What Psystar needs now is lawyers, sweet lawyers
- May 2nd, 2008
- 4 Comments
News.com.com digs down into what Psystar really needs to keep itself alive during the sure and swift onslaught of litigation that will some hit them broadside. Here’s the rub. According the the OS X license:
“This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so.”
Bloops. In fact, Psystar enabled us to do so. The company’s real legal ammunition will probably be in couching the argument in terms of illegal tying by Apple, leading to a monopoly battle that ‘lil old Psystar can’t fight. Now, there’s something else no one has considered: that this is a backdoor move by another major player or Apple itself to bring the issue of OS X tying to the fore. I seriously doubt that but stranger things have happened.
Kai (Who am I?)
5 months ago
Based on the SLA I found here: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf
(I don’t have a Mac)
but apparently there is no definition of what is an “Apple-labeled computer”. So Psystar can simply stick the word “Apple” or a generic apple picture (to avoid legal issues, don’t use the Apple Inc. logo), and voila, it’s an “Apple-labeled computer”!
It would have an Apple label :D
Adam (Who am I?)
5 months ago
When they refer to the Apple label they are referring to it being labeled by the company Apple. Funny though if all they had to do is paint a small Apple on it.
Kai (Who am I?)
5 months ago
It was a joke… :D
I was just wondering why Apple’s SLA is quite concise compared to other SLAs I’ve seen (there’s no definition of Apple-labeled), unlike other terms like: Apple Inc. (“Apple”), … on any other media or in any other form (collectively the “Apple Software”), etc.
I thought there should be a definition like: …on a single computer sold by Apple (“Apple-labeled computer”)…
I don’t know anything about law, so… just for fun :D
Podesta (Who am I?)
5 months ago
What the people at Psystar really need is common sense. Their previous businesses were either extant for a few months or never got off the ground. One suspects that is because it does not take long to set up an operation, collect funds from an initial surge of marks and then go out of business while holding the loot. However, Psystar, which appears to consist of three people, has miscalculated its ability to carry out pyramid schemes posing as businesses in this episode. It will not have trouble making money off several thousand clueless customers, but Apple will act to protect its work product and brand.