As we've detailed before, both companies filed motions for a summary judgement, and in its ruling, the court sided with Apple on basically all the major points in this trial. The judge affirmed the legality of the EULA, agreed that Psystar broke the DMCA, and that the clone maker violated Apple's copyrights. This is what we call an eight-ender in curling.
As said, I'm down with the flu, so I don't feel like summarising everything in detail. You can download the order and see for yourself - it's not even that tainted by legalese. The trial itself is not over, however, as there are still a number of issues to work out.
In any case, this is a good example of the slippery slope I wrote about earlier this week. This opens the door for software companies to include - and enforce - all sorts of restrictive clauses in their EULAs, because Alsup's entire ruling is based on the fact that yes, Apple licensed Mac OS X instead of selling it.
It's a crazy situation, but I guess Psystar's own conduct is partially to blame here. In the order, Alsup mentioned sloppy legal conduct by Psystar's lawyers a few times, and the installation method Psystar used seemed very elaborate and complicated as well (multiple copies, disk images, and so on).
A win for Apple, a loss for consumers (that would be us). That software? It's not yours. You better step in line with whatever the software company tells you.