Psystar Looking To Charge Apple With Antitrust Violations

from the this-will-get-interesting dept

Once “unauthorized” Apple clone maker, Psystar, was 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.

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: apple, psystar

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Psystar Looking To Charge Apple With Antitrust Violations”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Freedom says:

Apple too dumb for its own good...

>> Given that Dell would love to ship PCs with OSX on them

If Apple was smart, it would let them. It provides them with almost as much control over the hardware platform to have a major OEM that it can dictate to, and lots of folks that hate buying pure Apple would be tempted to final try Apple’s OS. In short, a win-win.


TriZz says:

Re: Apple too dumb for its own good...

I used to agree with you, but really…Apple isn’t selling OS X when you get a Mac, they’re selling an elitist lifestyle, a membership into a club that only owning a Mac gets you in. You start selling OS X to any Tom and Dick who want it on any hardware, and now you’re diluting that membership.

It’s stupid, I know. But Apple’s recent success is only because it’s trendy now to own a Mac. I don’t and have never seen that happen with any other Windows based PC manufacturer.

Eric says:

Er, ya...

A ‘win-win’ for Apple? Ya… right.

Apple makes NO money on computer hardware. And having NO control over the hardware would make support easier. And make developing the OS easier. (sarcasm)

I hate buying pure ‘Ford’, so I will sue them to put a Ferrari engine in a Ford Focus. I will then force them to properly service my car. And then sue the pants off them when I crash into a tree.

Uh huh…

Dr E

TravisO (profile) says:

Re: Er, ya...

>> Apple makes NO money on computer hardware

You couldn’t be more wrong, how do you think Apple stayed in business only 5yrs ago when all they sold was hardware (OS9 came for free on your Apple computer). There’s a reason why an Apple computer costs twice as much as a PC with the same specs, a very large markup, to make up for the fact they sell so few of them.

Nowadays they probably do make more money off of their iPod sales than computer sales, but no matter how you cut it, 95% of their profit comes from hardware and only hardware. Apple has mentioned in the past 100% of the money from iTunes goes to the record labels, servers and manpower needed to run the setup, iTunes only exists to sell iPods, which is why they don’t open up iTunes to support any MP3 player.

ed says:

Apple violates its own EULA

I’m very concerned about the comment you made regarding Apple putting its operating system on non Apple hardware. You should very well know that they own the OS and therefore aren’t bound by the EULA as you and I are. It was a ridiculous thing to say, and I’m pretty disappointed since you are usually much smarter than that.

David (profile) says:

Re: Apple violates its own EULA

When Mike said Apple ignored the provision, I don’t think he meant Apple was somehow violating their own EULA (which as you rightly point out is nonsense).

I think the point was, if Apple had reason to put OSX on non-Apple software, that weakens any claim they might make that OSX in some way needs to be on Mac hardware.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Apple violates its own EULA

I’m very concerned about the comment you made regarding Apple putting its operating system on non Apple hardware. You should very well know that they own the OS and therefore aren’t bound by the EULA as you and I are. It was a ridiculous thing to say, and I’m pretty disappointed since you are usually much smarter than that.

Just to be clear, it wasn’t *APPLE* violating its own EULA, it was Apple’s EULA not making sense — showing that Apple wasn’t even aware of what was in its EULA.

What happened was it offered Safari for Windows, but in the EULA said it could only be used on Apple hardware.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Apple violates its own EULA


FTLITFA (From The Link In The Fracking Article)

“the EULA for Apple’s newly-released version of Safari for Windows requires that “The software allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time.”

Safari for Windows…only allowed to be installed on Apple Hardware.

Might I suggest you try following the links next time.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Re: Apple's violation of its own EULA

Funny, considering Quicktime is available for Windows on the Apple webiste. Very curious…

Right, that was the point. Apple’s EULA still said it could only work on Apple hardware, even as they were offering it for download on Windows… thus showing that Apple didn’t pay attention to its own EULA (and it was Safari, not Quicktime).

Dr. G says:

Simple solution to claims of tying/bundeling antitrust

If Apple stopped selling OSX as a retail product, it could invalidate any claims that Apple might be illegally tying the OSX operating system to Apple hardware. Simply, you end up with a product in which the OS is considered just one of the components; i.e. the OS is there to make the product work, just like a keyboard, battery, or screen. So, if the courts ruled that bundling OSX is an antitrust law violation, Apple could just stop selling OSX separately. (Not too good for Apple customers who are then limited to the copy and free upgrades that came with their machine).

The whole antitrust claim is ridiculous anyway. No one is forcing consumers to buy an Apple – there are plenty of other operating systems and hardware out there to choose from that arguably do the same thing. What monopoly?

What Psystar has done is analogous to the following example: a “Mercedes” car called model A1 manufactured by Gigi Cars Ltd. (nobody has heard of them either) advertising that their model A1 runs faster, cheaper, and better that a 300SL Mercedes. Mercedes sues Gigi Cars Ltd for using the Mercedes name to sell their product without licensing or permission. Gigi turns around and sues Mercedes for antitrust law violation because, if a consumer wants a Mercedes engine, they have to buy the whole car and Mercedes doesn’t allow their engines to be used by other manufacturers in their cars without a license from Mercedes.

Perhaps the credit should go to Mercedes for developing such a nice engine and perhaps the courts should recognize that one company’s intellectual property shouldn’t be distributed without the owner’s permission just because everyone likes it so much – that smacks of communism and it will ruin this country. Think about it.

This is just my opinion.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...