Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Mon 21st Jul 2008 14:35 UTC, submitted by Thom_Holwerda
Thread beginning with comment 323849
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: F... rickey Apple
by ringham on Mon 21st Jul 2008 15:16
in reply to "RE[2]: F... rickey Apple"
RE[4]: F... rickey Apple
by Ford Prefect on Mon 21st Jul 2008 15:39
in reply to "RE[3]: F... rickey Apple"
Member since:2006-01-16
Member since:2006-11-12
You do realize that patents help protect small companies, too, right?
Patents have nothing to do with this situation/case.
From the Mac world article: "Apple contends Psystar's owners are aware of the end-user license agreement... and that installing OS X on its Open Computer constitutes a breach of contract... Apple argues that the end result of unauthorized use of its software and intellectual property is damaging to its brand."
Apple does not claim that a patent has been violated, they claim breach of private contract and "damage to their brand."
Edited 2008-07-21 15:56 UTC
RE[3]: F... rickey Apple
by lurch_mojoff on Mon 21st Jul 2008 15:29
in reply to "RE[2]: F... rickey Apple"
Member since:2007-05-12
Well, Apple are not stopping Psystar form writing an OS, they just don't want Psystar to use theirs.
EDIT: Just noticed this gem:
"Shame of them that they not offer alternatives, instead they attack small companies, as did Microsoft with 235 patents to attack Linux."
In this example Microsoft were using their extensive software patent portfolio to bully a competing OS. The concept of a software patent exists almost exclusively for bullying purposes. That is why it is an "evil" thing to do. Apple are doing no such thing. They are not suing Psystar because the latter decided to use, say, the patented "jinni effect" in their OS. Apple are suing Psystar because they are violating Apple's Mac OS X EULA, Apple's copyright, and possibly DMCA (which I personally don't give a f--k if Psystar are violating, because it is another strongarming tool, like software patents, and doesn't protect anything).
Edited 2008-07-21 15:49 UTC
Member since:2006-11-12
Actually, patents have nothing to do with this situation/case.
Apple would be probably not be able to successfully sue for patent infringement (nor for copyright infringement), because, it appears that every OSX installation on a Pystar machine is backed by a legally purchased copy of OSX.
Pystar legally bought each copy -- Apple has been fully compensated for use of their patented (and copyrighted) property.
RE[3]: F... rickey Apple
by Ford Prefect on Mon 21st Jul 2008 15:43
in reply to "RE[2]: F... rickey Apple"
Member since:2006-01-16
You have to realize that Apple is a big company now worth a shitload of money.
Do you really think Steve Jobs decides on those issues? He will just call Apple's lawyers and ask them what to do.
There is no reason to criticize Apple for doing whatever other company in their position would do as well. Business is business and that also holds for funky Stevy. Or where do you think their success comes from? Don't be naïve.
RE[3]: F... rickey Apple
by javiercero1 on Mon 21st Jul 2008 16:31
in reply to "RE[2]: F... rickey Apple"
Member since:2005-11-10
RE[3]: F... rickey Apple
by tyrione on Mon 21st Jul 2008 18:15
in reply to "RE[2]: F... rickey Apple"
Member since:2005-11-21
Yes sorry, you have right.
In 1987, Steve Jobs was booted out from Apple. At that time he start NeXT OS and Next Box.
At the very time, he was attacked in justice by Apple cause he copy many of ideas of Apple brand.
S. Jobs answer was: "It is hard to think that a $2 billion company with 4,300-plus people couldn't compete with six people in blue jeans." - WikiQuote.org
Right now the same company, but instead S. Jobs to be attacked by Apple, right now he is the mastermind of the attack, did not try to make their product affordable, but instead it attacks the competitors.
They use iPhone, even was a Cisco brand, but they say that is too generic.
For me Apple looks like a behemoth that force you in the same as Microsoft or any monopoly do, but in their "stylish" OS, brand, products.
Shame of them that they not offer alternatives, instead they attack small companies, as did Microsoft with 235 patents to attack Linux.
In 1987, Steve Jobs was booted out from Apple. At that time he start NeXT OS and Next Box.
At the very time, he was attacked in justice by Apple cause he copy many of ideas of Apple brand.
S. Jobs answer was: "It is hard to think that a $2 billion company with 4,300-plus people couldn't compete with six people in blue jeans." - WikiQuote.org
Right now the same company, but instead S. Jobs to be attacked by Apple, right now he is the mastermind of the attack, did not try to make their product affordable, but instead it attacks the competitors.
They use iPhone, even was a Cisco brand, but they say that is too generic.
For me Apple looks like a behemoth that force you in the same as Microsoft or any monopoly do, but in their "stylish" OS, brand, products.
Shame of them that they not offer alternatives, instead they attack small companies, as did Microsoft with 235 patents to attack Linux.
Go ahead and quote Steve. It shows you didnt' work at NeXT and realize that we did lose those lawsuits and for sound reasons.
This didn't stop the NeXT Computer or NeXTSTEP.
However, this pissant stripmall stunt of a company isn't NeXT, didn't write an Operating System, build hardware plants, sell workstations they designed and built, and have a founder dump in $125 Million of his own coin into PIXAR and NeXT, plus an additional $400 Million from other investors to pull off what later would come full circle.
When this little pissant company does this then they can have their founder make off-the-cuff comments while still losing in court.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-12-22
Yes sorry, you have right.
In 1987, Steve Jobs was booted out from Apple. At that time he start NeXT OS and Next Box.
At the very time, he was attacked in justice by Apple cause he copy many of ideas of Apple brand.
S. Jobs answer was: "It is hard to think that a $2 billion company with 4,300-plus people couldn't compete with six people in blue jeans." - WikiQuote.org
Right now the same company, but instead S. Jobs to be attacked by Apple, right now he is the mastermind of the attack, did not try to make their product affordable, but instead it attacks the competitors.
They use iPhone, even was a Cisco brand, but they say that is too generic.
For me Apple looks like a behemoth that force you in the same as Microsoft or any monopoly do, but in their "stylish" OS, brand, products.
Shame of them that they not offer alternatives, instead they attack small companies, as did Microsoft with 235 patents to attack Linux.