Posted on 11/14/2009 3:58:16 PM PST by Swordmaker
Apple won a sweeping legal victory against Macintosh clone maker Psystar Corp. Nov. 13 when a federal judge in San Francisco ruled (PDF, courtesy of Groklaw) that Psystar had violated Apple’s copyright and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Judge William Alsup struck what may be a death blow for Psystar by granting Apple’s motion for summary judgment while denying Psystar’s counterclaims.
The only real surprise here was the swiftness and thoroughness of Apple’s victory. Judge Alsup basically ruled that the OS X End User License Agreement (EULA), which prohibits the installation of the software on non-Apple hardware, is legal and means exactly what it says. It is just the latest in a long string of ruling upholding EULAs, sometimes called shrinkwrap or click-wrap licenses.
Judge Alsup sidestepped Psystar's claim that it was protected by the first sale doctrine, which generally gives the buyer of a protected work the right to resell it without the permission of, or any payment to, the copyright holder. The judge said first sale only applies to legal copies and that the way in which Psystar had modified the software to let it run on clones meant that the copies did not meet this standard. The judge rejected out of hand Psystar's claims that it made legal use of Apple's trademarks and that Apple has misued it copyrights.
A hearing on remedies is scheduled for Dec. 14. The order does not cover several other claims by Apple, including breach of contract and trademark infringement, but the ruling suggest that Apple would be heavily favored to win should the remaining case ever come to trial. There is also similar litigation pending in Florida, where Psystar is based.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
I just hope they don't come after me for ripping my DVDs.
The Supreme Court is considering patents right now, and it looks like they're feeling pretty critical of business method and software patents. Maybe they're thinking of cleaning up our current mess, and copyright is patent's broken brother (they're even both allowed by the same constitutional clause). I can hope.
Just...wow. Not unexpected but a stunning beeyotch slap nonetheless.
Hey look you have split circuits. Maybe the SC will take a case and clear it all up.
Apple software like Logic, Aperture and Final Cut Pro may be for music and video, but they are for professional content producers, the business of music and video. Then there's iWork (like Office), Final Cut Server (for multiple editors using Final Cut), XSan (business oriented SAN solution) and Remote Desktop (network remote access and management). And add all the business-oriented stuff in OS X Server. Aside from that, there are plenty of business applications for the Mac from third parties, and Apple gets to inherit many UNIX business applications.
All well and good but Apple makes its real money off its entertainment products such as ipods and home computers. People who noodle around on their Apple and post to social networking sites. As far as Iphones I believe most are for non-business purposes
Computers used to be 100% serious and for business purposes. Slowly through the years they have become primarily home entertainment vehicles with Apple tilting this way more than Windows users. I hear MS makes more money off of Office than from operating systems. Windows is used many times more in business and education than Apple
This is not just this judge. Alsup provided several case citations that showed it is settled case law with plenty of precedent, including the cases Psystar cited, that a license is not a sale subject to first-sale rights and never has been. Those where it has been held different was where the SLA was poorly written and did not make the distinction clearly enough. Apple's SLA was explicit. However, the right of first-sale DOES extend to selling the license... and the media... so the purchaser is allowed to transfer the rights to use the software they have purchased to another purchaser down-line so long as the sold versions still in possession of the seller are destroyed.
I thought every Psystar system came with an original OS X disk. The judge says it's in excess, but I see no evidence for excess to equal the cited case. Psystar's interpretation should stand, but the judge just completely ignored precedent.
Nope. Testimony established that of twenty systems examined by an independent expert witness, five had systems on them that did not match the included operating system disk and three did not come with disks at all. Also testimony was presented and not countered by Psystar that their own books showed they sold more Psystar computer systems than they bought OS X upgrade install disks.
What an assumption. This is a FEDERAL COURT CASE, DennisW... not a California Court Case. Apple is entitled to bring the case in the circuit in which it and Psystar does business... and Psystar was selling computers in California. Other than that... your Apple derangement syndrome is one of the worst cases I have ever seen, Dennis.
Autodesk got shot down because they made it too restrictive and the courts ruled it a sale rather than a license because of that restriction. Autodesk made no provision in their license for recapture or destruction of the software at the end of the license, thus the court ruled it was a sale. Apple requires that the software be erased from all computers if the license and media is sold to another user meeting the requirement for it to be a license. Vernor was also ruled never to have been a user subject to the license, having never agreed to the license since he bought the unopened software at a garage sale and was merely selling it on eBay, still unopened. The court noted in its ruling that Autodesk may have had a complaint against the original buyer who DID agree to the SLA when the installed the software they used and sold the unused portion from the bundle the bought. . . but not against Vernor as a defendant.
That is really stretched logic, Dennis. The federal judge is not paid from California taxes. . . nor are the few thousand dollars of sales taxes on the Psystar clones of that much value to make such a "corruption charge." Those actually could be collected by the state very simply by requiring Psystar to report its California sales (something already allowed by law) and requiring the purchasers to pay California Use Taxes (the equivalent of Sales Taxes) which is already a requirement of law. A desperate California Franchise Tax Board IS already doing this on many such out of state purchases.
As long as it IS for your personal use, that is considered Fair Use. If you give the copy to someone else, or give the original while keeping the copy, you could be in trouble.
As long as it IS for your personal use, that is considered Fair Use. If you give the copy to someone else, or give the original while keeping the copy, you could be in trouble.
So your beef, and the basis for your support of everything “not Apple”, is that you have a problem with the evolution of the computer?
Do I have that about right?
And, here, I thought this was a recipe post or a nifty new kitchen appliance...
Judge William Alsup struck what may be a death blow for Psystar by granting Apple's motion for summary judgment while denying Psystar's counterclaims. The only real surprise here was the swiftness and thoroughness of Apple's victory. Judge Alsup basically ruled that the OS X End User License Agreement (EULA), which prohibits the installation of the software on non-Apple hardware, is legal and means exactly what it says. It is just the latest in a long string of ruling upholding EULAs, sometimes called shrinkwrap or click-wrap licenses.Dell would have won this court victory, done it a year earlier, and for 40 per cent as much money. /sarc
Yes they are, and China is loaded with Commies. What's you point?
Take your argument up with Rush, he uses nothing else, because they work, and he is all about what just works.
Because the money is good — people buy the genuine product because they work better than the other stuff out there.
And just whose line are you parroting? Are you doing this for pay, or just having fun showing your ignorance?
The home computer is mostly used for screwing around....not all the time mind you
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.