Skip to main content

Psystar: We're Not Shutting Down for Good

Late last week there was confusion as to whether or not Psystar would continue to do business now that the company was no longer allowed to selling Mac OS X on non-Apple-branded computers. One lawyer said the company was shutting up shop and all employees would be laid off. Another claimed that was a misquote, adding that despite the site being offline, Psystar was not permanently shutting down.

It seems the second statement from Camara & Sibley partner, K. A. D. Camara, was right. The Psystar store is back online and, while there's nary a hackintosh in sight, the company is still selling Rebel EFI.

The software, which allows users to run OS X on their PC, was not mentioned specifically in an injunction handed down last week. The injunction awarded to Apple prevents Psystar from selling any computers with Apple's OS X software preinstalled. However, Judge Aslop did not address the issue of Rebel EFI. Stating he did not believe it was his place to decide whether the software falls within the scope of the injunction or not because Psystar didn't mention it in statements made to the court.

MacObserver cites Psystar lawyer Camara as saying, "Psystar will proceed to litigate the legality of Rebel EFI through the motion process described in Judge Alsup's order. Psystar will also proceed with its antitrust case in Miami."

  • mlopinto2k1
    Doesn't that break the ruling? They they aren't supposed to be a part of any kind of "hacking" of the Operating System?
    Reply
  • smashley
    The ruling just says that they can't sell systems preinstalled with MacOS, but doesn't specify anything about selling software to facilitate an end user putting it on themself.
    Reply
  • jhansonxi
    For some reason, the Black Knight in Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail comes to mind.
    Reply
  • sunflier
    Psystar is still worming its way through apple.
    Reply
  • sliem
    If EU can do similar things to M$ over, they can do the same to Apple. Down with Apple and its greedy taxmen!
    Reply
  • zelannii
    @smashley: you apparently did not read the ruling...

    Specifically, the injunction bars Psystar from doing any of the following:

    1. Copying, selling, offering to sell, distributing, or creating derivative works of" Mac OS X without permission.
    2. Inducing, aiding, assisting, abetting, or encouraging" other parties to infringe on Mac OS X copyrights.
    3. Circumventing any technological measure" designed to prevent installing Mac OS X on approved hardware.
    4. Having anything whatsoever to do with "any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof" that circumvents Apple's technological protections of Mac OS X.
    5. Having anything whatsoever to do with "any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof" that circumvents Apple's technological protections of Apple's copyright of Mac OS X.

    Additionally the judge firmly warned them against "defiant or unreasonable conduct" between now and Jan 1, and also strongly questioned the legality of Rebel EFI even though it was not directly included in the case. He mentioned all that was necessary was for apple to request a simple contempt proceeding wich would immediately bring Rebel EFI and any other technology under the scope of the ruling, which requires no additional trial to conclude, and for which the punishment would be sever. I expect apple to file such motion within a few weeks, if not by Jan 1 itself.
    Reply
  • zelannii
    @Sleim,

    Apple is doing the EXACT same thing Microsoft does. Look, it;s equally egainst the EULA to use a upgrade copy of Win7 to install Win 7 on a new machine, claiming the re-use of an OEM licence on new hardware. This HAS been held up in court, and microsoft regularly fines small resellers for selling machines with less-than-retail licneced machines. The courts take this in stride and hand out judgements so often its not news. I know 2 resellers in SC that had their doos closed for the exact same thing Psystar was doing, except with comodity PCs and windows, and WITHOUT circumventing DRM.

    Apple is exactly in their rights. They're not suing Psystar for selling clones, they're suing Psystar for distributing PCs purported to run OS X, including only an Upgrade licence, with no validatably copy of the OS to upgrade.

    The courts have already ruled in favor of apple refusing to open it's OS to the open market. That's not illegal. There's fair competition in the market segment, and Apple can do watever they like so long as they do not directly interfere with the abiltiy for another vendor to compete. Ruling otherwise would mean Palm would have to sell their OS on non-Palm phones, that you could put the TomTom map updates on a Garmin, IBM would have to allow the install of OS390 on non-big-blue mainframes, and more. They have EVERY RIGHT to restrict what hardware their support organization is required to support, and where the license can be placed. in fact, they even have the right, should they choose, to charge different prices for commercial and non-commercial licenses of the exact same software (like microsoft does, but thankfully Apple does not). until they are the ONLY Os maker, or until the courts decide there's a monopoly or Duopoly, and there has then beyond that been actual motions to stifle the competition (like Intel paying Dell and others to not sell AMD chips), then it's still PERFECTLY LEGAL, and you still have every right to not buy their products.
    Reply
  • falchard
    Hmm, does this mean Psystar can get around to selling a better computer like a... windows or linux machine? They have the long drawn out name recognition.
    Reply
  • jerreece
    zelannii@Sleim,Apple is doing the EXACT same thing Microsoft does. Look, it;s equally egainst the EULA to use a upgrade copy of Win7 to install Win 7 on a new machine, claiming the re-use of an OEM licence on new hardware. This HAS been held up in court, and microsoft regularly fines small resellers for selling machines with less-than-retail licneced machines. The courts take this in stride and hand out judgements so often its not news. I know 2 resellers in SC that had their doos closed for the exact same thing Psystar was doing, except with comodity PCs and windows, and WITHOUT circumventing DRM. Apple is exactly in their rights. They're not suing Psystar for selling clones, they're suing Psystar for distributing PCs purported to run OS X, including only an Upgrade licence, with no validatably copy of the OS to upgrade.The courts have already ruled in favor of apple refusing to open it's OS to the open market. That's not illegal. There's fair competition in the market segment, and Apple can do watever they like so long as they do not directly interfere with the abiltiy for another vendor to compete. Ruling otherwise would mean Palm would have to sell their OS on non-Palm phones, that you could put the TomTom map updates on a Garmin, IBM would have to allow the install of OS390 on non-big-blue mainframes, and more. They have EVERY RIGHT to restrict what hardware their support organization is required to support, and where the license can be placed. in fact, they even have the right, should they choose, to charge different prices for commercial and non-commercial licenses of the exact same software (like microsoft does, but thankfully Apple does not). until they are the ONLY Os maker, or until the courts decide there's a monopoly or Duopoly, and there has then beyond that been actual motions to stifle the competition (like Intel paying Dell and others to not sell AMD chips), then it's still PERFECTLY LEGAL, and you still have every right to not buy their products.
    Except wasn't there a federal court case that basically said the EULA's of software companies were garbage? Saying that if you buy the software on a DVD/CD, that you own that copy of the software and can do whatever you want with it personally? (with exception of selling for profit obviously).
    Reply
  • uh_no
    blegh

    microsoft gets in trouble with the EU for not giving you options to use other browsers (lol) but mac gets away with FORCING you to use their hardware and software.......not sure what the difference is there.....
    Reply