There's one other little wrinkle here, and that's exactly what Apple's eventually going to be able to prevent Psystar from doing. It's certain that the California court will bar Psystar from preloading machines with Leopard, but Psystar's arguing that its new Rebel EFI software shouldn't be covered by any decision, since it wasn't part of the case. That's an interesting argument and definitely worth some consideration -- but it's got some holes in it since Psystar's now admitted that it's liable for contributory and induced copyright infringement and violating the DMCA. As we've said before, Psystar's essentially doing with Rebel EFI what Grokster got smacked by the Supreme Court for doing in 2005: it's trying to build a business around the knowing copyright infringement of customers, and that usually doesn't fly. We'll see what happens -- and Florida awaits.
Apple dings Psystar for $2.67m, round two heads to Florida

N. Patel|12.01.09
Sponsored Links

December 1st, 2009
In this article: apple, breaking news, BreakingNews, cloning, hackintosh, lawsuit, legal, mac clone, MacClone, os x, OsX, osx86, psystar

There's one other little wrinkle here, and that's exactly what Apple's eventually going to be able to prevent Psystar from doing. It's certain that the California court will bar Psystar from preloading machines with Leopard, but Psystar's arguing that its new Rebel EFI software shouldn't be covered by any decision, since it wasn't part of the case. That's an interesting argument and definitely worth some consideration -- but it's got some holes in it since Psystar's now admitted that it's liable for contributory and induced copyright infringement and violating the DMCA. As we've said before, Psystar's essentially doing with Rebel EFI what Grokster got smacked by the Supreme Court for doing in 2005: it's trying to build a business around the knowing copyright infringement of customers, and that usually doesn't fly. We'll see what happens -- and Florida awaits.