Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Oct 2008 22:34 UTC
The legal battle between Macintosh clone maker PsyStar and Apple is still being waged, but it appears that the two companies are going to do what some of us had already predicted: settle the whole thing out of court.
Thread beginning with comment 334451
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[7]: Not quite like stated...
by Vanders on Tue 21st Oct 2008 21:15
in reply to "RE[6]: Not quite like stated..."
Member since:2005-07-06
1. The fact that nowhere does PyStar on their site mention that Macintosh and OS X are registered trademarks of Apple, Inc.
Something which I believe you are not legally required to do except in specific cases. Even if this is an issue it is a very minor issue which is also done by many hundreds of websites across the internet and certainly does not require a large lawsuit from Apple to rectify: a letter from their lawyers would have sufficed.
2. The fact that they've had to modify Apple software to allow system updates.
As I understand it they do not "modify" the software: they provide their own update agent which uses their own update servers, from which they can re-issue unmodified Apple updates after they have tested and cleared them for use with their systems. That's actually quite a smart, clean way to handle things.
However I concede it may, may be seen as "republishing" Apple software without a license, but it's a very grey area: would a web cache between your Mac and the Apple update server be guilty of "republishing" too?
And of course, the one item Apple itself isn't able to address specifically...
As such it is irrelevant to this lawsuit.
Member since:
2006-05-26
Perhaps you missed:
1. The fact that nowhere does PyStar on their site mention that Macintosh and OS X are registered trademarks of Apple, Inc. and this can reasonably cause confusion amongst potential customers as to their relationship to Apple, at least implying they have permission to do what they're doing.
2. The fact that they've had to modify Apple software to allow system updates.
And of course, the one item Apple itself isn't able to address specifically, but has someone else up in arms: PyStar got their EFI implementation without following the licensing of the creator.