInsider has learned that Apple and its counsel at Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP filed the suit on grounds of copyright infringement.

In April, Psystar made headlines when it announced a $400 desktop dubbed OpenMac (later renamed Open Computer) which was described as "a low-cost high-performance computing platform" based on the ongoing OSX86Project -- a hacker-based initiative aimed at maintaining a version of the Mac OS X operating system for everyday PCs.

A representative for the company, identified only as Robert, would later go on record and challenge Apple to bring formal charges against his firm, arguing that the Mac OS X end-user license agreement, which prohibits third-party installations of Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, stands in violation of antitrust laws.

"What if Microsoft said you could only install Windows on Dell computers?," he said. "What if Honda said that, after you buy their car, you could only drive it on the roads they said you could?"

With Apple remaining largely silent on the matter, Psystar last month continued to taunt the Mac maker by aggressively staking its claim as the lone company outside of Apple selling Mac OS X systems, unveiling a pair of Xserve-like rackmount computers unofficially based on Mac OS X Leopard Server.

As part of its unauthorized Mac clone business, Psystar has promised to provide customers with altered versions of Mac OS X system updates for its Open Computing products shortly after Apple releases official versions for its own systems.

[Thanks, AppleInsider!]

Link to post
"What if Microsoft said you could only install Windows on Dell computers?," he said.

Um, Microsoft doesn't make computers, they license the OS. Apple makes the computer AND the OS (duh!). That quote is so flawed, it's no wonder they're going to lose.

Link to post
Um, Microsoft doesn't make computers, they license the OS. Apple makes the computer AND the OS (duh!). That quote is so flawed, it's no wonder they're going to lose.

They can still do that. Theoretically, if they wanted to, they could only license it to Dell only. Would they do that? No, doesn't make money. Obviously, Apple is doing something right with their business since their doing that.

Can someone please translate this to german? Very difficult to understand for me, thanks.

Here you go, translated by Google Translate.

Apple Computer, Inc. ist satt, mit einem kleinen Florida ansässige Unternehmen, das seit dem Verkauf ihrer eigenen Marke von Computern ausgeführt gehackt Versionen des Mac OS X-Betriebssystem und hat schließlich schlug das Unternehmen mit einer Klage.

Der Mac-Hersteller den Akten eine formelle Beschwerde bei der US District Court für den Northern District of California in der 3. Juli, nur einen Tag nach Psystar begann die Verteilung eine modifizierte Version des Mac OS X 10.5.4 Update Leopard an Kunden, die zuvor gekauft hatte einer von ihre unbefugte Mac-Systemen.

Während die Einzelheiten der Klage sind unklar, in dieser Zeit, AppleInsider hat gelernt, dass Apple und seine Berater auf Townsend und Townsend und Crew LLP Akten der Anzug aus Gründen der Urheberrechtsverletzung.

Im April, Psystar machte Schlagzeilen, als er angekündigt, einen $ 400 Desktop synchronisiert OpenMac (später umbenannt Open Computer) wurde der als "Low-Cost-High-Performance Computing-Plattform" auf der Grundlage der laufenden OSX86Project - ein Hacker-Initiative zur Aufrechterhaltung eine Version des Mac OS X-Betriebssystem für PCs Alltag.

Ein Vertreter für das Unternehmen, die wir nur als Robert, würde später weiter zu erfassen und Herausforderung Apple zu bringen formelle Anklage gegen seine Firma und vertritt die Ansicht, dass die Mac OS X Endbenutzer-Lizenzvertrag, der verbietet Drittanbieter-Installationen von Mac OS X auf Nicht-Apple-Hardware, steht unter Verstoß gegen das Kartellrecht.

"Was wäre, wenn Microsoft sagten, Sie könnten nur der Installation von Windows auf Dell-Computern?", Sagte er. "Was wäre, wenn Honda gesagt, dass, nachdem Sie ihr Auto kaufen, können Sie es nur Laufwerk auf den Straßen sie sagten, Sie könnten?"

Mit Apple weitgehend unverändert blieb stumm auf die Frage, Psystar letzten Monat weiter sticheln die Hersteller von Mac aggressiv Spieleinsatz ihren Anspruch als Einzelkämpfer Unternehmen außerhalb von Apple Verkauf von Mac OS X-Systemen, ein Paar Enthüllung des Xserve-Rackmount-Computer wie inoffiziell auf der Grundlage von Mac OS X Leopard-Server.

Im Rahmen ihrer unberechtigten Mac-Klon, Psystar hat versprochen, den Kunden mit falschen Versionen von Mac OS X System-Updates für seine Produkte Open Computing, kurz nachdem Apple Releases offiziellen Versionen für seine eigenen Systeme.

Link to post
Dude, ADHD. I got about 2 paragraphs done until I couldn't take it anymore :P

I had to re-read some pages a few times due to all the repetition. D:

To sum it up:

They didn't inform Apple that they were going to do this or ask for permission.

They sold retail OS X rather than full OS X. According to that document the retail version is only an upgrade and not meant to be installed on a computer without OS X already on it. (basically you can only get the "full" OS X by buying an Apple computer) This means that Apple only licensed it to them, rather than them owning the product.

They didn't stress the fact that they were not connected to Apple.

And the one thing that enabled Apple to go after them: They used hacked .kexts to run OS X better. Before this it was a matter of EULA, which a court doesn't give a shit about. Doing this was copyright infringement, since they were editting non open-source parts of the OS. I think its funny since they stole those .kexts from the OSx86 community. They also stole PC EFI from Netkas, which is pretty pathetic being he put alot of time into it. I wish he would jump in and sue them too. :P

Link to post

Now Apple wants a recall of the machines, per PC Magazine...

I'm of two minds about this; Clearly there is demand for the OS, minus the overpriced 3rd party hardware (that can be obtained at Newegg.com very reasonably), but on on the the other hand, Apple has a legitimate argument that their intellectual property was infringed (obliquely, anyway).

In short, the only thing holding Apple back in the marketplace is Apple. And recalling computers that will run Windows and Linux flawlessly doesn't make any sense...

Link to post

Yeah. The least they could've done is put better compatible hardware in their "OpenMac"s. What a joke. I know of better (and hell, some being cheaper) hardware -- where if I buy individually based on "perfect OOTB compatibility" lists, I can install OS X with no hacked kexts, vanilla kernel, updates... all as if it were on a real mac itself. If they were going to use that approach, they could've at least done it right.

Link to post
Yeah. The least they could've done is put better compatible hardware in their "OpenMac"s. What a joke. I know of better (and hell, some being cheaper) hardware -- where if I buy individually based on "perfect OOTB compatibility" lists, I can install OS X with no hacked kexts, vanilla kernel, updates... all as if it were on a real mac itself. If they were going to use that approach, they could've at least done it right.

...but if you installed it as if it were on a real Mac you would have vanilla kernal. In terms of kernals "vanilla" means original. :P

Link to post

The ONLY differences between a REAL Mac and of the shelf hardware is EFI (which is easy to work around) and the embedded TPM module.

Since Apple uses a TPM module, you have to hack at least ONE kext to build a Hackintosh.

Apple uses "Don't Steal Mac OS.kext" to verify the TPM module is present.

Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...