Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Mon 21st Jul 2008 14:35 UTC, submitted by Thom_Holwerda
Thread beginning with comment 323860
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.
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[5]: F... rickey Apple
by lurch_mojoff on Mon 21st Jul 2008 16:32
in reply to "RE[4]: F... rickey Apple"
Member since:2007-05-12
Pystar legally bought each copy -- Apple has been fully compensated for use of their patented (and copyrighted) property.
No, Apple are not fully compensated - the pricing of Mac OS X assumes that the stipulations of the EULA are obeyed. For example (not based on facts, but a realistic hypothetical case) Apple make $200 per copy, $70 of which are calculated in the price of a new Mac (totaling $270 for software) and the rest $130 - the retail price of the upgrade copy.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
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:
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