Apple files motion to dismiss Psystar 'monopoly' lawsuit

Jonny Evans
|
October 01, 2008
|
Share

 Apple has filed a 23-page motion to dismiss upstart clone maker Psystar’s counterclaim against Cupertino rather than filing a response to that claim. 

The story starts way back when, when Psystar, a Miami-based company, started advertising its $400 OpenComputer this week. A PC that shipped with Mac OS X installed, and "violated Apple's terms of use" for the OS.

Apple's End User License Agreement clearly says its OS can only be used on Apple-branded hardware - and soon (in July) slammed an injunction against Psystar for breaking that admonition, accusing the firm of copyright and trademark infringement for pre-installing Leopard on systems,

Faced with that lawsuit, Psystar fought back with a legal claim which accused Apple of breaking anti-trust laws by determining that only Macs can run its OS.

Psystar even claimed Apple embedded code in the OS that, when it recognizes non-Apple hardware, sends the system into a kernel panic, in order to prevent operability on computers other than Macs,

Speaking to Information Week in August, a Psystar employee said, "What if Microsoft said you could only install Windows on Dell computers?" The rogue firm also accused Apple of charging an 80 per cent mark-up on hardware.

Via: World of Apple

Comments (13)

daPrinz (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 9:05am

I agree 100%. I can't imagine that a small company like Psystar lacks so much common sense. I still believe that there is a master behind the puppet. I would like to know the full story.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 9:34am

You are comparing industries that have little in common with software. End users depend on companies like Psystar to challenge monopolies like Apple. Apple does everything but tell you how to use your computer and I am sure they are working on ways to do just that.

The OS, like the computer itself, is a tool. People who use tools to perform their job cannot do their jobs well when they are limited by the maker of the tools to using the tools only as the manufacturer prefers.

M$ got slapped for this behaviour, why shouldn't Apple?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 3:14pm

Because Microsoft was using its monopoly power - over 95% of the worlds OS desktop - to "destroy" Netscape and other vendors. In addition, there are no viable alternatives to WIndows when it's use is often stipulated in contracts and event in government regulations.

Furthermore, Windows itself has many restrictions spelled out in it's license. Just not the Apple-branded machines one, but there are dozens of other limitations above and beyond mere theft.

In contrast, Apple has less than 5% market share world-wide, and there are viable alternatives (namely, Windows, Linux, and OS/2 Warp). Just kidding about Warp.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 8:13am

"What if Microsoft said you could only install Windows on Dell computers?" haha erm, they are 2 different companies and 1 is a monopoly, what a dick, if apple was at 70% or over marketshare there might be a case but the vertical solution for a 'niche' brand is far from a monopoly.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 10:45am

In addition, microsoft sold the Windows OS in a condition that could be run on multiple different manufacturer's equipment from the start. If they changed that later, then it would become a contestable thing.

Apple, on the other hand, has almost never (except for the Gil Amelio dark ages) allowed compatibility with non apple equipment.

I hope the court awards Apple a no contest ruling.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 8:56am

damn... I was kinda hoping this would play out. I wanted to see who would win. Awell.

Is it possibled for pystar to force apple to continue the case?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 8:59am

damn... I was kinda hoping this would play out. I wanted to see who would win. Awell.

Is it possibled for pystar to force apple to continue the case?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 8:59am

damn... I was kinda hoping this would play out. I wanted to see who would win. Awell.

Is it possibled for pystar to force apple to continue the case?

tmm (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 9:12am

How can a company not forcing you to use their OS be named a monopoly? That is news to me.

Apple doesn't allow you to run Mac OS on other computers, but you can install ANY other x86 OS on a Mac, now.
Very monopolistic of them, how easy they make that and even include very well made software to do that.
Nobody else does that.

Let me make it clear - like the first Commenter already said:
The efforts to get Mac OS to run on - mostly cheap, crappy - any x86 are a attempt to feed on Apple's work, r&d, success and property.

Very well said by Chano: They are stuck with either Windows or Linux.
BOTH are now in a dead end. Windows is a pile of mess, because it has always to be the lowest denominator and drags a rat's tail of "compatibility" stuff.

It's so apparent that the model of simply "buying in" what you self want not to put any effort into is now starting to break down.
What is the difference between a HP, a DELL, a Gateway, a Sony?
Not only do they all use the same standart components, they all even run the same software. The only alternative is Mac OS.

Computers are FINALLY all about software.
Apple - Steve Jobs and his "team players" - new that decades ago.
And if you want great software, you need full control of the hardware. Because bug fixing for a gazillion of configurations will lead to: WINDOWS!

Good idea of all you "open up Mac OS" ranters: it would be dead fast.
(Which is imo mostly the screaming of nerds which want custom build machines, because Macs aren't gaming machines. Admit it already).

And finally I have to say that the first comment, by Chano, was well written!
I couldn't agree more and compliment him on his comment. Very well made!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 9:36am

^ Fanboi

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 10:24am

Linux at a "dead end?" You REALLY don't know what you're talking about. BESIDES, PCs, Linux is on practically every type of device imaginable. Heck, the PS3 is Linux as well.

Yeah, Linux is at a dead end. RIIIGHT. You seriously have no clue.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2008 - 2:27pm

your right its not a dead end. It just moves very slow. (also ps3 does not run linux out of the box, it can be installed however. The ps3 rumor is the same as the wii rumor, they dont run linux.) also before you call me ignorant. I am developing my own distro based on ubuntu. I have used these versions of linux
Ubuntu 7.04-8.04, Ubuntu studio 7.10-8.04, Fedora 7-9, Gentoo linux with kde 4, Sabayon Linux idr the versions, Linux Mint, Kubuntu, and many other small distros.