And the Apple vs. Psystar case continues to roll onwards. A lot of mud is going back and forth between the two companies: Apple has accused Psystar of making information public which was under a protective order, and obviously, Psystar denied. In addition, Groklaw's Pamela Jones continues to suspect that this Psystar case is related to the SCO case, and is part of a concentrated effort to destroy the GPL. Update: I've just been emailed (on behalf of Psystar's lawyers, actually) the outcome (in the form of a court order) of the hearing held this morning. Sadly, it's very late here, so I won't be able to analyse it properly until tomorrow.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-24
Specifically, which outlandish conspiracy theories, espoused by Ms. Pamela Jones, have turned out to be true?
Edited 2009-09-05 00:11 UTC
Member since:2006-06-21
Well, Groklaw unearthed that Microsoft was behind the BayStar deal which funded SCO in their suit against IBM. Back then people also said it was a crazy conspiracy theory... only it turned out to be true. How funny if it should happen again.
But chill, so far all PJ said is that she finds it strange that all these lawsuits that would ultimately benefit Microsoft seem to pop up at the most interesting of times. And since in the SCO case it was already proven that Microsoft was implicated... you can see how one might feel enclined to be suspicious of the Psystar case as well.
These are not stupid lawsuits brought up by random nutjobs. They are extremely artfully put together cases, backed up by lots of money from unknown sources, and which attack core strengths of FOSS, namely copyright and the GPL. If it's a coincidence it's a damn big one.
And speaking of Microsoft and how Thom doesn't see what they'd have to gain, two things. First, an earlier Groklaw article notes that Psystar is arguing in a very sly manner, which would attack the GPL and Apple but leave Microsoft's EULAs alone:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090829201948789
Second, if Apple would find itself facing clones again, like it happened in the 90's, yeah, it would be a short-term boom of Apple-like machines, but the whole thing would blow pretty soon, taking Apple down with it. Winner? Microsoft. That's because the one thing that makes Apple stuff stand out is the tight control over every aspect of its design. The attack of the clones would dilute that value and make these fake-Macs undistinguishable from PC's, while Apple would waste away in lawsuits and have its software powering their competitors.
Edited 2009-09-05 00:39 UTC
Member since:2009-05-20
Member since:
2006-07-16
I'm going easy on Pamela Jones of Groklaw because history has taught us that sometimes, conspiracy theories eventually turn out to be true even when they sounded outlandish or ridiculous at first! There are many parties in the tech industry who would like nothing better than see the GPL invalidated. While I don't think this has anything to do with the Apple v. Psystar case it's certainly understandable how Ms. Jones may believe such a thing.
On a related topic, I second the vote to see all future articles regarding the minutia of the Psystar case be moved to Page 2.