apple sues psystar to block macintosh clone sales

UPDATED 5:38 P. M.
The website of Psystar is now running normally.
Maybe Apple has more important things to do.
For example, the launch of the iPhone 3g)
But computer manufacturers have now taken steps to shut down Psystar, a manufacturer of open computing series Macintosh clones that has been available since.
Apple filed a lawsuit on July 3 (PDF here)
Federal District Court in Northern California, claiming Florida-
Companies at headquarters sell non-
Apple hardware, including the server, can run a modified version of the Mac OS X Leopard operating system.
Apple said in the lawsuit, \"by embezzling Apple\'s proprietary software and intellectual property rights for its own use, psystar\'s actions hurt consumers and sold them a bad product, this product is advertised and promoted in a false and unfair manner, which means it is related to Apple.
\"This suit details the meaning of\" bad \", citing commenters comments on the system of the Psystar, which indicate that the computer\" is missing things like iLife, Bluetooth, IR receiver, etc, they \"are loud, crazy loud \".
\"It\'s no surprise that the lawsuit requires not only that Psystar stop selling its computers, but that the company recall all the machines that have been sold.
Apple also asked for compensation and legal fees.
As of Wednesday, the website of Psystar has been closed.
Rudy Pedraza, the owner of the company, did not comment.
Sales staff who answer calls at the company headquarters (888-456-7801)
As far as I know, open computer systems are still on sale and the website is closed because the company is \"experiencing a lot of traffic,\" he said.
\"We are working hard now,\" he said . \".
Comments are no longer accepted.
Psystar, a factory White box maker, is trying to make a name for himself by blatantly ignoring Apple\'s software license agreement.
The real victims here are anyone who doesn\'t know, who bought one of these white box systems and ended up with a loud, poorly assembled, unsupported machine.
Consumers who are looking for a cheaper Mac box are better off buying a cheaper white box machine and installing Mac OS X on it themselves.
If the prospect of hacking Mac OS X making it run scares you, then you \'d better buy a Mini with proper warranty and customer support, or even a cheap Windows machine.
This is the reason for the failure.
No court would have ruled on Psystar like no court could have ruled on IBM. compatible PCs.
The reason is simple: they have not violated Apple\'s disclaimer license agreement at all.
They just offer Apple-
Compatible gear, cycle.
It can be said that its quality is better or lower, and so is the argument for prosecution.
Psystar will not hurt Apple more than IBM\'s entire package.
Compatible computers are hurting giant IBM.
In addition, the industry as a whole has benefited from many IBM clones around the world and is reluctant to build PC gear configurations around the world.
When you realize that what Apple really wants is to hold on to Mac customers and continue to charge a huge amount of service time, the situation is simpler, away from many unanswered complaints and cancel the purchase price.
How many more bullies do we need to see?
In response to the comments above, if the prospect of Hacking OS X making it run scares someone, isn\'t it better to get one of these Psystar clones?
Because I think the whole idea behind it is that it is cheaper than mini.
What\'s the problem with showing Apple the small competition for charging on some things?
People don\'t realize that iLife, Bluetooth or infrared receiver won\'t come with it?
Well, I doubt Psystar is promoting that it has these things, so why would people expect them to be there?
If they\'re really crazy, it\'s too bad.
It shows that they are not of high quality.
But that doesn\'t mean they shouldn\'t be sold.
Many people are just as satisfied with Wal-Mart\'s brand and brand name.
It\'s my 2 cents.
Zeev Reuteman: \"Psystar does no more damage to Apple than it does to IBM as a whole --
Compatible computers are hurting giant IBM.
\"In fact, IBM\'s PC clone has done a lot of harm to IBM, and eventually it was completely kicked out of the PC market.
The beneficiaries here are Microsoft, not IBM.
In retrospect, IBM should do its best to prevent cloning.
Apple should do the same now.
If Psystar wants to sell computers, they are welcome to sell Linux or Windows machines.
Of course, Psystar, if you do a feature by comparing it to the features of the Mac Mini, it\'s not just a bad, poorly built computer --
It\'s more expensive.
I\'m totally in favor of competition, but it\'s closer to consumer fraud than Apple\'s legitimate competition.
This is not a problem with the big guy squashing the little guy.
The apple was invented by several children in the garage.
But they actually created something new.
Apple II was unique and revolutionary at the time.
Small companies like Psystar (
Will one day)
Become the next Apple
But they have to do it through innovation, invention, brilliance and hard work --
Not cloned. [to Collin]
Buy a PC if you want disposable hardware.
If you want a well-designed system, look forward to paying for it.
Apple has the right to license their software in any way they choose.
You don\'t like it. you can take your business somewhere else.
That\'s how it works.
Their products are not \"rights \". ”[
Said to Zeev: \"This is the reason for the failure.
No court would have ruled on Psystar like no court could have ruled on IBM. compatible PCs. ”]Are you serious?
Psystar will be defeated like a rented mule.
Does anyone remember Grokster?
This is a dunk for Apple.
Pystar has been calling on Apple to \"meet the legal challenges \".
This is the so-called intentional infringement. (
Microsoft licensed their software to system manufacturers.
Apple specifically prohibits its software from being installed in Africa.
Apple hardware-the key difference. )
One day Apple\'s arrogance will come back and bite it.
Poor quality of Pystar-
If it\'s really pathetic
This is a question that is decided by the market and not by the court.
The history of Apple\'s court is sad, perhaps to bring high legal costs to others, even if a preliminary understanding of the law clearly shows that it is not likely to succeed.
For example, in the past, Apple sued Microsoft for adopting the \"look and feel\" of the Mac, which Apple took from Xerox, ask bloggers to provide sources through subpoenas for their speculation about upcoming Apple products, etc.
I wrote it for a long time.
In fact, the word Mac user has been saddened by this childish behavior since 1984, as it should be a proud and noble business enterprise.
Psystar does not provide \"Apple-Assembled gear.
\"They have invaded the operating system to make itApple hardware.
This is obviously illegal.
IBM does not control the way hardware and software work together as Apple does.
Install the mac operating system in any non-Apple hardware.
As many Apple fans know, this policy really hurts Apple after the increasingly popular 90 s for PCs, but today it\'s an important part of their continued success.
You can sell a computer that is compatible with mac OS X, what you can\'t do is sell it with a copy of OS X installed, and mac EULA is not allowed to sell it.
On the other hand, you can re-sell a copy of OS X and have the user install it on their own.
A cheap, scalable OSX computer doesn\'t need much.
The jump from mini to the lowest-priced Pro is exponential.
Apple should fill the gap by itself.
Psystar may have performed poorly, but I hope someone can do a better job.
It is legal to use DRM and DRM to protect copyright.
Apple did not, however, do so.
Apple is using DRM and EULA to protect the monopoly of hardware production that can run OSX.
So far, we all know that high quality machines made with ready-made parts can be produced at a price lower than Apple Mac.
Apple has two options, either to stop selling separate licensed copies of the software or to tolerate other companies that sell hardware that can run OSX.
Simply include DRM to prevent your OS from running on ready-made hardware, which is much worse for the competition than having a piece of browser software on your desktop.
I would love to know how many people who post reviews are Macintosh users and how long they have some hardware.
Not only does Apple have superior software and hardware engineering, it can also build and maintain its value with consistently reliable machines.
I\'m in a 6-year-
Old Tower I use a lot every day.
Did I buy it more expensive than Windows tower? Yes.
Do I know this trade fair happened? Yes.
Do I think it\'s worth it? Absolutely.
It is paid repeatedly by itself.
Take a look at the price points on any used Mac site and see how these machines maintain value over time.
I feel the negative \"sour grapes\" comment on inflated pricing comes from people who want to buy a BMW but only have a Ford budget.
I agree with a previous poster and he suggests picking up a mini if they need a machine that is both cheap and reliable.
I promise you will buy three Dell or HP for the same lifetime of the same small machine.
Everybody, total cost of ownership.
Simple and clear. Go, Apple!
For Al Feldzamen, if you are indeed a Mac user since 1984, then you will know that Apple has not stolen anything from Xerox.
Schle received generous compensation. (
\"Apple\"
53, first print-1999.
Xerox\'s $1 million investment in Apple\'s stock returned $17.
When Apple went public, it was 6 million. )
Childish behavior? Hardly.
Defending intellectual property, like any other business, is certainly not a teenager. Nice “Word-of-the-
However, the use of the day.
Protecting intellectual property is the reason why Apple provides research and development funds to deliver the operating systems and hardware you use.
As for Apple\'s arrogance, it\'s already a bite for them when they get permission to clone.
They have learned a lot since then.
Yes, they may still be a little arrogant, but some of them are worth it.
I personally support Psystar, whether it\'s legal or not . . . . . . I think Apple\'s performance on the playground is long enough and it\'s time to retaliate!
Also, it would be a slap in the face for those ignorant consumers who think that because their Mac works better than their porn sites --
A Mac is a better machine.
The Mac works better because they only need to support their own systems.
If Microsoft only needs to support their own systems and not millions of them, Windows will be as smooth as OS X.
By the way: I run Linux.
@ Ted Todorov: But according to your argument, Apple will benefit as much as Microsoft, because Apple offers OS X, just like Microsoft produces Windows.
I can\'t see what you got at all.
What is the hostility to Apple?
I noticed that there are quite a few posts on this article that sound unreasonably hostile.
I don\'t see any problem with Apple wanting to protect its brand by ensuring quality?
If Microsoft is so \"arrogant\", maybe my roommate will have a computer that can work, not the damn Vista box that can\'t even log in to our wireless network reliability.
In terms of the view that Apple\'s legal case is easily dismissed, I will not count on it.
I mean, does anyone of you even bother reading the lookup print on the OSX document that comes with the OS?
Their boxes are airtight!
I mean, it\'s just common sense people.
Once you buy a product, you can do whatever you want.
Of course, you can cancel your guarantor, but this is not against the law.
But once you try to make money from someone else\'s product-your illegal behavior.
Apple is smart and creative enough to create not only high-quality operating systems, but also a stable hardware platform.
Maybe Psystar should put in some work on its own, instead of copying someone else\'s work, rather than manipulating their ideas.
I hope Apple will bury them deep and will never climb back. Go Apple!
Another reason not to go to Apple.
Pystar not only violated Apple, but also violated the EFI V8 license, which is used to simulate the firmware of the Mac and in the non-Apple machine.
They can\'t give up the claim that \"everything we do is completely legal and in the interest of fair play.
\"Not only do they not have legal rights to redistribute (and modify)
Apple\'s products, they didn\'t have the legal mechanism to install and sell it in the first place.
What about Psystar? From Netkas.
Org: \"re-allocation and use of binary forms for direct or indirect commercial purposes, whether modified or not, is strictly [sic]forbidden.
\"I wouldn\'t be surprised if the author of EFI V8 received a call from Apple\'s legal team . . . . . . .
I like to see the fire of this company very much.
Apple\'s EULA says their operating system has to be installed on \"Apple-
Not that it must be manufactured, sold or even recognized by Apple.
Why make a fuss if Pystars are so rubbish?
Apple is good enough, but the overall invasion of privacy by the EULA and the high price makes it good, but the price is too high.
If the garbage is at least the right price.
Give them some midol and ipad.
All the support from Psystar is really interesting.
Gizmodo is a Psystar Chronicles.
They changed the business address multiple times and gave at least one false address.
Psystar is nothing more than a few flies-by-
Night scam artists who want to make money quickly and then disappear . . . . . . PC fans are coming to rescue them.
If Psystar were their white knight, Microsoft\'s devotees would have said a lot.