Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Nov 2009 21:53 UTC
Legal We've got some progress in the other legal case Apple is involved in. The California case, Apple vs. Psystar, is more or less a done deal, but the Florida case, Psystar vs. Apple, is only just beginning. As it promised it would do, Apple has now asked the court in California to either dismiss the Florida case, or transfer it to California. Apple is also asking for a permanent injuction against Psystar. Through this motion, we also gain some juicy insight into Psystar's sales projections - and more interestingly, how many machines the clone maker actually sold.
Thread beginning with comment 396732
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Reality however is Fair
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 27th Nov 2009 09:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Reality however is Fair"
Member since:

But you are not allowed to remove the Nike trademark, attach it to a generic pair of shoes and sell them as Nike. If we are going to use these ridiculous analogies then that would be a better one.


That makes no sense, and isn't IN ANY WAY like what clone makers are doing.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Reality however is Fair
by Budd on Fri 27th Nov 2009 10:41 in reply to "RE[3]: Reality however is Fair"
Budd Member since:

IT IS EXACTLY what this specifically clone maker did. Whether you like it or not,is your problem.

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:

If this is exactly like taking the Nike logo off a pair of shoes so a pair of converse can be sold with it; why did the vendor put the iron on logos on store shelves for any of the public to buy?

I'd say it's more like Gap selling geans with Ykk zippers. Someone else comes along and buy Ykk zippers off the shelf to put in there own geans. If Gap owned Ykk, it to would have to choice of selling zippers separately on store shelves or only to owners of Gap branded pants.

Reply Parent Score: 3