Psystar is officially toast!
From The Mac Observer...
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...enies_psystar/
Here comes 'da judge. Psystar is infringing. Remedy hearing is Nov 23.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...enies_psystar/
Here comes 'da judge. Psystar is infringing. Remedy hearing is Nov 23.
Comments
Yep- don't screw with Apple.
OK- so Jobs- now that this crap is out of the way, can you please bring out the slate? I want to get one for my wife.
Here's this from Groklaw. They'll likely have a deep analysis in the next few days.
http://www.groklaw.net/index.php
Read the actual decision linked to in the article, very interesting, and a total wipeout.
Read the actual decision linked to in the article, very interesting, and a total wipeout.
Maybe, but it read to me more like a big putdown on the free as in beer crowd, which I'm pretty sure isn't the key issue here. The issue of an injunction seems like a big loose end, and a bunch of other issues remain for trial. Either way, Pystar's lawyers can't be having a very nice weekend. I can't say I feel sorry for them.
Maybe, but it read to me more like a big putdown on the free as in beer crowd, which I'm pretty sure isn't the key issue here. The issue of an injunction seems like a big loose end, and a bunch of other issues remain for trial. Either way, Pystar's lawyers can't be having a very nice weekend. I can't say I feel sorry for them.
As Psystar has lost all of its pleadings, how can there be doubt that Apple will be granted injunctive relief?
It's really more a question as to what they ask for, and how much of it the judge will grant. But whatever happens, there's not doubt that Apple will be granted an injunction against Psystar's selling any more machines withLeopard. the only real question is whether he will allow Apple to extend those to 10.6 and updates as well, or whether that will be be handed over to the Florida court.
As has been pointed out, courts rarely don't defer to a previous decision involving the same parties on a similar case. It's likely, therefor, that the Florida judge will take this into account, and agree with its findings as regards 10.6.x.
I can't see Psystar being allowed to sell something that has been judged illegal.
Whether Apple will be granted relief in forcing the return of all sold product is a different, and interesting question.
In addition, Apple has claimed that other parties are behind this. What is happening in the attempt to identify them, if they do indeed exist?
Faster than I expected.
I've always thought the "conspiracy" angle on this has been overplayed, and seems to be based mainly on Apple naming Joe Doe defendants in the suit, which is SOP. I suspect that the only interest Apple has in these Joe Doe defendants is monetary at such time as damages are assessed. Psystar has to be broke (or soon will be), but they might have investors who aren't.
This is excellent news for other vendors who rely on the integrity of the EULA.
Not being a lawyer, I can't say -- but on the face of it, I'd have to suppose that an injunction will be forthcoming. Still I see that and the many issues still set for trial as being potentially big loose ends.
I've always thought the "conspiracy" angle on this has been overplayed, and seems to be based mainly on Apple naming Joe Doe defendants in the suit, which is SOP. I suspect that the only interest Apple has in these Joe Doe defendants is monetary at such time as damages are assessed. Psystar has to be broke (or soon will be), but they might have investors who aren't.
Agreed.
I see writing that as with SCO, MS might be behind this.
But unless someone in MS has gone totally insane, that couldn't be possible. If Psystar had won this, then the one company who would have lost the most, after Apple's loss of some hardware sales, would be MS.
I can't imagine who the "invisible investors" could be, but if Apple wins monetary relief, which seems likely, then all of Psystars' income sources must be revealed, even if they are contractually immunized from suit.
I can't imagine who the "invisible investors" could be, but if Apple wins monetary relief, which seems likely, then all of Psystars' income sources must be revealed, even if they are contractually immunized from suit.
Some venture capital must have been required for the startup, but I can't imagine it was much, since they never were really much more than a glorified screwdriver shop. I just hope it wasn't some poor mislead sap who took out a second mortgage on his house.
Prepare for the criminal case against Psystar next, for defrauding investors.
Some venture capital must have been required for the startup, but I can't imagine it was much, since they never were really much more than a glorified screwdriver shop. I just hope it wasn't some poor mislead sap who took out a second mortgage on his house.
One thing we can be sure of is that it won't be a "real" venture capitalist company.
It ain't over till the fat lady sings!
Prepare for the criminal case against Psystar next, for defrauding investors.
Legally, this can be a criminal copyright violation case as it is. You can claim criminal violation if the purpose was to make money and did so.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...6----000-.html
I see writing that as with SCO, MS might be behind this.
Why Microsoft? What do they have to gain? They can already sell their OSs to Mac users. The ones with something to gain is the Dells, Gateways and HPs. They would love to put the Mac OS onto their machines.
Why Microsoft? What do they have to gain? They can already sell their OSs to Mac users. The ones with something to gain is the Dells, Gateways and HPs. They would love to put the Mac OS onto their machines.
I said that some writers think that they could be behind this. Those writers are nutty. As I already said, MS would be crazy to back them.