Apple suit: Psystar's Mac clones must be recalled
Apple's list of grievances against Mac clone maker Psystar spans 16 pages, but, in the end, its argument boils down to the one expected. Psystar, Apple says, had no right to do what it did, and should be stopped and forced to pay.
Psystar's Open Computer, as seen shortly after its unboxing at CNET.
(Credit: CNET News)In its lawsuit, a copy of which was seen by CNET News courtesy of our colleagues at ZDNet, Apple alleges copyright infringement, inducement of copyright infringement, trademark infringement, as well as a couple of other legal claims. It seeks any profits earned by Psystar from its Open Computer, triple damages for willful acts, a permanent injunction against the sale of the product, as well as recall of those units already sold.
"Apple licenses the use of its Macintosh operating system software for use only on Apple-labeled hardware," the Mac maker says in the suit (click here for PDF) adding that the only way to get a full version of the Mac OS is on a new machine. The boxed software product, it says, is only an upgrade version, valid only for upgrading an existing, Apple-branded Macintosh.
Apple argues that by selling the Open Computer in conjunction with a copy of the Mac OS, Psystar both infringed on Apple's copyright and induced purchasers to also violate Apple's copyright.
News.com Poll
The infringement, Apple says, "is and continues to be intentional, willful, and in conscious disregard of Apple's rights." It also alleges that its use of Apple's trademarks "is likely, if not certain, to deceive or cause confusion or mistake" over whether there is a connection between Apple and Psystar.
A Psystar employee told CNET News on Tuesday that no one was available to comment on Apple's suit.
However, Apple charges that Psystar owners and managers have admitted in public statements their knowledge of the existence of Apple's software license agreement and its terms.
Because the infringements were willful, Apple says it is entitled to triple damages.
A status conference in the case is set for October.
Mark A. Goldstein, a lawyer with the Westlake Village, Ca.-based SoCal IP Law Group, said Apple's case appears to be a "slam dunk."
"In view of the Grokster ruling, it's hard to see any viable argument (for Psystar)," he said.
"If Psystar only sold hardware without an OS or only with Ubuntu or MS XP, then the case would be wholly different," he said. "They could assert that there are substantial non-infringing uses. That is, a hardware maker/reseller should be able to sell a computer that can run multiple operating systems."
"That they are selling Apple OS leaves them open for direct and contributory copyright infringement," Goldstein added.
John Ferrell, chairman of the intellectual property practice at Carr & Ferrell, also wondered what legal theory Psystar will used to defend their cloning of the Mac.
"Using copies of Apple's operating system to build Apple look-alikes was thought to have been clearly settled in the 1983 landmark copyright decision that put the last of the significant Apple clone makers, Franklin Computer, out of the Apple business," he said in an e-mail interview. "Apple's Macintosh products are protected by a wide range of intellectual property assets including copyrights, patents, and trademarks. It's no (coincidence) that there have been no successful Macintosh 'me-too' manufacturers in the past quarter of a century."
Ferrell added that One Infinite Loop, the road that stretches through Apple's headquarters, "is littered with the wrecked business plans of companies that have tried to copy and sell Apple look-alikes."
Infringe on trademark. Psystar didn't call the computer Apple. What trademark? Apple should lose its trademark because Apple is a dictionary word. I wish someone will sue Apple so it loses its trademark that way it can't go after anyone for Apple trademark infringement. Apple will have to change its name or allow other companies to use Apple as its name, this will cause it to lose A LOT of money. If I have money, I'm going to do that.
Steve Jobs need to go to jail. He kept on suing people left and right. Karma is going to come to you batch.
Outside of software products have uses beyond their intent and those uses are considered reasonable. A screwdriver to open a can of paint for example.
Personally I hope Apple loses. If they win (and the merit of that is absed on the "ugrade" nature of the product vs. a full copy which apparently you can't buy) I hope it's limited entirly to the OS so Psystar can send out XP and some instructions on how the owner can add versitility to their computer by installing the Mac OS should they have it laying around.
It's funny how people trash MS when Apple is the same or worse.
Slam dunk for apple.
sina loghavi
Apple's licenses are socialist version of software.
Yes, because using Apple's Boot Camp hurts the sale of MicroSoft's PC sales.
OTOH, Given the relative sizes, it'll likely turn out that Psystar will probably go bankrupt before the outcome arrives.
As for recalling them? Heh... fat chance.
/P
Plus its also deceptive to a customer to tell them they have Mac OS X (which is true out of the box) but after software updates they do not have the exact same code as a person using an Apple Computer.
Psystar cannot sell copies of Mac OS X unless Apple gives them permission. To do so is to sell someone else's property and (presumably) make a profit from it. The alternative is that they only "gave away" Mac OS X and "sold" the computer. This is still illegal because in that case they would be giving away someone else's (Apple Inc.'s) property.
It was down earlier today and then back up later. It may be a technical problem, they seemed to have the same problem back when they first started violating Apple's EULA
-
by mlinder69
July 15, 2008 1:29 PM PDT
- Regardless of how you feel about the laws, how apple does business is exactly why I would never buy a thing from them, they suck far worse than MS every thought about.
-
Reply to this comment
View
all 3 replies
-
-
See all 219 Comments >>