TechStuff
Navigate today's cutting-edge technology with the gurus from HowStuffWorks.
Judge Sides With Apple Against Psystar
by Jonathan Strickland | November 16, 2009
U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup ruled on Friday that Psystar was guilty of copyright infringement against Apple, according to Natalie Weinstein of CNET. The whole case revolves around Apple’s Mac operating system. Unlike Windows or Linux, which you can install on whatever hardware you like, Apple only wants the Mac OS to belong to Apple computers.
That hasn’t stopped hundreds of enterprising hackers from building their own machines and installing Mac OS X. But because Apple designed the operating system with a particular hardware and BIOS configuration in mind, the OS doesn’t always work properly on an unauthorized machine. And the process of installing a non-native operating system is complicated and can require a lot of troubleshooting — it’s not something the computer novice should attempt.
That’s where Psystar stepped in. The fact that hackintoshes (the common name for a PC running the Mac OS) exist shows that people want computers running the Mac OS but they don’t want an actual Apple computer. Maybe they don’t like Apple’s product design, or perhaps they feel that the Mac line of computers is too expensive. In 2008, Psystar began to sell PCs running the Mac operating system. The company took care of the tricky process of installing the OS on non-Apple hardware (though Psystar also explained that the computer might not always behave as it should).
Apple slapped Psystar with a lawsuit claiming the company had infringed upon Apple’s copyright by installing the Mac OS on non-Apple hardware. Psystar countered that its approach fell under the protection of fair use. Psystar also said that Apple’s licensing agreement was unfair because it created a monopoly for machines running Mac OS.
The judge has sided with Apple on these matters, stating that Psystar is guilty of copyright-infringement and violating the Digital Media Copyright Act. Whether this means Psystar will have to stop selling their PCs remains to be seen. In December, the two companies will meet in court again as Apple lays further claims against Psystar, including trademark infringement.
This isn’t going to stop people from building their own hackintoshes. As long as Apple stays out of the netbook game, people will try to find ways to create their own Mac netbooks. It’s just going to take a lot more work than buying a computer from Psystar.
If you want to hear more about Psystar and hackintoshes, there are two episodes of TechStuff in which Chris and I discuss them.
Learn more about operating systems at HowStuffWorks.com:
How Operating Systems Work
How Hackers Work
How Copyright Works
-
I’m glad Apple won this, and I say that as a former clone-owner back in the mid-90s, when Apple licensed out their O.S. It was a fine machine — cheap — but not of Apple caliber. But while I say shame on Psystar, I still wish Apple would find a business model that would allow them to sell a $500 notebook or low-end iMac. At that price, Apple would crush the high school and college market and I’d buy my 6-year old a computer, because he’s already using computers in 1st grade (Windows). The profit per sale wouldn’t be as high, but I think the return in scale would be, along with brand loyalty (starting consumers younger) and leveraging consumers into other Apple products.
-
I wish Apple will sell their Mac OS as how Microsoft does, so that more users will use it therefore more hardware/software developers will develop more for Mac OS. But that might probably spoil the impression of people towards Apple products if they are developed poorly.
-
Mac: they are making cheap Mac knock offs! I’m going to write a really mean blog entry about them, or maybe I’ll make a bitter abstract movie about a fat guy wearing glasses with “cool guy clothes”.
PC: don’t worry Mac I’ll just sue them for you.
Mac: thanks PC… you still suck.
-
I’m can’t see how Apple won this. People should be be free to build their computers anyway they want. Say someone custom built a Ford with a Chevy engine, Chevy can sue. If the OS software was bought legally, I just can’t see how this is copyright infringement.
Recent Postings by Category
BrainStuff
- Interesting Reading #414 – The tiniest computer, hearts really can break, family pays $5,000 per year for connections, New font saves ink and much more…
- Public Service Announcement – Soft drinks nearly double your chances of pancreatic cancer
- Amazing – Going inside the Giant Crystal Cave
FanStuff
- What’s art — and what’s groundbreaking — in video games?
- Ursula K. Le Guin vs. Google Books: Round Two
- “Lost,” “Fringe” and That Whole Alternate Universe Thing
How-to Stuff
- How to Take a Road Trip, Abraham Lincoln-Style
- How to Explain Love in the Least Romantic Way Possible
- How to Quiet a Barking Dog
ScienceStuff
- Space Music Vol. 8: Sun Ra and Afrofuturism
- Stuff from the Science Lab Roundup: Space Eats and Grow Houses
- Why does time fly as you get older?
Stuff You Should Know
The Coolest Stuff on the Planet
High Speed Stuff
- The Toyota Recall: Where can you get the latest information?
- What is Toyota doing to fix its gas pedal problem?
- High Speed Stuff Wrap-up: Automotive Pet Peeves and Polar Vehicles
Keep Asking
- How does an airbrush work?
- Is the Internet free? If you want to make a website, will it cost you to put it online?
- If you look at a piece of glass from an angle, why does it have a bluish or green tint?
Stuff You Missed in History Class
- Last Week in History Podcasts: Battle Horses and Black Moses
- The Wonderful Adventures of the Nurse We Forgot
- Black History Month on HowStuffWorks



4 Comments