
There are probably lots and lots of lawsuits going on every day in the technology world, and generally, they are quite uninteresting to all of us. Exceptions exist, of course, and the case of Apple and PsyStar is definitely one of them. It's a lawsuit that could test one of the most debated issues in the world of software: the EULA issue. To refresh your memory: PsyStar started offering Macintosh clones
earlier this year, which caused quite the uproar in the Mac community. Apple was silent on the issue at first, but a few weeks ago the company decided to
take legal action against PsyStar,
claiming PsyStar violated Apple's copyright and license agreements (EULAs), and motivated others to do the same. While several legal experts agree that Apple's EULA will
stand the test of court in The Netherlands, the situation in the US might be completely different. PsyStar seems prepared for the worst, as they have
hired lawyers from Carr & Ferrell LLP, a firm who successfully fought Apple in court over IP issues before. I'm breaking out the popcorn, because this is hopefully going to be a big one.
Member since:
2008-04-10
On one hand, I hope Psystar win, simply because I like to see regulations like this destroyed. If I bought a copy of OS X, I'd like to be able to install it on anything. Apple still get their money from the sale of OS X, and what I do with it shouldn't concern them. However, poking out of my other sleeve is the predictable other hand. I think Apple's stance on only supporting the hardware they choose and doing it (for the most part) well is quite a reasonable stance to take. I think the middle ground here would be letting people install OS X on whatever they want but not providing tech support for people on unapproved hardware; which is kind of what happens with Hackintoshes already. Throw in a disclaimer that software updates may break existing functionality, and that's already more than most software providers would do.
Edited 2008-08-01 09:56 UTC