Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Dec 2008 20:49 UTC, submitted by judgen
The legal back-and-forth between PsyStar and Apple is slowly but surely moving into the twilight zone. Not too long ago we had Apple going all black helicopter on PsyStar claiming people and/or companies other than PsyStar are involved in the clone maker's unlawful practices, even though Apple could so far not name any of them because, well, they don't know who they are yet. If that wasn't enough, PsyStar now claims that Apple's copyright on Mac OS X is invalid.
Thread beginning with comment 341410
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by lurch_mojoff on Wed 24th Dec 2008 21:28
in reply to "I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2007-05-12
Either my sarcasm detector is completely broken or you are not reading the same story I am. "Quite serious"? Really? By pulling the most ridiculous allegations out of thin air? This is nothing but desperation and it actually supports exactly the argument that Psystar are "just another company looking for a quick buck by stepping on Apple's feet and causing a bit of a stir, then just giving up".
RE[2]: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by UltraZelda64 on Wed 24th Dec 2008 21:45
in reply to "RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2006-12-05
They're a small company. Just about any small company (or even medium or probably large one) would have *given up* by now. Hell, they wouldn't have even done something like this in the first place. It's too much of a gamble (and likely a losing one at that). The fact that they're still willing to fight (even if that means digging their own grave even deeper) shows that they're at least trying... despite how laughable their claims may be. They could have just took the publicity and ran.
RE[2]: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by looncraz on Thu 25th Dec 2008 05:37
in reply to "RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2005-07-24
Well, what is REALLY happening is rather typical of any lawsuit. You ALWAYS try to attack the very merits by whatever means available of the other party's case - ALWAYS.
If you find that a copyright application form was filed improperly - for whatever reason - you try and use that if your opponent's case depends on it. Cases get thrown out on technicalities all the time. Sometimes ones that don't even make sense.
Sadly, what I don't see here, is what Psystar's evidence is in regards to this matter. It could be something really minor ( like a typo )... or it could be something rather serious ( like the wrong proof of product - instead of OS X, they supplied Darwin (happens) ).
I wish I knew.
Besides, in the U.S., copyrights are automatic - so it ain't gonna work... but whatever...
Still, my desire is to see Psystar pull out a surprise win. Not just because I almost always root for the underdog, but because I believe Psystar is in the right. NOTHING in the law prevents Psystar, or anyone else, from installing MacOS X on a non-Apple computer.
Technical hurdles for copy-protect only apply to piracy. They buy MacOS X at retail and sell computers with a service to install MacOS X for the customer - while warranting that the computer will be able to run MacOS X. All legal.
--The loon
PS: I think I get it now:
From copyright.gov:
Why should I register my work if copyright protection is automatic?
Registration is recommended for a number of reasons. Many choose to register their works because they wish to have the facts of their copyright on the public record and have a certificate of registration. Registered works may be eligible for statutory damages and attorney's fees in successful litigation. Finally, if registration occurs within 5 years of publication, it is considered prima facie evidence in a court of law. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration” and Circular 38b, Highlights of Copyright Amendments Contained in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), on non-U.S. works.
Registration is recommended for a number of reasons. Many choose to register their works because they wish to have the facts of their copyright on the public record and have a certificate of registration. Registered works may be eligible for statutory damages and attorney's fees in successful litigation. Finally, if registration occurs within 5 years of publication, it is considered prima facie evidence in a court of law. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration” and Circular 38b, Highlights of Copyright Amendments Contained in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), on non-U.S. works.
Edited 2008-12-25 05:46 UTC
RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by Hussein on Thu 25th Dec 2008 00:20
in reply to "I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
RE[2]: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by TheIdiotThatIsMe on Thu 25th Dec 2008 01:34
in reply to "RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2006-06-17
Using Mac OS X isn't a right!
It is if you pay for it. Through Pystar, you DO pay for Mac OS X. The real question is does Apple have the right to limit how you use it after you've paid for it, and also whether or not Pystar broke copyright by intentionally altering/fooling/bypassing/whatever part of the OS.
...when better options exist like Windows XP and Windows Vista...
That is completely subjective. While one person may argue that Windows is a better option, another may argue that Mac OS is a better option. In the end they may both be right (or wrong), because really it's up to the end user as to what's best for them. Same goes for Linux.
In the end, it's not a privilege, but an option. And when a company attempts to limit a consumers options for it's own gain, you may run into problems.
RE[2]: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 25th Dec 2008 03:11
in reply to "RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2006-12-05
Using Mac OS X isn't a right! It's a privilege! If you want OS X buy a Mac.
The real question is why would you want to use such an OS, when better options exist like Windows XP and Windows Vista, or the free option (Linux) for people who care about money?
The real question is why would you want to use such an OS, when better options exist like Windows XP and Windows Vista, or the free option (Linux) for people who care about money?
Wow. Just... wow. What the hell are you talking about?
And I'd really hate to burst your bubble, but my first "real" computer (a '97 Gateway 2000 machine with Windows 95) was the introduction that really sparked my interest in computers (sorry... the previous Apple IIe with DOS doesn't count), and I've been a Windows user until just a couple years ago. It ended with Windows XP for various reasons, including:
1) Microsoft's seemingly increasing lack of care for their own users with preference towards the mega "entertainment" corporations (one word/abbreviation: DRM).
2) Their insistence to attempt to kill off what worked, and worked quite well I might add (Windows XP), and try to force Vista onto PC users like they've never forced an "upgrade" before. It seemed like an eternity that they held back even the slightest hint of an SP3 of XP, for example, while they were busy trying to force Vista down people's throats.
3) My increasing knowledge of what they, as a company, have done in the past, and increasing skepticism of them as a result.
4) The realization that there are, in fact, "better" alternatives to their OSes available, and even free of charge.
What this all means is that, as a longtime Windows user, I've given up with Microsoft starting with Vista. I'm currently a Linux user, but BSD, Solaris, Haiku, and possibly even Mac OS X are not out of the question. So, I'm not quite sure what you mean when saying that Windows XP and (*gasp*) Vista are better. They're exactly what I'm running from.
Edited 2008-12-25 03:30 UTC
RE[2]: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by Bobthearch on Thu 25th Dec 2008 07:36
in reply to "RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2006-01-27
RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by trenchsol on Fri 26th Dec 2008 03:59
in reply to "I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2006-12-07
RE[2]: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past...
by milatchi on Fri 26th Dec 2008 04:45
in reply to "RE: I was too quick to judge Psystar in the past..."
Member since:2005-08-29
I'm a Mac user and let me be the first to say that Apple deserves everything they get. In the past Apple has unleashed its lawyers with unprecedented litigious force
on people for doing far less than what Psystar is doing now. So in my opinion it's about time karma caught up with Apple.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
The Verge pointed me to a blog post by Leap Motion - which reveals how their Kinect-like motion control works with Windows 8. "From the second you plug in your Leap Motion Controller, you'll be able to browse the web and interact with your computer just by moving your hands and fingers in the air. With Leap Motion technology and Windows, you can do everything that's possible with multi-touch inputs - without actually touching anything. This also means that existing applications in Windows 7 and 8 will respond to your natural hand and finger movements. Soon, we'll show you how Leap Motion will work with Mac OS X." Quite cool.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
PocketNow interviews Marc Dillon, and there's an interesting note about why Jolla is keeping the display properties under wraps: "We're leaving some of those details out because we do understand that there are a lot of really big players in the market and they tend to take certain components in the market and dominate them. We created the ability to actually be able to run Sailfish on multiple hardware displays and be able to swap components, so this is part of the demand and supply planning phase. We are committed to this industrial design which is a 4.5-inch display, an 8 megapixel camera on the back and a front-facing camera at the front, and the exact specs of the display we'll provide when we're close to delivery." Something you rarely hear anything about.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
"This is my NeXTstation Turbo Color booting the Mac System 7.1 Operating System using a hardware add-on called 'Daydream'. The Daydream has a Mac ROM and a few custom ICs in it and hooked up to the NeXTs DSP port. Turns your NeXT into a full fledged 68k powered Mac." So cool.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
"The NetBSD Project is pleased to announce NetBSD 6.1, the first feature update of the NetBSD 6 release branch. It represents a selected subset of fixes deemed important for security or stability reasons, as well as new features and enhancements. Please note that all fixes in the prior security/bugfix updates (NetBSD 6.0.1 and 6.0.2) are also in 6.1."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
"At the end of a week in which Electronic Arts confirmed it wasn't developing a thing for the Wii U, one of the software engineers in EA Sports' Canada studio, in a series of since-deleted tweets, disparaged the console as 'crap' and suggested Nintendo should give up on hardware altogether. 'The Wii U is crap. Less powerful than an Xbox 360. Poor online/store. Weird tablet', tweeted Bob Summerwill, listed as a senior software engineer at EA Canada, in a reply to a tweet posting a link about EA's no-Wii U news. 'Nintendo are walking dead at this point'." The Wii U is turning into the 21st century's Virtual Boy.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
"In NixOS, the entire operating system - the kernel, applications, system packages, configuration files, and so on - is built by the Nix package manager from a description in a purely functional build language. The fact that it's purely functional essentially means that building a new configuration cannot overwrite previous configurations. Most of the other features follow from this." Interesting approach. A Linux distribution, sure, but with some very refreshing ideas about system configuration.
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Appfour added, among other features, C/C++ support to its new version of AIDE. From Android-IDE, "Now you can write parts of your app or your whole app in C/C++ on your device. AIDE supports the Standard Android NDK toolchain (GCC 4.6 + Bionic, STL, ...). No changes are necessary if you want to build an app developed on a PC with Eclipse. C/C++ development is fully integrated: Build errors appear in the error list and files can easily be navigated to with Go to file. The editor supports C/C++ syntax highlighting."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Ars nails it: "The answer is that Google did announce what amounts to a fairly substantial Android update yesterday. They simply did it without adding to the update fragmentation problems that continue to plague the platform. By focusing on these changes and not the apparently-waiting-in-the-wings update to the core software, Google is showing us one of the ways in which it's trying to fix the update problem."
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
"It is good for programmers to understand what goes on inside a processor. The CPU is at the heart of our career. What goes on inside the CPU? How long does it take for one instruction to run? What does it mean when a new CPU has a 12-stage pipeline, or 18-stage pipeline, or even a 'deep' 31-stage pipeline? Programs generally treat the CPU as a black box. Instructions go into the box in order, instructions come out of the box in order, and some processing magic happens inside. As a programmer, it is useful to learn what happens inside the box. This is especially true if you will be working on tasks like program optimization. If you don't know what is going on inside the CPU, how can you optimize for it? This article is about what goes on inside the x86 processor's deep pipeline."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
"It was the only moment I heard regret slip into Otellini's voice during the several hours of conversations I had with him. 'The lesson I took away from that was, while we like to speak with data around here, so many times in my career I've ended up making decisions with my gut, and I should have followed my gut,' he said. 'My gut told me to say yes.'" The world would've been a much different place - Apple would have been less dependant on Samsung for its chips, which probably would've meant less money for Samsung to develop its Galaxy business.More News »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2006-12-05
One of the previous news stories made it out to look like they were just another company looking for a quick buck by stepping on Apple's feet and causing a bit of a stir, then just giving up. Now it seems clear that they're quite serious. What can I say? I really do hope they win.