Originally Posted by Quadra 610
That's right, Apple's EULA is legal. It "means exactly what it says."
A win for Apple, a win for consumers, and a win for vendors who depend on the integrity of the EULA.
a key to the EULA issue is that Apple's agreement is merely a codification of the rights granted to them by other laws, like copyright. If they were trying to assert additional rights that were not previously granted or violated user rights legally granted to users, then it would be a problem.
Originally Posted by bloggerblog
Selling a product containing tampered copyrighted code has always been illegal, which makes me ask: Why did Psystar invest all those resources in the first place?
because they wanted to see if they could do it and then got cocky and figured they could pull an Apple -- copy someone else's work but better. Only they got a cease and desist and tried to play anti-trust etc. Probably figured they would be heroes when they forced Apple to allow cloning again.
They do not seem interested in selling their computers, they do not answer their phones, attend to potential customer, and they are continuously on the move claiming to lose important records.
Yep. which is going to cost them their legit Windows/Linux sales and those lost records are going to be of great interest to the IRS.
Originally Posted by noirdesir
Can somebody explain me this:
Why does a judge rule on a key issue before the trial has even started?
In a civil case you can ask the judge to rule before the trial. both sides did.
In videogame terms, it's the equivalent of using up all your energy for a single, powerful shot, risking all (on part of the issues, or all of them.)
It's an imperfect explanation but maybe it simplifies it./QUOTE]
Asking for a summary judgment is like going all in at the table because you believe the other guy is bluffing (ie has a weak hand)
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
You still have the freedom to make a hackintosh, you just don't have the freedom to make money selling them out of your garage.
Actually no. The DMCA doesn't care about profit. Anyone that makes an HackMac is breaking the law. The only grey area is that if you don't tell anyone you did it, you aren't likely to get caught. Psystar shouted it very loud and very clear so they were easy to catch.
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore
Apple will now sue for damages (lost revenue, etc.. plus punitive) thus driving Psystar to bankruptcy and shutter of doors.
Actually on this particular issue Apple isn't likely to ask for damages. since they know there's nothing to collect. Shuttering the doors will be enough. the legal fees will bankrupt Psystar plenty
The main reason I like this is because if any manufacturer can do this it will severely hurt Apple and thus the millions of consumers that are served by a strong and robust Apple.
this is part of why Apple needed to see the sitch all the way through and let Psystar toss out all their arguments. Get them shot down now and not when someone with a better rep and chance of actually selling machines decides to get cute.
I'm thrilled that Apple has won. Being forced to reopen the cloning game means more time having to support all the various options which means I won't necessarily get the attention I want them to pay to my machine which is a fully AppleMac. I don't want to have to wait 3 times as long to get a bug fixed cause they have to test a zillion set ups. yeah it sucks that I have to play $4000 to get the imac I want, but if I"m going to be able to use it for the next 5 years, that's not so bad (yeah, I max'd that baby out all the way)