Psystar claims Apple asking for non-existent, redundant info

13468917

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 331
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    You see, now you are closer to the truth.



    Apple could have prevented this very situation by selling copies of Mac OS X which ONLY upgrade previous installations of the software. It could have also prevented this situation by selling a full install version which retails for $300.



    Instead, Apple decided to litigate the competition out of the picture. Not because Apple is in the moral position, but only because it wants ALL competition removed from the picture for no other reason besides hubris. Microsoft fell into that trap. Look where it got them.



    There's nonsense, and then there's bloody nonsense. This bloody nonsense, squared.



    The ability to use a produce in violation of the law in not tantamount to permission to do so. I think we could all easily come up with numerous examples of copyrights which can be easily violated, but I seriously doubt anyone would suggest that those copyrights are null and void on that account. Some seem totally convinced that computer operating systems live in a completely different legal and logical universe. They don't.



    Neither Apple nor any other company is obligated to allow, let alone encourage or create, competition for their own products. Who does this? Name one.



    Microsoft's problems were with antitrust laws. Their situation was completely and utterly unlike this situation. They have no resemblance to each other in any way, shape or form.
  • Reply 102 of 331
    trajectorytrajectory Posts: 647member
    I'm all for rooting for the underdog, but, I think in this case Psystar is being purposely obtuse and vague. Any company that has investors and spent millions on R&D is going to have financial statements. Their excuses seem dubious at best.
  • Reply 103 of 331
    steviet02steviet02 Posts: 594member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by parky View Post


    This is not competition it is theft, pure and simple.



    Well, not really, they are purchasing the OS. It's the EULA that they are breaking.
  • Reply 104 of 331
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by steviet02 View Post


    Well, not really, they are purchasing the OS. It's the EULA that they are breaking.



    It's more than just the EULA. They are trading on Apple's copyrights and trademarks.
  • Reply 105 of 331
    g3prog3pro Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    There's nonsense, and then there's bloody nonsense. This bloody nonsense, squared.



    The ability to use a produce in violation of the law in not tantamount to permission to do so. I think we could all easily come up with numerous examples of copyrights which can be easily violated, but I seriously doubt anyone would suggest that those copyrights are null and void on that account. Some seem totally convinced that computer operating systems live in a completely different legal and logical universe. They don't.



    Neither Apple nor any other company is obligated to allow, let alone encourage or create, competition for their own products. Who does this? Name one.



    Microsoft's problems were with antitrust laws. Their situation was completely and utterly unlike this situation. They have no resemblance to each other in any way, shape or form.



    Selling a computer with a legally purchased operating system on it is illegal? Oooo kaaayyyy.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    It's more than just the EULA. They are trading on Apple's copyrights and trademarks.



    So selling an unused retail copy of Mac OS X on eBay while mentioning "Mac OS X" on the title and showing a photo of the box is illegal? Ooooo kaaayyyyyy.
  • Reply 106 of 331
    bobertoqbobertoq Posts: 172member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by steviet02 View Post


    Just in case you didn't fully understand what he meant... If you have only an email and delete it without printing it out then its gone. I'm not saying it doesn't sound fishy but your comment made it sound like they had the email, when it's clear they are saying it was 'lost in the move'.



    Why would you delete an email when you have Gmail?
  • Reply 107 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Selling a computer with a legally purchased operating system on it is illegal? Oooo kaaayyyy.











    So selling an unused retail copy of Mac OS X on eBay while mentioning "Mac OS X" on the title and showing a photo of the box is illegal? Ooooo kaaayyyyyy.



    That's individual private sale.



    Psystar is selling these on computers and running a business behind it.



    Big differences there.



    Same reasons Apple turns a blind eye to the hackintosh community but not to Psystar.
  • Reply 108 of 331
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Selling a computer with a legally purchased operating system on it is illegal?



    No, that isn't illegal if that is how you bought it... and there is plenty of precedence that allows that to happen, but buying one copy and selling two is illegal. How many copies of Windows do you get with each Dell? Two, one on a disc (or a partition as your install disc) and one installed as the OS. Psystar is buying one copy on disc but then selling two copies with each of their illegal clones. If they were only selling the retail software uninstalled with their PC, requiring their customer to install it then the issue would be a lot more grey. But that isn't all what they are doing. Buyng one and selling two, without first getting an OEM license from Apple, which that have the right to not allow.



    PS: You still haven't answered my question.
  • Reply 109 of 331
    maximaramaximara Posts: 269member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    Seems the judge agrees with Apple Wolrd-of-apple



    Glad to see Judge Alsup saw through Psystar's nonsense and demand they produce the documents required by both Florida and Federal law. Failure to do so could result in contempt of court charge and if they tick off Alsup enough a summery judgment in Apple's favor. This could be followed by the AG of Florida and IRS going after Psystar for failure to keep the required tax documents.



    In short it looks like Judge Alsup may be getting fed up with Psystar's legal games.
  • Reply 110 of 331
    maximaramaximara Posts: 269member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    A tax return (which should also be in the possession of their accountants, assuming they have accountants), won't necessarily include all of the documentation Apple is demanding. I presume tax returns will could suffice as a P&L statement for that tax year, but Apple also wants breakdowns of costs for constructing a Psystar Mac clone, and more specifically I am guessing, where they are buying their copies of OSX and for how much. The suspicion has to be that Psystar is not actually buying a copy of OSX for every Mac clone they sell; if they could prove they are, I can't imagine why they would not be anxious to prove it to the court.



    While it is true that all the information Apple is requested is not sent to the IRS with the Form 1120 (the corporate tax return) it is required if the IRS ever did an audit. By law you must have documentation that proves that every figure you gave the IRS is real especially the figures put on Schedule D (Form 1120) and Form 4797; these documents must be kept for seven years.
  • Reply 111 of 331
    g3prog3pro Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    That's individual private sale.



    Psystar is selling these on computers and running a business behind it.



    Big differences there.



    Same reasons Apple turns a blind eye to the hackintosh community but not to Psystar.



    So, it is legal if an individual sells one computer, but it's illegal if two people sell two computers? At what point is it legal and what point is it illegal?
  • Reply 112 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maximara View Post


    Glad to see Judge Alsup saw through Psystar's nonsense and demand they produce the documents required by both Florida and Federal law. Failure to do so could result in contempt of court charge and if they tick off Alsup enough a summery judgment in Apple's favor. This could be followed by the AG of Florida and IRS going after Psystar for failure to keep the required tax documents.



    In short it looks like Judge Alsup may be getting fed up with Psystar's legal games.



    Yes. Judge Alsup saw through their BS before, too.



    It seems Psystar is now playing the "little guy" or "mom and pop store" card. Big bad Apple is trying to strongarm the little guy.



    Except that the little guy in this case is the worst kind of Intellectual Property violator.
  • Reply 113 of 331
    jensonbjensonb Posts: 528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    I'm all for rooting for the underdog, but, I think in this case Psystar is being purposely obtuse and vague. Any company that has investors and spent millions on R&D is going to have financial statements. Their excuses seem dubious at best.



    Indeed it does. Let's assume for a second that Psystar really is a coupe, of rebellious cowboys in the AMerican equivalent of a Garden Shed. Lt us then assume that this business is "volume purchasing" (I use the term loosely owing to the low volume of sales) its parts from conventional dealers, and not directly from manufacturers. Tey are assembling the machines and installing the OS themselves. :et's spec up a Psystar and a Dell to match roughly on power:



    Core2 Duo E7400

    Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium/Mac OS X 10.6 Leopard

    2GB RAM

    500GB Serial ATA 7200RPM HDD

    16xDVD+/-R Drive on the Dell, 20xDVD+/-R Drive on the Psystar

    Radeon HD 4670 512MB on the Dell, GeForce 9500GT 512MB on the Psystar



    Our Dell runs us $689.

    Our Psystar? A cool $723.99. Switching to a 9400GT drops it to $674.99.



    Now, since Dell is one of the largest PC manufacturers in the world and buys its components direct form manufacturers at substantial economies of scale, it is surprising that some cowboys are able to sell a comparable system within $100. And by that, I mean it would be surprising if they enjoyed the same OS pricing.



    They do not. Dell most certainly do not pay Microsoft $129 for Windows per machine. Estimates put the number at $50 or lower. Tell me then. How is it that a manufacturer, who are building machines by hand, and paying more than twice as much for their OS, able to compete on price with a giant like Dell?



    That Psystar can build a machine at such a similar cost is absolutely absurd. There is no way they can make profit on that, they'd be lucky to break even. Dell itself has razor thin margins. A couple of yahoos in a garage couldn't possibly compete on price.



    How then can Psystar possibly be a going concern? It has to have revenue coming in from elsewhere. And think of it like this. Who gains from Psystar winning this thing? Not Psystar themselves, no way. Microsoft? Nope, they lose out massively. Apple's rivals, who make PCs? They stand to gain a great deal - namely OS X, which many of them have been after for years.



    There is more evidence that Psystar is a front Company than there is evidence it actually exists. But the question remains, who is behind it? Clearly, it is someone Apple is competing with. The question is which of the many businesses going toe-to-toe with Infinite Loop are involved?



    But say for a moment, you don't think there's enough evidence to say it's some wider conspiracy. Let's do some roleplay. You're a venture capitalist, I'm Psystar:



    "Hello, I'm a nobody who just got out of College. Me and my associate here don't know much about running a business, but we'd like to sell computers with OS X on them for less than Apple sells theirs for and at prices competitive with PC makers...We think it's legal...Maybe...Anyway, we need like half a million dollars to get a foothold in this market and since we aim to compete on price, our profit margins will be razor thin even where we actually have them - often we'll be selling at BE or lower - there won't be much return on your investment.



    So...Interested?"
  • Reply 114 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    So, it is legal if an individual sells one computer, but it's illegal if two people sell two computers? At what point is it legal and what point is it illegal?



    Are you a business? Are you incorporated, etc, etc. And that's only one part of the issue.



    If you as an individual unlock OS X onto a generic PC and then load it onto that PC (or render it into a condition in which it can be installed on that PC), and you then proceed to sell it publicly you're already in violation. But Apple can't go after every individual like that.
  • Reply 115 of 331
    g3prog3pro Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    No, that isn't illegal if that is how you bought it... and there is plenty of precedence that allows that to happen, but buying one copy and selling two is illegal. How many copies of Windows do you get with each Dell? Two, one on a disc (or a partition as your install disc) and one installed as the OS. Psystar is buying one copy on disc but then selling two copies with each of their illegal clones. If they were only selling the retail software uninstalled with their PC, requiring their customer to install it then the issue would be a lot more grey. But that isn't all what they are doing. Buyng one and selling two, without first getting an OEM license from Apple, which that have the right to not allow.



    Stop lying. That's not what Dell does and that's not what Psystar is doing.



    You get a SINGLE copy of Windows XP from Dell. The one on the disc was conveniently INSTALLED on the computer for the convenience of the customer, and a backup disc is provided with the computer in the case reinstallation is needed.



    Similarly, you get a SINGLE copy of Mac OS X from Psystar, which was purchased legally. The one on the disc was conveniently INSTALLED on the computer for the convenience of the customer, and a backup disc is provided with the computer in the case reinstallation is needed.
  • Reply 116 of 331
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Stop lying.

    Similarly, you get a SINGLE copy of Mac OS X from Psystar, which was purchased legally. The one on the disc was conveniently INSTALLED on the computer for the convenience of the customer, and a backup disc is provided with the computer in the case reinstallation is needed.



    Except that Psystar is turning around and making modifications to that copy of OS X, installing it on PCs (or providing that modified copy with the PC), or otherwise wilfully breaking Apple's copy protection and then running a business behind it.



    That's a big problem in terms of Inellectual Property law.



    You probably weren't answering Solipsism in that regard, but I'm just pointing it out to you.



    Just because you bought a copy of OS X does not give you the right to do whatever the hell you want with it. This isn't about the EULA. It's about IP law.



    Alot of the Pro-Psystar people here would like to think that Apple has no Intellectual Property rights to their product once the sale is made. Not so, and it's a fallacious argument to make and very counterintuitive to the people who are able to make a living thanks to the existence of Intllectual Property law.



    Intellectual Property is not the same as physical property. It doesn't matter if Psystar actually purchased copies of OS X.
  • Reply 117 of 331
    g3prog3pro Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    If you as an individual unlock OS X onto a generic PC and then load it onto that PC (or render it into a condition in which it can be installed on that PC)you're already in violation. But Apple can't go after every individual like that.



    So, what you are saying is that if I purchase a retail copy of Mac OS X from Apple, bring it home, take the DVD out of the box, and install it on my own computer, which I have purchased legally, then what I have done is illegal, and Apple has every right to come at me with the full force of the law?



    Are you serious? Are you so blinded by fanaticism that you do not see the ridiculousness of your claim?
  • Reply 118 of 331
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Stop lying. That's not what Dell does and that's not what Psystar is doing.



    You get a SINGLE copy of Windows XP from Dell. The one on the disc was conveniently INSTALLED on the computer for the convenience of the customer, and a backup disc is provided with the computer in the case reinstallation is needed.



    Similarly, you get a SINGLE copy of Mac OS X from Psystar, which was purchased legally. The one on the disc was conveniently INSTALLED on the computer for the convenience of the customer, and a backup disc is provided with the computer in the case reinstallation is needed.



    If you can't see that the transference of copyrighted material to another medium is copying of that material then no one here will even begin to help you understand anything more advanced or nuisanced about the law. You are either very young, have never taken any courses on economics, are from a country that did not have a free market or you are Teckstud. Since you do not wish to understand or answer questions posed to you the only recourse we have is not engage you any more on this topic.
  • Reply 119 of 331
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    So, what you are saying is that if I purchase a retail copy of Mac OS X from Apple, bring it home, take the DVD out of the box, and install it on my own computer, which I have purchased legally, then what I have done is illegal, and Apple has every right to come at me with the full force of the law?



    Are you serious? Are you so blinded by fanaticism that you do not see the ridiculousness of your claim?



    If your computer isn't made by Apple, then yes, you have it right. I guess the addition of one extra word is necessary: Apple has every legal right to come at you.



    My view is that if you do do the above for your own personal use, that's morally acceptable - certainly it's a lot better than using a pirated copy of OS X. And it would seem that Apple agrees what with the way that they've made very little real effort to stamp out the hackintosh community.
  • Reply 120 of 331
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    or you are Teckstud..



    Good one!
Sign In or Register to comment.