Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Oct 2009 22:50 UTC
Remember the motions for a summary judgement filed by Apple and Psystar earlier this week? Large parts of them were censored per Apple's request. These censored parts detailed the protection measures Apple put in place in Leopard to prevent it from being installed on non-Apple labelled computers. Psystar filed a motion a few days ago asking the judge to uncensor the information.
Thread beginning with comment 389973
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[4]: Interesting. . .
by DrillSgt on Sun 18th Oct 2009 21:45
in reply to "RE[3]: Interesting. . ."
Member since:2005-12-02
Wrong again. You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you? Thre is Quo in California, PearC in The Netherlands/Belgium/Luxembourg/France/Germany, and there are cloners in the UK and Russia.
To this case the only one of these that would matter is Quo. Quo however is doing it differently then Psystar, so you have to keep that in mind.
Psystar is shipping computers pre-installed with OS X, and they have an image they use to actually install OS X on the machines with. They already have the copies of OS X on hand to ship to the consumer, and the machines are basically already installed, well before the request from the consumer comes in.
Quo on the other hand, waits for the order and requires the buyer to pre-pay for the system, and then goes and buys the copy of OS X from the Apple store, with the consumers money, and installs it after the fact. By doing that they are acting as an agent of the consumer to install the software, which is totally allowed under copyright law. Different model from the way Psystar is doing it, and one allowed by law, as it is specifically written in the law.
Apple I don't think would have a leg to stand on, even remotely, had Psystar used the same model that Quo is using.
RE[5]: Interesting. . .
by alcibiades on Mon 19th Oct 2009 13:11
in reply to "RE[4]: Interesting. . ."
Member since:2005-10-12
Except....read Blizzard. It is possible that under Blizzard, to break a EULA deprives you of permission to make any copies, including those necessary to run the system, ie the copies into memory. I am not sure of what exactly Blizzard amounts to, but its possible that it is a counter argument.
Except for Blizzard, the point is valid.
RE[4]: Interesting. . .
by KingRocky on Sun 18th Oct 2009 22:13
in reply to "RE[3]: Interesting. . ."
Member since:2009-07-30
You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you? Thre is Quo in California, PearC in The Netherlands/Belgium/Luxembourg/France/Germany, and there are cloners in the UK and Russia.
Quo did modify any of Apple's software, and neither did EfiX. PearC is a unique case because of the copyright laws in Germany.
If a company wants to sell computers that have the ability to run OS X, then I don't believe that Apple has a legal leg to stand on. The issue is when the software is modified.
Pystar can sell all of the OS X compatible computers they want, and Apple probably can't do a thing about it. But Pystar, Quo and others like them would be no different than any other PC manufacturer, as just about any modern PC can run OS X.
In fact, since Pystar has apparently changed their business model and no longer modifies OS X, any future action from Apple regarding OS X on non-apple computers will probably be a hard battle for them to win.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-06-29
The "illegally" is what is at stake here. It is specifically allowed by US law to circumvent protections for the sake of getting software to work. This is what Psystar is betting on.. Judge Alsup will have to make a ruling on this first before you can declare it illegal.
Which law? As far as I know, the trial hasn't even started yet, so saying they broke the law is very, very premature.
Wrong again. You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you? Thre is Quo in California, PearC in The Netherlands/Belgium/Luxembourg/France/Germany, and there are cloners in the UK and Russia.