OSNews

This is a very bad move. I mean, the latest Apples are just dual core pentiums with intel gfx. Pretty much standard on dirt cheap PC's

Are we mow going to see Apple sue every PC manufacturer becuse someone "might" be able to install OSX on their white box ? "

<p>Of course not. The lawsuit targets an incorporated name unlawfully selling pre-installed copies of OS X or offering services to install OS X illegally on non-Apple hardware.</p>
<p>If the douchebag had offered to publish a thorough write up on how to install it there would be no lawsuit and people would run the risk, on their own, of seeing their warranty policies nullified and getting zero support from Apple.</p>

The article states, "Apple alleges licensing and trademark violations and copyright infringement." The only one of these alleged acts that could be construed as unlawful or illegal (criminal) might possibly be the charge of copyright infringement. However, the copyright infringement probably would only be criminal if Pystar sold many copies (installed or otherwise) from one master copy.

Remember, an EULA is a private contract -- not a government law.

It sounds like the only barely legitimate argument that Apple can make is that the Pystar computers are "diluting" the Mac brand (which is not a criminal offense).

Edited 2008-07-16 00:59 UTC

This is a very bad move. I mean, the latest Apples are just dual core pentiums with intel gfx. Pretty much standard on dirt cheap PC's

Are we mow going to see Apple sue every PC manufacturer becuse someone "might" be able to install OSX on their white box ? "

Of course not. The lawsuit targets an incorporated name unlawfully selling pre-installed copies of OS X or offering services to install OS X illegally on non-Apple hardware.
If the douchebag had offered to publish a thorough write up on how to install it there would be no lawsuit and people would run the risk, on their own, of seeing their warranty policies nullified and getting zero support from Apple. [/q]

Unlawfully selling illegal OS?
Since when is it illegal to install a legaly bought software on a computer?
Where did you find that it's illegal?
Or are you one of those gullible dimwits that will do anything anyone tells them or will believe anything they read anywhere just because it was printed?

Just because Apple says you can't do something means squat. Apple does not have any law making powers.

The only claim Apple can make is that Psystar is damaging Apple's brand and even that is highly arguable.
And if you believe that Apple computers have any higher quality parts than other computers then you've obviously haven't seen an inside of a computer yet.

install OS X illegally on non-Apple hardware

There is nothing illegal about it. It may be in violation of contract, but that is not illegal. One does wish people would think and talk with the same precision about these kinds of matters, that they would use when writing and specifying code.

Or maybe they do, in which case one shudders to think what their code must be like!

This is a very bad move. I mean, the latest Apples are just dual core pentiums with intel gfx. Pretty much standard on dirt cheap PC's Are we mow going to see Apple sue every PC manufacturer becuse someone "might" be able to install OSX on their white box ? "

The problem here seems to be that Psystar is selling the cloned hardware + OSX. If they had only sold the cloned hardware, I doubt that Apple would have a leg to stand on, legally speaking. The solution is pretty simple (but a pain in the ass): Psystar is going to have to decouple the sale of their hardware from the installation of OSX; ergo, they're going to have to let somebody else install OSX. Naturally, Apple is betting that no consumer is going to want to go through that kind of hassle just to get a clone with OSX, and they're probably right. It's odd: For all the criticism that Microsoft gets, Apple is 10 times worse when it comes to OS licensing. MS doesn't give a rat's ass about which hardware you install their products on. Apple, on the other hand, is ready to deploy a phalanx of attorneys to sue anyone into submission who dares to challenge their platform monopoly.

Please explain how Apple can legally prevent someone from hiring Pystar to install OSX on their newly-purchased, Pystar hardware.

Psystar isn't selling "cloned hardware".

Psystar is selling systems that are compatible with the open source hacks that make OS X run on generic hardware.

They are just building systems that have the largest amount of hardware compatible with the hack.

It's generic hardware you can buy ANYWHERE.

What Psystar is selling is the packaging of the computer with a retail copy of OS X and the Hack pre-installed.

I think what has finally got Apple hacked off is that Psystar is intercepting "Software Update" and modifying the packages so they won't break the system.

As the suit goes on, I'll bet this will be the major issue for the "copyright infringement".

Only Apple can legally distribute their software updates.

Microsoft is a software maker. They don't sell PCs. Their business model is not built around hardware. They couldn't care less what you tried to install Windows on, as long as they are paid for it.

Apple is a hardware manufacturer that only sell upgrades to the OS to people who buy the hardware. The OS is their property. They can decide what hardware it is permissible to sell it on, because they don't really sell the OS.

a while back I had emailed Pystar about purchasing a "barebone" version of their current $399 open computer. I advised that I already had a licensed legal copy of leopard and that I would use my own method for installing it. instead of responding sure and quoting me a price for a barebone system with just a case power supply and motherboard they made a point to advise that they didn't sell parts and that they wouldn't advise on parts for setting up a system with leopard.

maybe now the owner of pystar will realize that if he is willing to do that, and avoid installing software he can make a profit without violating any EULA agreements,etc. Afterall there is nothing wrong with stating that your equipment is macOS compatible if you don't install their software.

Am I right on my thinking for this?

Now that we're on the subject, Apple also sucks at making waffles and selling insurance. There's just no end of reasons to hate them!

This comparison is absurd. What meaning is there in saying they're worse about something they have no interest (both senses of the word) in doing? People say Apple is a hardware company because they are: Imagine if Psystar had stolen an embedded OS instead, such as by making an iPhone clone, and you might see why this disrupts Apple's business model.

No one can beat Microsoft at licensing PC software. Just ask IBM, NeXT, Caldera, Be, and Sun. Microsoft only makes money on the deal because of their aggressive tactics that ensure that fact: Until very recently, every generic PC from every generic PC supplier came with Windows. THAT is a monopoly, and I'm sick of people corrupting the meaning of that word by using it to describe vertically integrated platforms or just any successful OS they don't like. The correct word for those is niche, or even more simply, product. The fact that Microsoft sells a retail Windows you can put on anything is just a very expensive form of double dipping, and without their established monopoly it would be no different from Be in terms of success for the company.

Apple is in no position to be Microsoft, because you can't get the entire PC industry paying you a software tax overnight, and Apple is in no position to share their software with the world in some kind of charitable act like Linux because they have shareholders who wouldn't like it if they sabotaged their own source of profits, selling hardware, which, incidentally, is the reason they can afford to develop the software, which, in turn, is the reason their hardware is worth more than someone else's equivalently spec'd machine. All that is why you buy OS X on Apple's terms or not at all: if not for Apple's terms, there would be no OS X at all.