Featured Articles

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel has released a 3G cellular modem with an integrated power amplifier that fits into a 300 mm2 footprint, claiming it…

More...
Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

It's not all rosy in the house of Intel. It seems that upcoming Atom out-of-order cores might be giving this semiconductor…

More...
TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC will start producing 16nm wafers in the first quarter of 2015. Sometime in the second quarter production should ramp up…

More...
Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S is the ‘tock’ of the Haswell architecture and despite being delayed from the original plan, this desktop part is scheduled…

More...
Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool is well known for its gamer cases with aggressive styling. However, the Dead Silence chassis offers consumers a new choice,…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 16 November 2009 11:30

Apple wins Psystar case

Written by Nick Farell

Image

We are the only Apple company in the village


Apple has
won the case against Psystar, which has been selling Mac clones running Mac OS X.

U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup granted Apple's request for a summary judgement, while denying Psystar's counterclaim. He said that Psystar has violated Apple's exclusive reproduction right, distribution right, and right to create derivative works.

Apple sued in July 2008, a few months after Psystar began selling Mac clones. Psystar's claimed it could run Apple's Mac OS X operating system on non-Apple machines. Apple denied this, stating that its Mac OS X end user license agreement allows people to install the OS on Apple computers only.

Both Apple and Psystar had a requested a summary judgment, which is a determination made without trial based on the merits of a case. The judge rejected Psystar could claim fair use because it did not even attempt to address the four factors used to determine fair use.

Psystar's could not claim "first sale" doctrine, which allows someone who buys copyrighted material to sell it. Alsup said this doctrine did not apply to the "unauthorized copies" that Psystar produced. Psystar violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act because it circumvented Apple's protection barrier, the judge added.

Nick Farell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments