Username or EmailPassword
Let me get this straight: Psystar has a case sufficient to make it worth the court's time to a judge such that they don't get told "Go ahead, you're clearly right!" and you think Apple is going to offer them a pile of money for violating their IP? Must be too free of drug trade around your parts, as that's the only logical conclusion to explain that rationale
Meanwhile, it says a heck of a lot that Psystar claims to have lost all those documents: what does that say about customer service, or the security of any customer's data that falls into their hands? Oh, and there's another thing that's clearly going to raise red flags: what about recurring federal and state income and use tax payments, which have to be made usually at least once per quarter, often once per month? With such crappy record keeping and accounting as they're using, they're pushing their luck in regards to not being audited by the state and federal IRS right into jail for tax evasion. Anyone serious about being a going concern will be very well aware that they need to have their legal butts covered, and very good records of all that, and have that available for several years, lest they get audited, heavily fined or imprisoned for tax evasion and the like. I don't suppose you know how Al Capone was eventually taken off the streets... And that's a very good reason right there why Apple would insist on such documentation, not to mention being able to more precisely argue how much harm they believe they've suffered from the IP infringement and potential dilution of the brand.
to anyone who has ever run a start up eploying only a few people and scrambeling to make a profit, book keeping isn't aslways perfect. things are rushed, overlooked, and some times just plain lost. I have done several startups and in the begining isn't not that perfectly managed thing where everything is filed accordingly and what not. Peronally I don't care what side wins this case, but I can understand where they are comming from on the basis of being a startup struggeling to survive. it must be even harder being under constant litigation.
I am not saying what they are doing it right, but I do understand it.
At the same time, one would think that if Psystar was started specifically to sell these Mac clones, they would have been a lot more careful with their filings since they were knowingly going into dangerous territory. On the other hand, if they started up and only later decided to sell these Opencomputers (Mac clones, basically) that's another matter. I don't know which is the case, I'm just saying that if they were intending to challenge Apple they should have been a bit more careful about bookkeeping.
They didn't say that they lost the documents. It says that they never had them to begin with.
One of us is remembering incorrectly: they've also created modified copies of Apple software for their purposes, as well as using their trademarks inappropriately, so it isn't entirely about the EULA, and those things are pretty clearly addressed in IP litigation law.