Psystar, a company that builds computers that will run OSX natively (no hacks or reverse engineering) from off the shelf parts, is currently in the midst of a legal battle with Apple over their business.
Apparently, Apple claims that they’re violating the EULA for OS by not installing it on apple branded hardware among others.
Psystar is now counter-suing Apple for antitrust allegations. I don’t really see them winning this one, but it would be nice to see BOTH thrown out (if they can prove that the EULA doesn’t apply to them).
only time will tell. If the right judge gets the case, who knows which way it will go
now, if psystar stops selling their “open computer” line with os pre-installed (but still give the customer a legal copy with their order to install themselves) Does apple still have a case? Wouldn’t that be, more or less, a legal loop hole?
sort of like stores selling drug paraphernalia, but not the drugs?
edit: OR if apple wins this and the above scenario is still illegal, can hardware manufacturers be held liable for producing hardware that allows osx to run natively? Or is it apples fault for not protecting it better?
I’d think they could… if some dude with pot didn’t know how to make a joint, and called some other stoner for directions, I don’t think you could be in trouble for giving the directions.
good point, but I wonder what the law actually says about that kind of thing.
If they sold the computer to specifically run OS, then if something went wrong, wouldn’t they be responsible to fix the problem that their customers are having? And in doing so, could that possibly violate the eula as well?
either that or sell them with a disclaimer that they’ll help them the best that they can with the software, but can only officially support hardware failures
they’d probably have to switch from “we promise OSX will work on this” to “many of our customer choose our computers because they report that they can run OSX without any problems”
Preloaded with OSX is a big nono… I see apple collecting on that part.
I believe it does violate the EULA if the end user installs OS X on non apple branded hardware, but thats the users fault. Of course then can still sell their machines, just need some rewording of the ‘this supports OS X’ is likely, like posted above.