http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/ Engadget Comments for Psystar files official notice of appeal, ruthlessly attacks windmill http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 12:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Don Quixote reference?]]>Jan 16th 2010 1:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 3:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Apple-whoring much?

come on!]]>Jan 17th 2010 5:31AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 12:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 12:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Yes, but so is Deadpool.

I wonder if Psystar think in little iPhone SMS bubbles?]]>Jan 16th 2010 6:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
I guess the fact that these two wonderful companies have to deal with each other is going to have to be good enough for me.]]>Jan 16th 2010 12:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
I haven't really followed this whole Psystar thing. But I gotta say, I just gained a huge amount of respect for whoever wrote that statement. They hit the nail on the head, regarding everything that's wrong with the tech biz right now.]]>Jan 16th 2010 2:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Just hate both.]]>Jan 16th 2010 9:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 1:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Me: "Who the hell are you?!"
Eugene Action: "I am the Architect..."]]>Jan 16th 2010 3:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 4:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 1:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 2:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 1:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
they are the anti-christ? ]]>Jan 16th 2010 1:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/You cannot kill that which has no life..
]]>Jan 16th 2010 1:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Lol! +1]]>Jan 16th 2010 3:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
I just watched the skeleton of cadavera (like just finished 10 minutes ago). Is that what you are referencing? If so, awesome. The movie is indeed genius. ]]>Jan 17th 2010 2:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 1:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/it!!

*applauding* well played psystar, well played]]>Jan 16th 2010 1:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
A soporific christian name that lulls you into a false sense of security before you are slapped in the face with a canoe paddle rigged with dynamite.]]>Jan 16th 2010 1:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Wow. Just wow. There is nothing "legit" about violating license agreements in a non-profit way. You guys really ought to be thankful for Psystar because they are like a infected zit smack in the middle of Apple's back. Whether they are batshit crazy or just crazy like your ex-girlfriend, they are showing Apple how costly it is to enforce Draconian software license agreements.

You guys ought to look through Apple's license agreements. Did you know that in Snow Leopard, they inserted a prohibition on using synthesized speech in public settings or recordings? 20 years we were allowed and even encouraged to do it, then blamo, no more because of a license update. Apple lawyers are turds of the highest order. They deserve that infected pimple on their back. And more.]]>Jan 16th 2010 2:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
OS X Business model = Extremely effective.
Well designed hardware, charged at a premium
OS restricted to hardware, makes both exclusive
Exclusive, expensive things = fashionable

Yes its draconian, but thats what makes it brilliant. Obviously OSx86 breaches this model, but I do not actually think that Hackintoshers steal much business from Apple, as they usually use budget hardware, so would just use windows/linux instead. ]]>Jan 16th 2010 2:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
You think Apple really cares about a few geeks hacking OS X on to their PCs? No, probably not. We're not really lost sales because we wouldn't have bought the Apple hardware anyway (myself excluded... I'm a fanboy, though.) As long as the MASSES can't easily hack OS X onto their everyday PC, Apple doesn't have to worry about going out of business.

Psystar would let the masses do exactly that. Anyone who wanted one could get a cheap(er than Apple) PC with half decent specs running OS X. No hacking required on their part. THAT'S what scares Apple.

Psystar both copies and takes credit for the OSx86 community's work, AND draws unwanted attention to the OSx86 community.
]]>Jan 16th 2010 2:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
>Well designed hardware, charged at a premium

First off, well designed hardware my arse, its the same hardware in a shiny case. At one point they were charging $300 for an "upgrade" to a processor that cost $40 more (they may still be). I thought the extra cost for crapple was the OS, so what is better about the OS when someone pays the $260 extra over what the processor upgrade ACTUALLY cost?

Its the same as Alienware, and what do most people call Alienware? Dell's with shiny cases. I'm sorry to crash people back to reality, but there is nothing special about crapple hardware, its the same hardware with different firmware and driver. Psystar just proves that.]]>Jan 16th 2010 11:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Damn Psystar. Just go out of freakin' business already...

]]>Jan 16th 2010 2:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 2:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Hey, that is what the whole IT industry is based on, only thing that's changed is the legal leeches sniffed a gold mine and latched on to suck away our R&D dollars stiffling innovation and creating the need for more piracy and theft.

You can almost see their greedy fat hands and mouths trying to figure out how to scare IT companies into part with the large pots of cash amassed.

Don't forget, most people of "law" come from wealth, they weren't the nerd, the geek, they are the spoilt jocks who feel jilted by how the smart ones have suddenly got more money than them.

Hmmm.]]>Jan 16th 2010 4:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 3:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 4:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 4:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
A last name like action, "Thousands of cases handled" & practice area's include everything under the sun. Yup. He sure seems like a wiener...oops, i mean winner.]]>Jan 16th 2010 5:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
It is 100% legal, and done by millions of Americans everyday, to resell copyrighted purchases.
It's enshrined in the "Right of First Sale" (although that is something different) in the US. Please look it up.

Ever sold an old book/DVD/etc? All perfectly legal. Reselling software that you OWN is also perfectly legal.
You can't resell(reissue) software that you only "hold a licence" for...
]]>Jan 16th 2010 6:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 9:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Since he is a lawyer with some background in copyright, I'm pretty sure the author of this post is more than familiar with the legalities of this post.

I think you might need to brush up on what Psystar was found guilty of. Because it wasn't just reselling copyrighted material (which would be perfectly legal). They were modifying it and then reselling it. Big difference.]]>Jan 16th 2010 10:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Which is why I mentioned licenced software. I wasn't posting about Psystar in particular, I was posting about the OP. It says reselling software is illegal, which is incorrect.]]>Jan 16th 2010 10:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Perhaps he should be, but this: "you can't copy, modify, and resell a copyrighted work without permission" suggests otherwise.

You absolutely CAN resell a copyrighted work without permission.]]>Jan 16th 2010 11:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Did you miss the word "modify"?]]>Jan 16th 2010 11:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Did you forget the "alter" part? That most certainly is not legal. ]]>Jan 16th 2010 11:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
First sale was explicitly discussed and denied by the court in this case. Have you tried clicking on the many hyperlinks found in this post? They will provide the background information you need. They're the words highlighted in blue -- just move your mouse until the on-screen arrow hovers over them, and then press the button on the left.]]>Jan 17th 2010 4:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Do you usually go out of your way to insult readers critical of you?
Insecure much?

As I've already stated, I didn't bring up right of first sale in particular reference to Psystar (although their problem was selling copies instead of something specifically bought by them, which would be covered by right of first sale), but in reaction to you implying sale of copyrighted works is illegal in your post.

]]>Jan 17th 2010 6:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
"but in reaction to you implying sale of copyrighted works is illegal in your post."

Man, you are just attacking straw men here. The OP very clearly said:

"Just based on the simple open-and-shut legal reasoning involved in the decision -- surprise, you can't copy, modify, and resell a copyrighted work without permission..."

Notice the word "modify"? Such a small word I know, but it makes a huge difference in the eyes of the law.]]>Jan 17th 2010 11:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/Jan 16th 2010 7:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
It's a pity Psystar couldn't succeed. More competition for Apple would have been great for consumers of their products.

I'm surprised at all the negative comments directed at Psystar actually. You do realise that any "IBM-compatible" computer you've ever used that wasn't IBM/Lenovo branded also came from cloner companies just like Psystar, don't you?
]]>Jan 16th 2010 7:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
There is plenty of competition for Apple. Its called Windows and the numerous flavors of Linux.

Microsoft owns the intellectual property that makes "IBM compatible" machines run. If Microsoft did not want to license their OS and participate in the OEM market they would be free to do so. There is no [i]legal mandate[/i] for Microsoft to run their business the way they do. It's their choice.

Apple's chooses to run their business differently. And unless they have a monopoly on a market (which they don;t... the PC market has plenty of competition) its not the government's responsibility to dictate how apple runs its business.]]>Jan 16th 2010 10:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
"Plenty" is never enough.

MS is nothing to do with this, and they don't "hold the IP that makes PCs run".
All PC (once IBM-Compatible) makers either are cloners (Compaq, HP, etc) or evolved from cloners.

IBM made the first "IBM-Compatible", and other OEMs copied the hardware, the BIOS, and licenced the same OS from MS.
The only difference between Psystar and them is that IBM didn't own the OS they used, so other OEMs had no trouble using it legally.
IBM was unlucky. Apple was much luckier/smarter.]]>Jan 16th 2010 11:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Micorsoft has EVERYTHING to so with this. This case was about software, not hardware. Nothing in the ruling stated that Psystar was liable for making the hardware they made. It's all about the software and the fact that they altered and then resold intellectual property that was not theirs to alter and resell.

Just because Microsoft chooses to do business this way does not make such a business model legally mandated. If MS wanted to keep their OS restricted to certain hardware and stopped selling OEM versions they would be totally within their rights to do so.
]]>Jan 16th 2010 11:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/16/psystar-files-official-notice-of-appeal-ruthlessly-attacks-wind/
Bringing MS into an issue that doesn't involve them at all is just bizzare. If MS didn't exist in this world at all, it would make absolutely no difference to this situation whatsoever.

I've never once even suggested that Psystar's business model was legal. I said that I personally am sorry to see them fail, and that anyone who has owned a non-IBM/Lenovo PC criticizing them is being hypocritical.]]>Jan 17th 2010 1:30AM