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 396950
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by bongo_x
by bongo_x on Sun 29th Nov 2009 18:26 UTC
bongo_x
Member since:
2006-03-21

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that you have to protect your intellectual property or lose the right. You can't just let one company go because they only sold 700 something machines. The next company that sells thousands of machines will use that in court as a precedent.

bb

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by bongo_x
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 29th Nov 2009 19:58 in reply to "Comment by bongo_x"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

That's when it comes to trademarks, but not IP. IP is always yours, defending or no.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by bongo_x
by bongo_x on Mon 30th Nov 2009 02:59 in reply to "RE: Comment by bongo_x"
bongo_x Member since:
2006-03-21

I wasn't sure, but it seems to me a company could say in court "they didn't stop Company A, why are they trying to stop us?".

bb

Reply Parent Score: 1