Techdirt. Stories filed under "clones" Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us Techdirt. Stories filed under "clones"http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Fri, 30 Sep 2011 17:30:00 PDT Psystar Loses Again: Appeals Court Says It Can't Install Legally Purchased OSX On Other Hardware Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110930/03204216148/psystar-loses-again-appeals-court-says-it-cant-install-legally-purchased-osx-other-hardware.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110930/03204216148/psystar-loses-again-appeals-court-says-it-cant-install-legally-purchased-osx-other-hardware.shtml sued the company in 2008 for violating its license. Psystar went through a variety of (often questionable) defenses before settling on the one I thought had the best chance: the first sale doctrine -- basically claiming they legally purchased the software, and that they should be able to install it wherever they want. Psystar also claimed "copyright misuse," against Apple, arguing that its EULA restricting installation to only Apple hardware was a form of copyright misuse to stifle competition. Two years ago, though, the court granted summary judgment to Apple, rejecting both arguments.

Psystar appealed, focusing on the copyright misuse argument and, while it took some time, the always slightly wacky 9th Circuit has upheld the ruling. The court, tragically in my opinion, buys Apple's argument that its EULA does not unfairly restrict competition, because Psystar could go find a different operating system, rather than Apple's. Here, the court relies on the awful Vernor v. Autodesk ruling that basically said, "as long as a software company claims it's leasing the software to you, rather than selling it to you, your first sale rights disappear." This is true even if the "sale" really is a sale rather than a lease. It all depends on what you call it.

So, in this case, the court ruled that the copyright misuse claim must fail, because it's really an attempt to create a "right of first sale" for software -- and because Apple pretends its software sales are licenses, there is no right of first sale. So, without that... no copyright misuse. If you think this logic is circular, you should see if you can become a judge on the 9th Circuit, since they appear to need help. Furthermore, it argues that since Psystar could just go write its own operating system there is no copyright misuse:
Apple’s SLA does not restrict competitor’s ability to develop their own software, nor does it preclude customers from using non-Apple components with Apple computers. Instead, Apple's SLA merely restricts the use of Apple’s own software to its own hardware. As the district court properly concluded, Apple's SLA has "not prohibited others from independently developing and using their own operating systems." Apple I, 673 F. Supp. 2d at 939. Psystar produces its own computer hardware and it is free to develop its own computer software.
As with the Vernor case, the reasoning here is convoluted. It's really just another court decision that chips away at first sale rights, which are (were?) an important part of copyright law.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> copyright-misuse http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110930/03204216148 Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:00:00 PST DailyDirt: Attack Of The Bioengineered Organisms And Clones Michael Ho http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101203/17154112128/dailydirt-attack-bioengineered-organisms-clones.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101203/17154112128/dailydirt-attack-bioengineered-organisms-clones.shtml
  • Dolly the sheep has been revived again. Clones created THREE years ago in secret? Yah, nothing wrong with that at all.... [url]
  • Solar-powered hornets! Okay, these were discovered, not designed -- but it's just a matter of time before mad scientists start creating other solar-powered insects. [url]
  • Scientists have made bacteria with genes that can be used as logic circuits. Will Moore's law apply? Probably not, but self-assembled, exponential growth of a biological "chip" would be kinda cool. [url]
  • A mouse with two fathers still needs a mother to be born. But apparently, the rodents can be made with two genetic fathers or two genetic mothers. Weird family trees ensue. [url]
  • A human lung on a chip could lead to more "organ on a chip" developments. Great, now we can all breathe easier. :) [url]


    • Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
    ]]>     urls-we-dig-up http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101203/17154112128     Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:03:00 PST Judge Rejects Psystar's Antitrust Claims Against Apple Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081119/0104342876.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081119/0104342876.shtml sued Psystar, we were afraid that the smaller company wouldn't have much of a legal leg to stand on, even if it claimed antitrust violations by Apple -- which it did. However, the judge in the case is apparently unconvinced, dismissing Psystar's counterclaims, noting that Psystar did not do a very good job establishing that Apple has a monopoly, noting that the relevant market is not just the Macintosh operating system. Psystar can file an amended complaint, but it seems unlikely that the judge is going to buy any antitrust claims. That means the lawsuit, assuming it continues, will probably focus on the enforceability of certain end user license agreements, which could be more interesting anyway.

    Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
    ]]>     not-looking-good-for-psystar http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081119/0104342876     Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:32:00 PDT Psystar Apple Case Goes To Arbitration; Results May Be Secret Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0135532581.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0135532581.shtml key legal battle in determining the enforceability of certain provisions in an end user license agreement (EULA). And, indeed, the case was looking interesting, as Apple sued and Psystar hit back with antitrust charges. However, as a bunch of readers have sent in, it appears that the case has moved to "Alternative Dispute Resolution" (ADR). Basically, rather than going through a lawsuit, the two sides have agreed to first take it to an arbitrator, who may be able to work out a settlement. There are many, many good reasons to go this route (many of them have to do with saving money on the lawsuit), but the fear is that any settlement then isn't a binding legal precedent at all, and the actual results may even be kept secret. I can understand why both sides would do this, but it may deprive the world of a useful precedent.

    Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
    ]]>     hopefully-not http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081020/0135532581     Tue, 5 Aug 2008 18:08:00 PDT Psystar Looking To Charge Apple With Antitrust Violations Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080805/0242481892.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080805/0242481892.shtml sued by Apple, we fully expected it to challenge the legality of Apple's EULA (end user license agreement) which forbade putting the software on non-Apple hardware (a provision that even Apple has been known to ignore). The comments to our post suggested that a more likely option would be for Psystar to claim that Apple was violating antitrust laws in requiring the software and hardware be bundled that way.

    Indeed, it looks like both of those predictions were correct. Psystar's response is likely to focus on both the legality of the EULA and whether or not Apple violated antitrust law. As predicted, this case may be very interesting to watch -- and the end result could be very important for many other companies in the tech space.

    Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
    ]]>     this-will-get-interesting http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080805/0242481892     Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:21:00 PDT Apple Finally Sues Psystar For Selling Mac Clones Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080715/1154271690.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080715/1154271690.shtml finally sued clone maker Psystar. This was widely expected, so the most surprising part is that it took so long. Psystar, of course, is the company that came on the scene a few months back claiming to sell Apple's operating system on non-Apple hardware. At first, many people thought it was a hoax, but then Psystar actually started showing machines. Then the question turned to whether or not this is legal. While some say that this is almost certainly the end for Psystar, the company has insisted that what it's doing is perfectly legal. That may be quite debatable, but if this does go to court, it could put to the test the question of just how enforceable end user license agreements (EULAs) really are. Apple's EULA prevents buyers from putting its OS on a non-Apple machine -- but as we've pointed out, even Apple has been known to ignore this provision. While chances are Apple will prevail, if Psystar is willing to put up the fight, it has the potential to limit the power of click-through agreements. Update: This just gets better and better. Not only is Apple suing, but it's demanding that all Psystar machines that have already been sold need to be recalled.

    Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
    ]]>     bring-up-the-eula http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080715/1154271690