Apple Scores Big in Case Against Psystar

I think the only surprise here is that it took so long.

BTW, Psystar has also pissed off a lot of the Open Source community for taking their work and 'repackaging' it in their systems (and charging for it).

All in all, Psystar is a class act.

Great news. Whether you like Apple or not, they took the work of both Apple and the Open Source x86 hackintosh community and used it to their own financial gain without obtaining any kind of licensing from Apple and without giving anything back to the Open Source community.

its just stupid, cause i think pystar had no chance of going against apple. This is because just the legal fees will rob psystar of all of its money. Apple has a lot of money that they can use to fight in the court. That is just how it is, Individuals and or small companies have no chance of winning against big companies

Is that true? What license the hackintosh software is made available? If it is GNU GPL is not only ok, but it is encouraged to charge for providing service that compiles the software for users who don't know or don't want to compile the software them self. Only requirement is to provide access to source if the user requires. From GPL FAQs:

Apple is based in San Francisco and Paystar is in Florida but the ruling was from a hack judge from San Francisco, imagine that! Enough said.

(Quoted from another website)

Does this mean if I buy any copy of Apple O/S X and install it on my on x86 hardware (non-MAC) will Apple sue me too? The Eula above didn't only state if I were to sell it too, it says, "installation".

This case isn't about that or the fact that the judge is based in San Francisco. It's about copyright protection and how far it does -- and should -- extend for software, as well as the "fair use doctrine" for digitally copied products. Read the legal decision from judge. You may learn something.

Ha!!!!! Bitches!!!!! Take that you code stealing scum bags!!! Vindication!!!!! Vindication!!!!!

Really no surprise here. Did anyone really think Apple would not win this one?

Only if you make fun of Steve Jobs wardrobe, black turtlenecks is so 1999... but in a more serious note this wasn't unexpected.

I think Psystar should just open source their code and then "leak" it to a torrent site. Then give everyone the chance to see what it is all about. Not to meantion screw Apple even more, that being said Psystar is probably toast after this.

well if you want to get technical then the linux community should sue apple for stealing their code. cause all apple is, is linux

I'm glad that Apple won, keeps there crappy software from hitting mainstream and corrupting everyones way of life. who the Fruck wants to run that crap anyways?!?! unless you want your life to be totally controlled by someone else, and don't like variety and choices(again see the first one) then get away from Apple crap. you want freedom and mainstream, go linux or MS, yes MS sucks, but hey there is a reason that hackers and virus creators choose to hit that platform the most, it is mainstream and it just works not great but it works. I run both of those and need no more then that.

Hurray for Apple they won to keep themselves locked in a corner and out of my world! no complaints here!!!

Now the questions are,
Who was funding Psystar this whole time?
When will Psystar lawyers get the Appeal turned in?

OS X uses the Mach kernel, not the Linux kernel.

RUN Psystar!!!! You got an apple on your back!!!!

Apple is based on FreeBSD and netBSD which is derived from Unix not Linux. OSX and Linux came from the same tree, neither one came from one or the other. Get your facts straight before you bag on stuff!

Well, score one for Apple... until the appeal.

If I buy something I should be able to do what ever the hell I want to do with it after, but I should also understand that I can get no support or void any warranty that came with that product.

Could you imagine if I couldn't make rice squares and sell them because Kellogg told me I couldn't use their product for my own financial gain, cause I was cutting into their rice crispies treats profit? No they are not going to care, cause they already made their money when you bought the box. Apple should be lucky they sold licenses, that's money they didn't have before.

Apple is infringing on the Unix License agreement. I was hoping Psystar would win.

yawn!!

Ugh...I hate when people apply faulty analogies to digital copyright issues. Sure, let's compare a desert recipe to the complexities of software code. You make it sound like Psystar just accidentally made an OS like Apple's, which they didn't. They purchased OS X, hacked it, made several copies and put them on their own machines to redistribute and sell. Read the judge's decision and learn something.

would it be fun if windows added a line in there Eula that prohibited the installation on apple manufactured equipment and sue apple over the boot camp

The point was to not compare computer hardware and software to a baked good, but what I should be able to do after I buy a product, after I spend the money it now belongs to ME!

What this means is that I can't even buy my own copy of OSX and install it on my own hardware, cause apple could actually make me uninstall it cause it voids the eula, imo their eula is a violation.

Apple really should have oem licenses with specific hardware requirements to let people build their own pc's and companies sell their product just like windows.

We are witnessing the destruction of a company because psystar is proving apple is making way more money off your back buy selling you "their" hardware, which is the same hardware in their machine.

We are witnessing the destruction of a company, Psystar, for 1) making bad business decisions (they went chapter 11 earlier this year, and don't blame legal fees, this case has barely gotten into court), 2) making a faulty argument in court (Apple is creating a "monopoly"? That's rich), 3) making ANOTHER bad argument in court ("first sale doctrine doesn't apply because Psystar didn't legally copy Apple's software), and 4) making cheap computers with someone else's OS imaged on them, which they did not legally license.

As for Apple, why is its ELUA violation? If Apple wants to be stupidly stubborn and limit its software market, then let it be stupidly stubborn. It's their product, and their right. Yeah, Apple should have OEN licenses -- but they don't, and they shouldn't be compelled by law to do so.

I really don't like Apple. I used to be a fan of theirs (80s through the 90s)....not so much now. Not at all actually.

Psystar should move their HQ to EU. Then they can complain to the EC about restraint of trade, and the EC can get a shirtful off of crapple. I'm sure that Kroes would love to pursue crapple....

Their main source was NeXTSTEP (something Steve Jobs kept himself busy with while Apple was busy bankrupting itself during his forced retirement).

While OSX does have some contributions from FreeBSD and NetBSD, NeXTSTEP itself was sourced from BSD 4.3 before all of the open sourced variants, and before Linux 0.0.1. The GPL may not cover that much of OSX's codebase.

If you rent a movie, do you keep it too since you paid money for it? When you rent a car, do you just not return it since you spent some money on it? When you buy a piece of software, you implicitly agree to the EULA. Inside that EULA, you'll note that it allows you to do certain things, and it makes it "illegal" to do others. By buying and installing the software, you are agreeing to their terms. If you don't like the terms, then don't use the product.

Now, this isn't to say that I think EULAs are "fair" for most consumers, and I think many manufacturers should change them. However, they are what they are. You agreed to them when you bought and installed the program, so live up to your end up the agreement. I don't see why spending money on something guarantees that you can do whatever the heck you want with it without any repercussions.

I like what Psystar is trying to do.
There is obviously a massive market to bring OSX to the 'people'.

However nobel their intentions might be, they are breaking the law. Yes the wheels of justice turn slowly, but once they start, they cannot be stopped.

I don't think your comparison holds water. You explicitly mention renting and leasing, but they are different from buying. If you buy something, and you paid for it in full, you own that something and yes, you should be able to do whatever the heck you want with it.
If I rent a car I pay for the privilege of using it for a limited time, but if I bought it I can set it on fire if I want to. Why? Because it's mine!
Also, the way that EULAs are presented to the consumer makes it ridiculously hard to acknowledge their terms unless you open the package and start the installation process. Try to return an opened software package and see what happens... I know, there are ways of looking that info up online but be honest, do you actually believe that people do that? Not to mention that if you want to try the software you must install it, there is no other way. What if you decide you don't like it? Same problem as above.
My point is, this whole EULA stuff is specifically designed to screw the customer over and they are one of the biggest scam ever invented by greedy MF-ers.

You want to know why apple has a crap share of the market, because Windows can be installed on ANY hardware buy ANYBODY, because of this companies like Dell, HP, Acer, ASUS, MSI, etc, have made a presence in the computer world, you wouldn't have the ability to build you own systems either.

Companies like Apple are the ones destroying the economy, instead of offering a less expensive product for all people they instead only offer an expensive product for people who have the money.

My dad wants his own laptop just to web browse and play online pool, but guess what apple won't get his business cause he doesn't have 1000 bucks for a laptop.