Apple says Psystar holding back info in Mac clone legal case

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 157
    bsenkabsenka Posts: 799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    You don't appear to even try and understand what people here are trying to tell you?



    I fully understand that you are the ones who are confused as to what is actually happening here.



    Buying something, and reselling it. THAT is what Psystar is doing. They are not making an entirely new product and claiming that it's a real Mac. Those are not the same thing.
  • Reply 102 of 157
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post


    I fully understand that you are the ones who are confused as to what is actually happening here.



    Buying something, and reselling it. THAT is what Psystar is doing. They are not making an entirely new product and claiming that it's a real Mac. Those are not the same thing.



    No, you don't.



    No, they aren't.
  • Reply 103 of 157
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post


    I fully understand that you are the ones who are confused as to what is actually happening here.



    If you think we are wrong then explain why, answer some of the points put to you and stop just throwing your rattle out of the pram.



    PS. Find out the differences between "copyright" and "counterfeit".
  • Reply 104 of 157
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,676member
    I think apple is making this public for a very good reason, they are letting the people who maybe behind backing this company they better pull their support out since Apple is going to find out where they are getting their money.



    Apple does not need them to tell them what they make and their cost structure, they are a US company, so they do file a tax return and they could get copies of those and know almost what they make and the COGS and other expenses. Plus if Apple finds out money is being funnel in from elsewhere you know the IRS would be interested in that.



    I think this is tactic that Apple is using to smoke out anyone who is trying to mess with Apples business model. You can be almost guaranty that someone is behind them they cut their support verse being found out.
  • Reply 105 of 157
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    I don't think Apple had to make their filings public, since they are part of the court record. But clearly they are making a very public show of it, if only to scare off anyone else who might be tempted to try selling Mac clones. I suspect that too much is being made of the possible "power behind" Psystar. This issue first came up months back, when the Apple lawsuit was revealed to include numerous "John Doe" defendants. This resulted in a lot of speculation over who they might be -- but in reality, naming John Doe defendants is standard procedure in litigation, so that alone doesn't mean much.
  • Reply 106 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post


    I fully understand that you are the ones who are confused as to what is actually happening here.



    Buying something, and reselling it. THAT is what Psystar is doing. They are not making an entirely new product and claiming that it's a real Mac. Those are not the same thing.



    bsenka, it's not worth the fight. I, like you, attempted logical arguments and examples, all of which were unsuccessful at penetrating the thick skulls of the stubborn and close-minded. Some people are just incapable of entertaining the idea that they might, in fact, be wrong.



    -Clive
  • Reply 107 of 157
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    bsenka, it's not worth the fight. I, like you, attempted logical arguments and examples, all of which were unsuccessful at penetrating the thick skulls of the stubborn and close-minded. Some people are just incapable of entertaining the idea that they might, in fact, be wrong.



    -Clive



    The only closed minded people here are you two. Neither have addressed questions brought to you about their copying of the software, altering the code and their lack of a reseller's license.
  • Reply 108 of 157
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    The only closed minded people here are you two. Neither have addressed questions brought to you about their copying of the software, altering the code and their lack of a reseller's license.



    The other major issue which seems to be poorly understood is that Psystar is deliberately trading on Apple's intellectual property by selling Mac clones. They really got themselves in deep on this aspect of their business by claiming in their failed antitrust suit that Apple was illegally monopolizing the "Macintosh compatible computer market." No such market exists; in fact Psystar is attempting to fabricate one, and the only way they can do that is to trade on Apple's intellectual property.
  • Reply 109 of 157
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    bsenka, it's not worth the fight. I, like you, attempted logical arguments and examples, all of which were unsuccessful at penetrating the thick skulls of the stubborn and close-minded. Some people are just incapable of entertaining the idea that they might, in fact, be wrong.



    That's an easy accusation to throw, but it's hard to test. How does anyone else know whether you're capable of entertaining the idea that you might, in fact be wrong? How do you know that it isn't all of us that are wrong? Maybe everyone here is right, regardless of the position.



    Right and wrong in this case are loaded terms because you have to have a particular perspective and agenda in which to judge that. And the judgment arises from that perspective and agenda.
  • Reply 110 of 157
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    bsenka, it's not worth the fight. I, like you, attempted logical arguments and examples,



    With arguments like: The Mac is a monopoly. Apple is being anti-competitive. Apple is illegally tying products.





    Quote:

    all of which were unsuccessful at penetrating the thick skulls of the stubborn and close-minded.



    Or: People who may have considered your arguments and found them without merit.



    Quote:

    Some people are just incapable of entertaining the idea that they might, in fact, be wrong.



    Just like the judge in this case?
  • Reply 111 of 157
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    Or: People who may have considered your arguments and found them without merit.



    They've been responded to with reasons why their argument is poor and posted questions that they've refused to address.
  • Reply 112 of 157
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    In my experience, you'll never find a more powerful rationale for anything than wishful thinking.
  • Reply 113 of 157
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post


    Licensing is more than just a game, it's bullshit. I bought it, I own it, it is mine. You cannot tell me what I can do with it after I've paid you for it.



    Um, yes I/we/anyone can. Licensing is not that conceptually different from a lease. We lease cars, we lease living quarters, we lease computer hardware, we lease tools, etc. ...



    And every one of those comes with a list of restrictions, which the consumer/leasee explicitly agree to when money changes hands. A license is just a form of periodic, semi-perpetual or perpetual lease. Nothing changes just because the thing being paid for is information.
  • Reply 114 of 157
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    In my experience, you'll never find a more powerful rationale for anything than wishful thinking.



    Unbelievable!



    In all my frustrated conversations with the Pro Psystarers/iPhone unlockers/X-Maccers/Air-dumpers/Macs for a buck-ers etc etc....



    ... you have summed it up in just a couple of words. Bastard!
  • Reply 115 of 157
    Nice conspiracy nonsense but really Microsoft are not behind it, the end result might be Apple being forced to sell OSX as software and compete with Microsoft, not a situation that Remond wants.

    HP, Dell etc, also have no interest, If Apple starts selling OSX to OEMs at any stage financing Psystar is not a good way to win a contract from Apple.



    It really seems like the lack of financial information is no mystery, Apple wins and when damages get awarded Psystar declares themselves bankrupt with Psystar now mysteriously valued at arouns the damages claim, Psystar shuts down and its owners walk away under chapter 12.

    Why is that a mystery ? the more financial information they give that shows profits of any kind just juice up the amount of money Apple can claim along with a cease & desist.



    But yeah the conspiracy is way more funny......
  • Reply 116 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hiro View Post


    Um, yes I/we/anyone can. Licensing is not that conceptually different from a lease. We lease cars, we lease living quarters, we lease computer hardware, we lease tools, etc. ...



    And every one of those comes with a list of restrictions, which the consumer/leasee explicitly agree to when money changes hands. A license is just a form of periodic, semi-perpetual or perpetual lease. Nothing changes just because the thing being paid for is information.



    Yes Hiro thats a lease do you understand the difference between a software licence and lease ? every 3 years a leased item gets upgraded for free, leased items break and they go back for repair, if I buy software then I own it, I do what I want with it, Why are you defending corporations trying to get away with this shit, you'll be buying air to breath next, nope just leasing it really......iDiot
  • Reply 117 of 157
    stevieleestevielee Posts: 50member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    How many copies of Mac OS X does the Psystar customer get when he receives his illegal Mac clone?



    If you say one, then you are not thinking, per your MO. If you say two, then you are correct, but how do you explain the transference from the DVD to the harddrive if Psystar is not doing anything illegal. I can't legally make copies of Office or Photoshop or DVD movies and distribute them at will for a fee so why do you think Psystar should be able to break this law and get away with it? Apple owns the rights to the contents of that DVD just like MGM owns the rights to the contents of their movies. I can't start a business where I stick movies onto another DVD or a bunch of movies on harddrives and then sell them so why do you think Psystar should be allowed to break this law?





    Hmmm..Illegal you say? So you are the judge, jury and prosecutor who has the final say in all of this and you have handed down the ruling that they are in fact Illegal! Done deal..Ha!

    Buying a Psystar OSX clone is NOT illegal until it is ruled so by a court of law, and not a court of hacky opinion. Anyone can still purchase a Psystar OSX clone right now because of the fact that are still for sale... legally. Now you, and Apple have every right to legally dispute the selling of OSX clones by Psystar, but until there is an some kind of a court injunction, or final ruling to cease and desist, it is perfectly legal to go out and buy one - without any threat of prosecution - except of course being pilloried by the faithful MacTologist (largely AAPL holders) in these forums.



    It must be absolutely galling to you diehard Apple folks that these Psystar OSX Clones are still legally sold - and for so long now. How dispiriting it must be for you all to have suffer- for what must seem like an eternity - this uppity little dilettante company in Florida continuing to rub your faces in the fact that they are still selling OSX compatible clones - even after the big, bad A threatens them with eternal damnation. The Hutzpa of it all! Don't they know who they are sc*wing with for crying out loud?



    Apple may ( most likely), end up putting that snarky, heretical company out of it's misery someday soon - but until that day - OSX clones are LEGALLY available:



    http://www.psystar.com/index.php?&op...tpage&Itemid=1



    Oh the horror!
  • Reply 118 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    That's an easy accusation to throw, but it's hard to test. How does anyone else know whether you're capable of entertaining the idea that you might, in fact be wrong?



    I've admitted wrong on these boards in the past. There's no reason I shouldn't be willing to do it again.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    The only closed minded people here are you two. Neither have addressed questions brought to you about their copying of the software, altering the code and their lack of a reseller's license.



    The reseller's license is the only thing of which I won't argue on Psystar's behalf. They don't have one. Does it matter? I'm not sure. There are hundreds of career power-sellers on eBay who get by without them, despite frequently reselling copyrighted work. I also don't understand this either. Regardless, I think it's the least important of the issues at stake here, so let's move on to something more substantial.



    I can't speak for Psystar's method, but I know there exist install methods that require no "hacking" of OS X code. With the proper bootloader, OS X install disks will run natively on certain third-party hardware.



    Regarding the copying of their software, that is the purpose of the install DVD. The DVD itself is not the copyrighted work, the OS is. When one buys that DVD, they are buying the right to install and use that code. The terms of the EULA attempt to bind that use to "Apple-labeled" hardware. This link is what is contested, as it's akin to saying that you can buy this $15 reproduction Monet painting, but you can only display it in a $150 "Monet-brand" frame.



    Psystar is purchasing reproductions, putting them in their own frame and reselling the bundle. The copyrighted work is still intact (depending on the install method), the copyright-holder is getting paid for every reproduction purchased. The only thing that's different is the frame, which isn't copyrighted anyway, so that shouldn't matter, should it?



    So what is this dispute really about? Installing one legally-purchased software DVD on one computer? No, it's Apple's overreaching EULA, which attempts to force end-users into buying a frame from Apple even though the reproduction is a legally-purchased, self-standing work.



    This is not about Apple protecting its IP at all... It's about protecting its extra dollar.



    -Clive
  • Reply 119 of 157
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stevielee View Post


    this uppity little dilettante company in Florida continuing to rub your faces in the fact that they are still selling OSX compatible clones



    dilettante: a person who cultivates an area of interest, such as the arts, without real commitment or knowledge.



    Perfect!
  • Reply 120 of 157
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    This is not about Apple protecting its IP at all... It's about protecting its extra dollar.



    Of course it's about dollars. What is the point of running a business and owning your own intellectual property if you can't make money from it?



    Quote:

    No, it's Apple's overreaching EULA....



    Why are you guys so pissed at Apple's requirement to only install on a Mac... but you have no problem with the requirement to only install on ONLY ONE computer?
Sign In or Register to comment.