Judge Puts Apple’s Case Against Psystar Back on Track

Unauthorized Mac clone maker Psystar suffered a serious blow on Monday when the Judge overseeing its bankruptcy case in Florida granted Apple's Motion for Relief From Stay, allowing the copyright infringement case against Psystar to resume in norther California. Psystar filed for bankruptcy in May because of its mounting legal expenses, temporarily halting Apple's case against it.

The Judge hearing Psystar's bankruptcy case granted Apple's motion to resume its case in its entirety, most likely killing the company's chances of keeping Apple off its back for the next few months. "This means that the infringement case of Apple v. Psystar in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California shall resume immediately, unless Psystar makes a timely appeal of Judge Mark's decision to U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida or the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel," an attorney familiar with these types of cases anonymously told TMO.

Apple filed a lawsuit against Psystar in northern California claiming the company was violating the Mac OS X licensing agreement with end users, and that it was violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act with the steps it used to install the Mac operating system on PCs. Despite Apple's claims that the company doesn't have permission to sell PCs with Mac OS X, Psystar is still offering Mac clones for sale on its Web site.

Now that Judge Mark has lifted the automatic stay preventing Apple from moving forward with its case in California, Psystar isn't in a strong position to defend itself since it most likely doesn't have the money to pay its legal team.

Psystar could delay Apple's case a little longer by asking Judge Mark for a written analysis of his decision, and then filing a motion to reconsider. The odds, however, seem to be against Psystar.

"I doubt that an appeal would be successful, and the prospects for a motion for reconsideration are even worse," TMO's legal contact said. "So it appears that Apple and Psystar will soon by back in Judge Alsup's court."

I’m a huge intellectual property fan, though, let’s face it, Apple’s hardware is a bit spendy.

More than happy to buy the Genuine OSX if it’ll run on a clone.

The trouble is that intellectual property has an instrumental justification - Article 1 Section 8 gives Congress the authority
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
That purpose would not be accomplished by merely allowing Apple to sell OS X licenses without vindicating Apple's right not to sell OS X licenses on terms unfavorable to Apple.
The business model of Microsoft is to support and lead the "clone of the IBM PC" market, with its rich variety of hardware configurations, making only software. You wish that Apple competed head-to-head with Microsoft in that market. I agree that it would be nice for the consumer if Apple were to successfully do that; competition is freedom for the consumer. Full stop.
But Apple has chosen a different business model. Instead of making its money on software, Apple - tho not in the business of efficiently making hardware, is also fundamentally not a software company either. Apple is a systems design house. It not only develops the software, it designs the software in the context of its design of the hardware. So what you buy from Apple is the entire system, with not only its OS X software but its elegantly styled hardware which works for that software because the two were designed by the same entity, namely Apple. Because they control the entire system, Apple has the authority to make the system work - and is able to vindicate the customers' expectation that it will work. For the customer there is no separation of responsibility from authority. You go to the Apple store, you buy an Apple system, and any problem is an Apple problem. Cut and dried, no argument. Nobody tells the customer, "That's a software problem, go to Microsoft" or "That's a hardware problem, go to Dell." Let alone both.
And Apple is not a software company in that its objective in upgrading its OS is not to make big buck selling OS licenses. It does charge for them, but the primary objective of OS upgrades is to sell systems - on face value, hardware. Even at $129, an OS upgrade isn't a super cash cow for Apple to sell, and Snow Leopard especially makes the point when its announced price is only 29 bucks. What Apple gets out of it isn't so much the money for my upgrade, it is the reputation for selling you a system which is good and will get better. What they are after isn't so much my $29 as it is your $1000 when you see how good the system they offer you is, and you realize that the next upgrade of the OS will improve your system, rather than obsoleting your hardware with bloatware and driver issues.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.