Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

Apple picks at Psystar counterclaim as court info goes secret

Apple has responded to Psystar's latest copyright abuse claims against it by pointing out technicalities; simultaneously, both have successfully won approval for a protection order that keeps some of their discoveries out of each other's view.

The latest shot in the conflict between the Cupertino-based Mac maker and its unsanctioned, clone-building nuisance was exchanged on Wednesday when Apple submitted its response to Psystar's amended complaint, which accused Apple of abusing its end-user license agreement and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by forbidding third-party hardware from running Mac OS X.

Submitted through a Northern District of California court in San Francisco, the 13-page response unsurprisingly denies Psystar's accusations point-for-point but takes issue with Psystar's requests that the court find Apple's claimed copyrights untenable until it no longer interprets the license or the DMCA as valid.

Simply stated, Apple claims that the Mac clone builder hasn't asked for declaratory relief, or its own rights, in the newest form of the complaint. The move doesn't necessarily force a further amendment by Psystar, but does leave room for Apple to voice its opinion further on into the case.

Regardless of any possible modifications to the case, the discovery phase that follows next is now closer to reality.

A day before the Apple response, Northern District Judge William Alsup approved the protective order requested by both sides. The decision prevents anyone but the attorneys and others necessarily involved in any court proceedings from viewing information marked as confidential.

While most of the case will remain public, the order will prevent either company from obtaining trade secrets, such as source code for Mac OS X, in the course of collecting evidence before they go to trial — though both will have to prove that the information is important enough to be worth protecting, the judge said.



172 Comments

macmad 15 Years · 62 comments

I really don't understand how Psystar can even have a case.

If I purchased a Sony PS3 game and then got home and found it didn't play on a Nintendo Wii, how could I take Sony to court for this?

Apple's software/OS etc, clearly states on the box the system requirements... a Mac machine.

What am I missing here?

jenkman91 15 Years · 48 comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacMad

I really don't understand how Psystar can even have a case.

If I purchased a Sony PS3 game and then got home and found it didn't play on a Nintendo Wii, how could I take Sony to court for this?

Apple's software/OS etc, clearly states on the box the system requirements... a Mac machine.

What am I missing here?


I agree with you 100%

jenkman91 15 Years · 48 comments

Why is Apple letting this happen?

I by macs for a reason ( not because its shiny [for all you win fanboys who think that is the reason])

I use macs because they use their own software and hardware.

for Psystar to keep operating as a company that sells third party mac machines is crazy.

I understand that Apple wants to gain growth in the computer market but, this is not how you do it.

What Psystar is doing is illegal!!!

they are ignoring Apple's copyright and user agreements.

macmad 15 Years · 62 comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by jenkman91

I agree with you 100%

Then there are at least two of us who are really confused!

I know the legal system in the U.S. is a funny thing, but, well, I just really don't get it.

jenkman91 15 Years · 48 comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacMad

Then there are at least two of us who are really confused!

I know the legal system in the U.S. is a funny thing, but, well, I just really don't get it.

HAHA

I don't understand why Apple is letting Psystar getting away with this.

Like I said in my comment: Pystar is going against the copyright and user agreements that Apple set in stone.

I don't have a problem if somebody does a homebrew mod on a machine and is able to put OS X on it for fun.

But to go and start out a company to sell OS X is f*** up. It just boggles my mind at how they are getting away with this.

If I was in the Apple legal dept. I would be raising hell, and doing everything I can to shutdown this company