Got a tip for us? Share it...

Psystar Lawyer Hints at Anti-Trust Defense

Computerworld reports on comments made by Psystar's attorneys who suggest that anti-trust issues may arise in their defense of the Mac-clone company. Apple sued Psystar in July after Psystar had begun selling a Mac-compatible computer almost two months prior. Apple's lawsuit not only asked for the cessation of sales but also for a recall of all computers sold. Such a move would, of course, bankrupt the small clone company.

Some other intellectual property lawyers agree that Psystar "would be smart to play the antitrust card".

"What Psystar might say is, 'What we would like to do is use the Mac operating system's unique features more broadly on a variety of hardware,'" said Handler then. "I think it's a very, very hard argument to make, but I wouldn't be surprised if they tried.

Carr & Ferrell LLP, the law firm that is representing Psystar, has gone up against Apple before in another intellectual property case involving Burst.com. Colby Springer, one of Psystar's lawyers, promises "This will be an interesting case."

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

46 months ago
good luck!
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
I think this defense depends greatly on how broadly defined the markets are that they are claiming the anti-trust allegations.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
classic David vs Goliath
although in the old story, Goliath didn't have 25 high-priced lawyers on stand-by!
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
Eugh, Psystar should just bugger off and go to hell. They were trying to make a quick buck by selling someone else's product that they've hacked. I've got nothing against the x86 Hackintosh movement but its people that try to make a profit like this that are simply pathetic.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
Competition is a good thing.
If Psystar makes a Mac Clone better than an Apple Branded Mac, then it would just push Apple to do what they do best.... innovate and excel.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
I suppose it never hurts to try, but I don't see that defense working very well. MS/Sony/Nintendo/SGI make an OS that you must run on proprietary hardware. Just because MS has liberal licensing terms doesn't mean that Apple has to do the same.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
You've got to be kidding - any claim that Apple is a monopoly on computer hardware or OS is not going to be defensible. Apple is under no legal mandate to sell their OS for installation on non-Apple HW. This is particularly so since it doesn't even run on non-Apple HW without hacking it. Anti-trust legislation exists to protect markets, not to force competition on individual products. The FTC is concerned about a fair and open marketplace for personal computers, not about whether Apple has competition for selling macintoshes or OS X.

This will do nothing but suck money from Psystar's account into their lawyers.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
I'm rooting for Psystar on this one.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago

Competition is a good thing.
If Psystar makes a Mac Clone better than an Apple Branded Mac, then it would just push Apple to do what they do best.... innovate and excel.


Travel back 10 years to the powerpc clones.

Look up profits, high margin, mac clones.

Then see if you still like that.

And do you think it is fair for apple to do all the work and these slime buckets to profit off the OS?

Let these slimer buckets make linux clones. Oh wait. The Open source world interfaces still look like a mess so there's no money there and Paystar knows they would fail.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
46 months ago
I read this as such:
"We'd like to see OS X running on our hardware, which is of low quality. This will help OS X look inferior to Windows in many ways as people have problems with it while thinking they got a good deal on a 'Mac.'"
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives

[ Read All Comments ]