Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Apple Punches Through Psystar's Ch. 11 Stay

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 30 comments

Psystar filed for bankruptcy at the end of May, temporarily slowing down legal proceedings with Cupertino-based Apple. All legal actions involving Psystar were put on hold while the company began proceedings with bankruptcy courts.

A couple of weeks after Psystar filed for Chapter 11, Apple accused the company of hiding behind bankruptcy rather than facing up to the consequences of copyright infringement. The Cupertino-based company filed a motion to have its case against Psystar continue and according to AppleInsider, Apple’s efforts were successful.

Psystar’s Chapter 11 filing blamed mounting legal fees for having to file for bankruptcy in the first place. ChannelWeb reports that the company estimated its total debt at more than $250,000, about a third of which is payable to its legal firm Carr & Farrell.

Display 30 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 23 Hide
    hellwig , June 24, 2009 3:44 PM
    Copyright infringement, where? That's like saying a book store can't sell books they already paid for. Apple got their money for their copyrighted software fair and square. First-sale doctrince says Psystar can re-sell the software if they want to. The only thing Psystar did was violate the EULA, which is NOT copyright violation. Considering you can't read Apple's EULA without opening the software anyway, its not even a binding contract.
  • 13 Hide
    reddozen , June 24, 2009 5:45 PM
    etichi,
    You obviously have no clue what you're talking about...

    1) What people find to be "inferior" is their hardware with is generally speaking, outdated and overly expensive to update / upgrade.

    2) Monopoly, no... Arrogant, yes.

    3) Windows a train wreck? Hardly... OSX is a decent OS, but it's no godsend. It's NOT immune to viruses, and it DOES have bugs in the system. I'm sure if windows was only built to work perfectly on predefined hardware sets that it would work flawlessly too.

    4) Name 1 thing that you can do on your $1,000+ mac that I cant do on any $400~$600 PC? Anything you can name is purely software based and has nothing to do with the computer. There are windows variants / substitutions for any product you can name.

    The simple fact is that macs are grossly overpriced for what their capability is...

    Mac OS X v10.5.6 Leopard: $129.00
    Vista Ultimate 64: $174.99

    Now why is it that Windows costs more, yet I cant get a computer for cheaper utilizing it? *cough*Apple Tax*cough*

    If apple wants to step up, pull it's head out of it's own @$$, then I would consider it as a viable option for a computer. Until I can freely install OSX on whatever machine I want without Apple's hammer thumb getting in my way, then it will be ignored by me and my entire family. My step mother (a graphics designer) has already ditched her beloved mac for a PC, and her workmanship has yet to be challenged. I'll make apps for mac based systems cause I like money, but I'll never own one.
  • 10 Hide
    Shadow703793 , June 24, 2009 4:38 PM
    ^Violating the EULA is NOT copyright violation.
Other Comments
  • -8 Hide
    captaincharisma , June 24, 2009 3:09 PM
    can't blame apple. they smell Psystar's blood so time to go in for the kill
  • -2 Hide
    ohim , June 24, 2009 3:28 PM
    fuk apple :)  ...and their rebranded PCs with own OS that`s not a PC but costs shitloads of more monney compared to a PC.
  • 23 Hide
    hellwig , June 24, 2009 3:44 PM
    Copyright infringement, where? That's like saying a book store can't sell books they already paid for. Apple got their money for their copyrighted software fair and square. First-sale doctrince says Psystar can re-sell the software if they want to. The only thing Psystar did was violate the EULA, which is NOT copyright violation. Considering you can't read Apple's EULA without opening the software anyway, its not even a binding contract.
  • -2 Hide
    antilycus , June 24, 2009 4:04 PM
    gotta love capitalism, when u can get sued out of business for trying to take a slice out of someone's monopoly. And before you start trying to gnaw at my balls, the only computer you are LEGALLY able to install MAC OS X on is an APPLE computer. That's a freaking MONOPOLY, okay not really, but kind of.
  • 10 Hide
    Shadow703793 , June 24, 2009 4:38 PM
    ^Violating the EULA is NOT copyright violation.
  • 2 Hide
    cielmerlion , June 24, 2009 5:04 PM
    As much as I would love to agree with antilycus and his monopoly statement, i have to say that it is no a monopoly to want your own operating system on your "own" hardware. You dont see blackberry's OS on windows mobile phones for example.
  • 13 Hide
    reddozen , June 24, 2009 5:45 PM
    etichi,
    You obviously have no clue what you're talking about...

    1) What people find to be "inferior" is their hardware with is generally speaking, outdated and overly expensive to update / upgrade.

    2) Monopoly, no... Arrogant, yes.

    3) Windows a train wreck? Hardly... OSX is a decent OS, but it's no godsend. It's NOT immune to viruses, and it DOES have bugs in the system. I'm sure if windows was only built to work perfectly on predefined hardware sets that it would work flawlessly too.

    4) Name 1 thing that you can do on your $1,000+ mac that I cant do on any $400~$600 PC? Anything you can name is purely software based and has nothing to do with the computer. There are windows variants / substitutions for any product you can name.

    The simple fact is that macs are grossly overpriced for what their capability is...

    Mac OS X v10.5.6 Leopard: $129.00
    Vista Ultimate 64: $174.99

    Now why is it that Windows costs more, yet I cant get a computer for cheaper utilizing it? *cough*Apple Tax*cough*

    If apple wants to step up, pull it's head out of it's own @$$, then I would consider it as a viable option for a computer. Until I can freely install OSX on whatever machine I want without Apple's hammer thumb getting in my way, then it will be ignored by me and my entire family. My step mother (a graphics designer) has already ditched her beloved mac for a PC, and her workmanship has yet to be challenged. I'll make apps for mac based systems cause I like money, but I'll never own one.
  • 7 Hide
    deathblooms2k1 , June 24, 2009 6:05 PM
    etichi Microshit built their product off of a train wreck.


    See what he did there? Classy stuff.
  • -2 Hide
    rhys216 , June 24, 2009 6:27 PM
    Small companies like this should get legal aid from tax payers in such a circumstance. Seems like a big company like Apple can bankrupt a company out spite with ease, simply by forcing them to incur legal fees!

    Now it seems Apple is simply not happy with causing bankruptcy, and is VISCOUSLY still going for this companies blood!

    Shame on Apple!
  • -1 Hide
    captaincharisma , June 24, 2009 6:53 PM
    Quote:
    Small companies like this should get legal aid from tax payers in such a circumstance. Seems like a big company like Apple can bankrupt a company out spite with ease, simply by forcing them to incur legal fees!

    Now it seems Apple is simply not happy with causing bankruptcy, and is VISCOUSLY still going for this companies blood!

    Shame on Apple!



    why? its the small company that started this mess and found out going halfway threw the trial they were not really able to afford to go threw with it. why should taxpayers pay these companies that do not know what they are getting into?

    as for mac OSX. Apple made it so they can do whatever they want with it and if i were them i would tell these babies if you don't like it then f off.
  • 2 Hide
    neodude007 , June 24, 2009 7:10 PM
    Apple is so worried that other companies will follow where Psystar left off so they want to destroy Psystar in to the ground. They are too scared that their Apple Tax will be taken away from them. They love to control their hardware so their customers can brag about how their Macbooks have awesome firewire ports and stuff while a Dell or HP doesn't. Appleheads always look over the fact that Microsoft DOES NOT MAKE COMPUTORZ.

    Even those dumb shiz Mac commercials try to fool kiddies in to buying Macs using this odd argument. "All the slow PCs step out of the line" and half the "PCs" step away... maybe cuz uhhhh Windows runs on more then 2 sets of hardware and you can actually buy a working laptop perfect for college for $430??? have fun finding a Mac that does that.
  • 0 Hide
    Hanin33 , June 24, 2009 7:34 PM
    hellwigCopyright infringement, where? That's like saying a book store can't sell books they already paid for. Apple got their money for their copyrighted software fair and square. First-sale doctrince says Psystar can re-sell the software if they want to. The only thing Psystar did was violate the EULA, which is NOT copyright violation. Considering you can't read Apple's EULA without opening the software anyway, its not even a binding contract.


    don't ever let FACTS get in the way of money... such is the way legal proceedings operate in most of the world... whenever things don't seem to be going the logical way, ask yourself, "who has the most money to throw around?"
  • 0 Hide
    zebrafunk , June 24, 2009 8:13 PM
    Apple zealots have and will continue to drink at the fire hose pace, and no power in the verse will stop them, by God or Job’s (not in that order). I own an iMac 24 2.4 and a MacBook 13 aluminum 2.0 and thoroughly enjoy the Mac Leopard OS, not only for its seemingly easy and compact usability, but for its challenge to the Microsoft monolith OS standing. But don't misunderstand this enjoyment for love, or a desire to sleep with the random MacGeek passersby.

    I have largely earned my living on top of the Microsoft freight train, and have paid dearly for what feels like a dejected Indian ridding on top with many other likewise dejected passengers. Although by no fault of Microsoft's, I have been anything from free tech support to a Platinum Beta test site, and at no point did I ever receive anything that could be misconstrued as compensation for my efforts. I completed my MCSE, MCDBA, MCSA and MCSD in 2003, again aside from several fairly nice wall certs, nothing from Microsoft. So I likewise have no great love for Microsoft. These facts are not stated for self-aggrandizement as I find no specific operational benefit from certifications, but to clearly lay out where and how I stand in the middle.

    What I can tell you is that the EULA –v- copyright argument is not sustainable in a just court, and I continue to be disappointed by not only “make work” attorney mindset, but am repulsed by the court that entertains the argument, further polluting an already unconstitutional docket backlog.

    It seems to me that Apple has violated the open source agreement that exists with BSD and the free (FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD) community. BSD started in 1974 at Berkley as PDP-11 and was largely source modified by students (slave labor), and they contributed that intellectual properly FREELY. If Apple wants to bring a suit, they might consider going after Keith Bostic and the Net/2 release in a joint suit with AT&T? Since Sun is also BSD maybe we could finish the painful death of Sun, and at the same time dethrone the self-named King Jobs, which in turn would rip the worm from the Apple, and leave the rest of us with an unfettered OS that spans multiple platforms?

    Leopard = BSD + Gnome + very little spit and polish
    Windows = CPM/DOS + Lisa + right place at the right time + several years of piracy

    It is only a matter of time until someone regens a Leopard’esque OS on top of BSD, and presents it free to the X86 world. Of course Apple will bring a groundless suit against them as well. Universal constants hold true, when you take a bite out of an Apple it is sweet and juicy, but within minutes it changes colors, starts to rot and has to be thrown out.
  • -2 Hide
    chaohsiangchen , June 24, 2009 10:33 PM
    Example of Apple Inc's superior quatity:

    http://www.dailytech.com/No+End+in+Sight+for+MacBook+Display+Issues/article15519.htm

    Quote:

    And apparently, even with the update, many users still report problems, indicating that more problems are afoot. In the past Apple has blamed NVIDIA for making flawed drivers. Fixes by NVIDIA failed to resolve the issues. Issues have also been reported in iMac desktops, which incidentally have AMD Radeon graphics.


  • -1 Hide
    christop , June 24, 2009 11:39 PM
    I hope Quo computers don't get this shit thrown at them.. And what kind of a threat was Psystar to Apple anyways.. Damn you have enough market and money..
  • -2 Hide
    saturn77 , June 25, 2009 3:37 AM
    90% of the WORLD doesn't use nor wants to use a Macrap.

    What do we do with all that power that only PCs can provide? We do mult-cpu multi-gpu video editing, we run the business world, and we can actualy play games!

    LMAO@U!
  • -1 Hide
    rooseveltdon , June 25, 2009 7:14 AM
    saturn7790% of the WORLD doesn't use nor wants to use a Macrap.What do we do with all that power that only PCs can provide? We do mult-cpu multi-gpu video editing, we run the business world, and we can actualy play games! LMAO@U!

    PWNED!
  • 0 Hide
    jabliese , June 25, 2009 1:25 PM
    What some of you want to see is not government assistance for small companies to pay legal fees, but a loser pays system. Currently, it is possible, but not guaranteed, for the winner of such lawsuits to have the loser pay their legal fees.

    Some members of Congress (mostly Republicans) wants to pass a law making it obligatory that the loser pays the winner's legal fees. This is the main component of tort reform bills that are discussed from time to time.
  • -1 Hide
    reddozen , June 25, 2009 5:20 PM
    lol...

    poor etichi.
    I code in both winblows and *nix environments all day every day too? what's your point?
    server = *nix
    personal computer = winblows dual boot

    you're tired of the "but but but my pc is way more powerful than an apple.", and I'm tired of the "but mine's prettier!". zebrafunk made my point a lot better than I could have, so enough said.

    I have no problem with OSX, and I would gladly use it given that the choice was mine as to what I did with it. Just like you say "(I) prefer not to use Microsoft's products out of principle", I wont touch anything mac related until they decide to join the rest of the world on a lower pedestal. OSX is nothing special. Just a modified and polished X-Windows interface to BSD.

    Windows is for those of us that like to make money by maximizing our user base. It has nothing to do with brand loyalty. It's as you say... "principle"
  • -1 Hide
    crystalized , June 25, 2009 5:45 PM
    cielmerlionAs much as I would love to agree with antilycus and his monopoly statement, i have to say that it is no a monopoly to want your own operating system on your "own" hardware. You dont see blackberry's OS on windows mobile phones for example.

    But you don't see blackberry selling their OS to customers at retail stores do you?
Display more comments