Psystar claims Apple asking for non-existent, redundant info

1246717

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 331
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Oh great, I see you're another Adobe spiv who won't be happy until everyone on earth is forced into using their proprietry software.



    Say yes to open standards, say no to Adobe's attempt to close parts of the web, by forcing developers to buy their software and consumers to download their plugins.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    ...no flash on iPhone...



  • Reply 62 of 331
    old-wizold-wiz Posts: 194member
    Certainly a company that is running a business has to have information for the IRS? There's no reason why they can't produce that info for Apple. They're obviously hiding something. Any business has to have some accounting records.
  • Reply 63 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    Oh great, I see you're another Adobe spiv who won't be happy until everyone on earth is forced into using their proprietry software.



    Say yes to open standards, say no to Adobe's attempt to close parts of the web, by forcing developers to buy their software and consumers to download their plugins.



    And really now, in light of what the iPhone does well, what it is capable of, does Flash really matter??



    Hardly.



    The iPhone came out of nowhere to almost overnight revolutionize the entre industry with the features it DOES have. And that doesn't include Flash, MMS, and video recording. Pretty damned impresseive. And it helped Apple break revenue records like never before. In only a few months it took #1 spot in the US among smartphones and #3 worldwide. it takes years for others to achieve that. And the iPhone is NOT a cheap or economically priced product.



    And guess which platform developers are dying to work on?



    Again, though, we're off topic . . .
  • Reply 64 of 331
    kerrybkerryb Posts: 270member
    I hope the judge in this case can see through this moronic case. I know judge Judy wouldn't stand for it.
  • Reply 65 of 331
    physguyphysguy Posts: 915member
    Seems the judge agrees with Apple Wolrd-of-apple
  • Reply 66 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    Seems the judge agrees with Apple Wolrd-of-apple



    Yeah I saw it too. It only makes sense.



    I'm really interested to see how Psystar is getting their hands on OS X.



    I wonder if they'd dare to produce fraudulent documents. These thieves are capable of virtually anything.
  • Reply 67 of 331
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anilsudhakaran View Post


    Looks like someone from the Osama, sorry Obama team is here.



    Moron.
  • Reply 68 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Moron.



    I actually have no idea what he meant by that. It doesnt even make sense in terms of sarcasm or a joke.
  • Reply 69 of 331
    wambowambo Posts: 4member
    Isn't it amazing that lawyers are allowed to help them lie? This is obviously perjury, but yet, lawyers can go ahead and create these BS document sand present them to the courts. By law, any company is required to file a tax statement. These include profit, losses, dividends paid, etc... K-1 form comes to mind. Where are they? Psystar is hiding someone/company or stalling before the ultimate defeat and end of business. It's too bad they they could not become a low end dealer for a few years to increase market share, then take the money and run after the license agreement expires. But I really don't know if this would help Apple.
  • Reply 70 of 331
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    The stalking-horse theory just won't go away. I admit I've always thought it was implausible, but now I'm beginning to wonder. Psystar is trying to hide something. The question is, what?
  • Reply 71 of 331
    jezreeljezreel Posts: 2member
    And this time Big Brother has an Apple logo.
  • Reply 72 of 331
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,205member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    If only there was a way to electronically send files to people. Some sort of an electronic mail, if you will.



    that computer was accidentally dropped during the move and the hard drive crashed. since Psystar is so focused on litigation they didn't want to spend the time or money to recover the drive.



    and I agree that the IRS is going to find their so called lack of documents very interesting. I wonder if Apple can demand their tax filings as part of the proof (if they haven't already)



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    A more apt analogy would be that someone thinks they have the right to do some minor editing on the movie then turn around and sell copies of it on eBay as their movie.





    funny you mention that. there was a company a couple of years back that was sued for blantant and gross copyright infringement for re-editing movies to clean up the language, remove sex scenes etc without permission from the studios. And yes the studios won.
  • Reply 73 of 331
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    Seems the judge agrees with Apple Wolrd-of-apple



    I love this part from the agreement"



    "... 15 - Bank statements for all of Psystar’s accounts from Commerce Bank and TD Bank

    from April 2008 through September 2008. To the extent that said statements are

    not immediately in the possession of Psystar either in physical or electronic form,

    Psystar shall ask Commerce Bank and TD Bank for these statements
    on an every

    other day basis until Commerce Bank and TD Bank provide said statements ... "



    Given that Psystar's position was that it was not in possession of the documents, this is hilarious. It appears that Psystar was actually trying to argue that the dog had ate their paper bank statements or some such? And that they had no idea that the bank could give them further paper copies if asked? It implies that they also claimed to have asked the bank once and on receiving no reply never asked again? Who would believe this crap? What kind of fool would even try to get away with that in a court of law?



    And now the judge is making them promise to ask the nice bank lady every second day until they give them to them?

    HIlarious!





    Psystar is acting (and being treated like) ten year old boys here.



    I think this is strong evidence in favour of Psytar being more of a Judge Judy case than some conspiracy masterminded by dark forces in the computer industry. Coming to court without these basic documents is just ludicrous and claiming that you lost them is not going to cut it with most judges I think.
  • Reply 74 of 331
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    that computer was accidentally dropped during the move and the hard drive crashed. since Psystar is so focused on litigation they didn't want to spend the time or money to recover the drive.



    So did they not file taxes for that year? If they did, their will be a copy of their finances. Did they really have everything on one drive in one machine? I can't believe that a company that is completely electronic with no paper backups would not have tape backups of their servers.
  • Reply 75 of 331
    citycity Posts: 522member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    Big corporations should not be allowed to dictate what we can do once we make a purchase.



    I'm sure all the Apple fanboys here would be cool if Sony made you agree to a "license" that said if you purchase a DVD movie made by Sony Pictures Entertainment, then you have to play it only on a Sony DVD player. Same argument goes with music.



    I've used Apple computers since the Apple IIGS and they've always been overpriced on the hardware side.



    If Sony did that they wouldn't sell very many DVDs
  • Reply 76 of 331
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by city View Post


    If Sony did that they wouldn't sell very many DVDs



    The DVD argument doesn't make sense since it's created and controlled by a consortium. Sony does make PS3 games which will only play on PS3s.



    A little history of how DVD came be...
  • Reply 77 of 331
    well said. For a second there I thought you were taking sides with THE MORON that thinks that its ok to take as you wish years of one company's work , who itself STARTED OUT as a little one stop shop. In the case of copyrights I have mixed feelings on the issue. If company A patents something thats so specific that it prevents competition in that arena Im not ok with that because that is undermining the ability for other companies to try and make their own better version of something which is what competition is really.



    But for a little sh*t disturber like Psytar to come in, and use as defence I dont know how to run a business I cant be held accountable is by far the stupidest thing, and just backs the fact that they had no clue what they were doing when deciding to steal Apple IP
  • Reply 78 of 331
    g3prog3pro Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    A more apt analogy would be that someone thinks they have the right to do some minor editing on the movie then turn around and sell copies of it on eBay as their movie.



    Akshully, a more appropriate analogy would be that someone buys a movie on DVD, takes the disc out of the original packaging, places it in a packaging that they themselves created, and then sell that product at a much cheaper rate to people who don't care about the fancy external packaging.



    Owned.
  • Reply 79 of 331
    madivanmadivan Posts: 45member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    Big corporations should not be allowed to dictate what we can do once we make a purchase.



    I'm sure all the Apple fanboys here would be cool if Sony made you agree to a "license" that said if you purchase a DVD movie made by Sony Pictures Entertainment, then you have to play it only on a Sony DVD player. Same argument goes with music.



    I've used Apple computers since the Apple IIGS and they've always been overpriced on the hardware side.



    Ever hear of UMD on the PSP? The only reason DVDs play on multiple manufacturer's machines is because it is a standard that is cross licensed. Try again.
  • Reply 80 of 331
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Akshully, a more appropriate analogy would be that someone buys a movie on DVD, takes the disc out of the original packaging, places it in a packaging that they themselves created, and then sell that product at a much cheaper rate to people who don't care about the fancy external packaging.



    Now that many of these media appliances have upgradable firmware you can DL for free off their website and install via various methods, how about if I DLed the firmware for a commerical Blu-ray player and then built my own BR player to sell publicly without the consent of the owning company?
Sign In or Register to comment.