The Apple Core

Jason D. O'Grady & David Morgenstern
Home / News & Blogs / The Apple Core

Judge grants permanent injunction against Psystar

By | December 16, 2009, 7:33am PST

Summary: A US District Court judge Tuesday granted Apple a permanent injunction against Mac clone maker Psystar. The move effectively stops Psystar from selling PCs with Apple’s Mac OS X pre-installed.

psystarstompedThe US District Court for the Northern District of California on Tuesday granted Apple’s (AAPL) request for a permanent injunction against the Mac clone maker. The move effectively stops Psystar from selling PCs with Apple’s Mac OS X pre-installed.

“Defendant must bring its conduct into compliance with the injunction by midnight on December 31, 2009, at the latest,” U.S. District Judge William Alsup wrote in his ruling. “Defendant must immediately begin this process, and take the quickest path to compliance; thus, if compliance can be achieved within one hour after this order is filed, defendant shall reasonably see it done.”

Case closed.

The judge’s injunction doesn’t include the company’s Rebel EFI software, however. The $49.99 software allows the easy installation of “multiple operating systems” (including Mac OS X) to be installed on generic PC. The warns that Psystar is is skating on thin ice with Rebel EFI:

It should be clear, however, that this ruling is without prejudice to Psystar bringing a new motion before the undersigned that includes real details about Rebel EFI, and opening itself up to formal discovery thereon.

Is anyone really surprised? Everyone knew that the proverbial hammer was going to fall on Psystar, eventually. What’s going to become of Psystar? It could continue to sell generic PCs sans OS X slying offering Rebel EFI on the side but, as the judge warns, this opens the company up to more potential legal action from Cupertino. Will Apple go after Rebel EFI next?

Tip: Digital Daily

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “The Apple Core”

Topics

Apple Macintosh, Apple Inc., Psystar, Apple Mac OS X, Apple Mac OS, Operating Systems, Desktops, Software, Hardware, Jason D. O'Grady

Jason O'Grady is a journalist and author specializing in mobile technology. He has published six books on Apple and mobile gadgets and his PowerPage blog has been publishing for over 15 years.

Disclosure

Jason D. O'Grady

Jason D. O'Grady is the creator and editor of O'Grady's PowerPage, which has been publishing mobile technology news since 1995. He maintains an advertising relationship with the following legacy advertisers on the PowerPage:

  • Amazon Associates
  • Google Adsense
  • Tekserve

    • Advertising on the PowerPage is brokered by a third-party agency (BackBeat Media) and he recuses himself from these negotiations.

Biography

Jason D. O'Grady

Jason D. O'Grady developed an affinity for Apple computers after using the original Lisa, and this affinity turned into a bona-fide obsession when he got the original 128 KB Macintosh in 1984.

He started writing one of the first Web sites about Apple (O'Grady's PowerPage) in 1995 and is considered to be one of the fathers of blogging. He has been a frequent speaker at the Macworld Expo conference and a member of the conference faculty. He also co-founded the first dedicated PowerBook User Group (PPUG) in the United States.

After winning a major legal battle with Apple in 2006, he set the precedent that independent journalists are entitled to the same protections under the First Amendment as members of the mainstream media.

O'Grady is the author of The Nexus One Pocket Guide, The Droid Pocket Guide, The Google Phone Pocket Guide, and The Garmin nuvi Pocket Guide (Peachpit Press), the author of Corporations That Changed the World: Apple Inc. (Greenwood Press), and a contributor to The Mac Bible (Peachpit Press). In addition, he has contributed to numerous Mac publications over the years, including MacWEEK, Macworld, and MacPower (Japan).

When he's not writing about Apple for ZDNet at The Apple Core, he enjoys spending time with his family in New Jersey.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
Ask a Question Start a Discussion
64
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

then how do you get a license if all are upgrades....
dougogd@... 27th Dec 2009
If this is true you are saying that mac is not ever offering full licenses ever including what is installed on a mac. Makes no sense to me.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
Done and Done (NT)
CowLauncher 16th Dec 2009
NT
0 Votes
+ -
NT?
qunungnauraq 16th Dec 2009
What does it mean when someone posts (NT)?
0 Votes
+ -
no text
use_what_works_4_U 16th Dec 2009
NT
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Judge grants permanent injunction against Psystar
Badgered 16th Dec 2009
Yeah if they continue to sell the Rebel EFI, I'm sure they'll be back in court soon. What I wonder is, what if they gave it away free (as a separate download) to anyone who purchased an Open Computer, and a copy of OS X (not pre-installed). Would Apple still have a case then?
0 Votes
+ -
Yes.
UsernameRequired Updated - 16th Dec 2009
Because OS X is sold as an upgrade only. To have a full license to use OS
X you must buy an Apple manufactured computer. If RebelEFI is
deemed as "Circumventing any technological measure that effectively
controls access to plaintiff?s copyrighted Mac OS X software, including,
but not limited to, the technological measure used by Apple to prevent
unauthorized copying of Mac OS X on non-Apple computers" (it is!), then
definitely! Whichever way you put it or look at it, Psystar never,
ever, had a leg to stand on. This, as well as being frivolous, has been a
massive waste of everyones time.
0 Votes
+ -
Incorrect....
Badgered Updated - 16th Dec 2009
Because OS X is sold as an upgrade only. To have a full license to use OS X you must buy an Apple manufactured computer.

Incorrect. I can go to a store and pick up a copy of OS X today. I am not required by Apple or anyone else to prove that I own a Mac. And nowhere on that package does it say "Upgrade Only".
0 Votes
+ -
You are incorrect actually
JT82 16th Dec 2009
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC223Z/A?fnode=MTY1NDAzOA&mco=MTM3NDgwNzM

Now that is the SAME boxed product you buy from the store (if its $49.99 you are buying a family pack licence). And I quote "Snow Leopard is an upgrade for Leopard users and requires a Mac with an Intel processor."

now from the System requirements section (and check the system requirements part of the sticker on the retail box, you'll see the same thing) "Mac computer with an Intel processor "

They make it pretty clear that it is only an upgrade. Mac has ALWAYS sold retail upgrades only, never the full version unbundled from Apple hardware.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually..
daftkey 16th Dec 2009
Apple sold Full Retail copies of Mac OS up to Mac OS 8. This practice was discontinued when they pulled the plug on the clones.
0 Votes
+ -
Then certain Mac users on ZDNet are idiots
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
They make it pretty clear that it is only an
upgrade.

Whenever the OS X vs Windows price comparison
comes up, certain Mac users on ZDNet always
compare what you say is the Upgrade price of OS X
to the full license price of Windows. Anyone doing
that would be an uninformed idiot, isn't that
right?
0 Votes
+ -
ALL versions except for Snow Leopard are full.
Arm A. Geddon 16th Dec 2009
Ever try to do a upgrade on a reformatted HDD? SHEESH!! Grab a brain!!
0 Votes
+ -
Re: uninformed idiot
Arm A. Geddon 16th Dec 2009
Now. Now. You shouldn't be calling yourself names. You shouldn't be posting in Apple articles either, as it shows in your posts, you know nothing about them. Goodbye
nothing!!
0 Votes
+ -
wait...
Badgered 16th Dec 2009
you mean that copy of OS X which is listed as Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard is only an upgrade version? Odd it's not listed that way on the box. You know, like when you buy an upgrade version of other software that says something like... Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade.

I know, I'm always supposed to read the fine print...
0 Votes
+ -
Snow Leopard is an Upgrade
WarhavenSC 16th Dec 2009
Snow Leopard is sold as an upgrade. And even with retail versions of
OS X (such as Tiger and Leopard), the EULA says you are only allowed
to install it on Apple hardware:

http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/Welcome_to_Leopard.pdf

2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions.

A. Single Use. This License allows you to install, use and run one (1)
copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a
time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any
non-Apple labeled computer, or to enable others to do so. This
License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one
computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software
available over a network where it could be used by multiple
computers at the same time.
0 Votes
+ -
Even Leopard was an Upgrade
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
From your link:
Updates: If an Apple Software update
completely replaces (full install) a previously
licensed version of the Apple Software, you may
not use both versions of the Apple Software at
the same time nor may you transfer them
separately.

If your Mac came with Tiger (or earlier
versions of OS X) and you purchased Leopard,
installing Leopard completely replaces Tiger.
Therefor, you may not use your Tiger install
disc on another Mac nor can you sell / transfer
your Tiger license to anyone else. Leopard
upgrades not only your software but also the
license that came with your software. Upon
installing Leopard, your Tiger license no
longer exists, it has been replaced.

More interesting reading from your link that
every OS X user should be terrified
about:
4. Consent to Use of Data. You agree that
Apple and its subsidiaries may collect and use
technical and related information, including
but not limited to technical information about
your computer, system and application software,
and peripherals, that is gathered periodically
to facilitate the provision of software
updates, product support and other services to
you (if any) related to the Apple Software,
and to verify compliance with the terms of
this License.

You consent to give Apple the right to collect
information from your computer at any time and
with no additional warnings in order to make
sure you are complying with their licenses.
0 Votes
+ -
Just like Microsoft
use_what_works_4_U Updated - 16th Dec 2009
"Genuine Advantage" anyone?

BTW: I don't like it, but I accept that in both cases it is what I agreed to.
Why should I have to verify my OS license because I installed RAM?? That
tells me that MS is collecting data about my system when I am
online. All I can say for sure about Apple is that they may be which is, as
stated, bad enough.

We agree, but it's an industry issue, not a "one particular vendor" issue.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree 100%
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
Apple is often brought forward as the "good guy"
to contrast with MS's "bad guy". This is clearly
not the case. Neither is the good guy, both are
interested only in their bottom lines and will
only help us, as consumers, when it also helps
their bottom lines. Apple and MS are no different
in this respect.
0 Votes
+ -
You'll find something similar in the Windows EULA [nt]
A none mouse Cow Herd 16th Dec 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
LEOPARD was NOT!! Stop the BULL!!
Arm A. Geddon 16th Dec 2009
How would I, which I did recently, was able to reinstall Leopard if it was just an upgrade?
0 Votes
+ -
Pot Kettle Black
Arm A. Geddon 16th Dec 2009
Seems I can't update Windows XP to Windows 7 without replacing XP. wink
0 Votes
+ -
Asinine.
A none mouse Cow Herd 16th Dec 2009
It's implicit you idiot. To buy the boxed version, you must own a Mac. L Go and
read the EULA. Show me where in the law it says that an upgrade must be
marked as such.
0 Votes
+ -
Doesn't matter anyway.
frgough 16th Dec 2009
Giving it away doesn't let you violate copyright. Saying it's a full version I
bought and not an upgrade doesn't let you violate copyright. Saying I
bought it so I can sell it to someone else as right of first sale does not let
you violate copyright.

Psystar was smacked down for violating copyright. They not only broke
the law, they're a bunch of unethical snakes.
0 Votes
+ -
I call BULL SH*T on OS X upgrades!!
Arm A. Geddon 16th Dec 2009
Every version up to Snow Leopard was a full version. Yes, Snow Leopard is an upgrade but previous versions were not. If that was the case, then how could one do a complete install? DUH!!
0 Votes
+ -
.
UsernameRequired Updated - 17th Dec 2009
.
0 Votes
+ -
Really?
UsernameRequired Updated - 17th Dec 2009
Do you really think that S/W vendors only put a subset of the
software on an upgrade disk? That comes across as naive to say the
least! All previous versions of OS X are sold with the proviso that
you have an Apple Mac computer which already has a licensed
version of Mac OS X installed. Your statement "If that was the case,
then how could one do a complete install? DUH!!" is asinine at best,
unless you are being sarcastic, in which case, it doesn't come across
very well! When upgrading from Tiger to Leopard, for instance, I
simply upgraded the resident OS (Tiger) to Leopard - With Snow
Leopard, I did the opposite. OS X 10.0 was an upgrade from OS 9,
as OS 9 was from 8.6. It's the way it's always worked with Apple's
OSs! The machine is the license! Every time you buy a new
version of OS X to replace the current version, you upgrade, whether
you overwrite itor perform a clean installation.
0 Votes
+ -
Here I'll give you a link.
Arm A. Geddon 17th Dec 2009
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/10/26/leopard-how-to-clean-install/

Btw, we're talking about two different things. NZ said every OS X version
is an upgrade not a full version. Of course I agree, as you say, when you
replace an old version of any OS you are upgrading. Do you understand
what he is saying compared to what you said?
0 Votes
+ -
What are you buying when you pay for software?
NonZealot 17th Dec 2009
Hint: it isn't the 1s and 0s. You are buying
a... wait for it... license.

Windows Full versions are full licenses and do
not upgrade any existing licenses. OS X
licenses are all upgrade licenses. Every
single one of them.

I just have to laugh and laugh and laugh at
idiots who don't understand what the "Upgrade"
on the box means. It has nothing to do with
being able to install it on a clean hard drive.
happy
0 Votes
+ -
Ahh!! I now see what you are saying.
Arm A. Geddon Updated - 17th Dec 2009
A lot of times you don't explain things too well because you're too busy going off into your anti Apple rant. I don't believe, unless you have any links, that Windows doesn't upgrade any existing licenses with each new version because we know they do. Btw, you do know you're not actually buying a copy of Microsofts Windows, you're just leasing.
0 Votes
+ -
Well
DannyO_0x98 16th Dec 2009
That's lawyer-land but this is beside the point.

If doing some work at home in order to get the os to run on the
hardware and BIOS so as to save a few hundred bucks was that viable
a business model, 2003 would have been the year of the Linux
desktop.

And look at it from a consumer point of view: are you really going to
consider buying a computer from a Florida shop that is going to have
to come up with 2.5 million dollars on sub-1000 unit sales? So as to
get the free thumbdrive with the code that is available elsewhere?
Really? If you know enough to hackintosh, you know how to do it with
better computers made by companies that will have their doors open
in six months.

On the other hand, keep looking for them loopholes, those heating
vents to the reactor core, and take heart that if Jerry's mechanic hadn't
made a mercy car theft, Peterman would have gotten Kennedy's golf
clubs and Newman and Kramer would be rolling in recycling arbitrage
dough.
0 Votes
+ -
Good point.
Badgered 16th Dec 2009
If doing some work at home in order to get the os to run on the hardware and BIOS so as to save a few hundred bucks was that viable a business model, 2003 would have been the year of the Linux desktop.

Good point, but I was just wondering what if.
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah, but only if...
edwards.wb 16th Dec 2009
...Apple is going to bring every consumer to court
who does this. Psystar is no longer liable.
0 Votes
+ -
I wonder if this had happend some 28 years ago
voska1 16th Dec 2009
Where would Microsoft be and would Compact just have been like Phystar.
0 Votes
+ -
Not the same.
UsernameRequired Updated - 16th Dec 2009
This did happen 28 years ago, but the circumstance was
significantly different. The OS of the day didn't check that the machine
was made by IBM and as a result the machine didn't have to pretend
that it was made by IBM and the OS did not need to be 'modified' so that
the checking process was not performed or to perform a false positive.
0 Votes
+ -
Any news on the second case?
johnfenjackson@... 16th Dec 2009
1. I think the more interesting case is the second one: Psystar v Apple on the (un)lawful tying of OSX to Apple hardware ... any news?

2. How does this jusdgement square with the ZDNET posts on hacking OSX onto a DELL mini?

HAND
0 Votes
+ -
I doubt that Apple will chase individuals.
UsernameRequired 16th Dec 2009
This judgement has set a precedent for the Psystar v Apple on the
lawful tying of OSX to Apple hardware. Psystar will likely drop the
case, or it'll be thrown out (no contest).
0 Votes
+ -
Well that is reassuring
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
I'm glad that you doubt Apple would chase
individuals. Were this to be proven wrong, could
the individual being sued by Apple quote you in
their defense?
0 Votes
+ -
Sure, I would not bother though
use_what_works_4_U Updated - 16th Dec 2009
Seeing as he expressed a doubt that Apple would sue me. He
did not offer a legal opinion or any sort of advice on the
subject. For that matter he didn't even offer any non-legal advice. Just a
doubt.

Hobbyist Hackintoshing has been going on in plain view with open
discussions on the Internet since circa 2001. Apple chose to save their
war chest until someone actually tried to make a profit at it. My
legally unqualified and totally personal opinion is that Apple will
continue to leave us hobbyists alone.
0 Votes
+ -
My facts trump your opinions
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
Apple will continue to leave us hobbyists alone.

http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/02/17/apple.serves.dmca.notice/
0 Votes
+ -
Fair enough however outdated ...
use_what_works_4_U 16th Dec 2009
But then why is it that when you go to the OSx86 webpage you can
one click to http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
and still get all the information you need? Would the DMCA notice
you reference not include removal of all the instructions? Would there
be no follow up if Apple wanted to squash the hobbyist?

I am taking a risk, but it is a risk I am willing to take. If Apple were
seriously considering suing the hobbyists out of existence then they
surely would have followed up on the wiki page which has references
for OS X 10.6.2 which just recently came out. Furthermore EnGadget,
Gizmodo, and many other major websites have published direct links
to instructions for hacking netbooks and Apple has done nothing.
Boing boing attracted the attention of much of the tech-press
(including this very blog) when it published a guide last summer to
the most easily hacked netbooks. http://bit.ly/vqWL.

Your link points accurately to something that Apple did 2 years ago.
They made no really credible follow up to the situation and their
current behavior is quite different. At the time I followed that story
and the speculation then was that this action was Apple testing the
waters. I think they tested the waters and decided that the hobbyists
were not enough of a threat to go after. If I am wrong, I'll post from
my bankruptcy hearing. happy
0 Votes
+ -
They thought the RIAA would never go after individuals
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
They were wrong. happy
0 Votes
+ -
Point taken
use_what_works_4_U Updated - 16th Dec 2009
I have my opinion, you have yours. We each have evidence, I believe
mine to be more current and applicable, you apparently do not. Once
again we must agree to disagree.
0 Votes
+ -
There is a major difference between
frgough 16th Dec 2009
hacking your mac in your basement, and telling everyone else how to do
it in a public forum.

Just like the RIAA went after individuals who were UPLOADING music.

An important little fact conveniently ignored by the anti-corporate types.
0 Votes
+ -
Not even close to being over.
kyron.gustafson@... 16th Dec 2009
Who didn't guess that Apple would win on their home turf.

Psystar got what they wanted out of the court - no payment (2.5 Million) until the appeals process is done.

Psystar will appeal and Apple may find the going a little bit rougher with the 9th Circuit calling the shots.

This will be going on for years.
0 Votes
+ -
But would it matter?
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
From what I understand, Psystar sold very few of
these boxes. Mac users on ZDNet claim that OS X's
marketshare is quite low because Apple doesn't
sell cheap computers with OS X. This whole Psystar
situation proves them wrong. It turns out that OS
X's marketshare is quite low because few people
want it.
0 Votes
+ -
maybe purchasers were worried about Psystar...
randysmith@... 16th Dec 2009
Could it maybe be that potential purchasers were concerned that Psystar would not be around for the long term, and were reluctant to consider Apple OS on a platform that may have no future support?
0 Votes
+ -
Don't cloud the issue with logic, it only makes him confused. [nt]
olePigeon 16th Dec 2009
[nt]
0 Votes
+ -
True, so very true. [nt]
Arm A. Geddon 16th Dec 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
Copyright Issue
kyron.gustafson@... 17th Dec 2009
The whole thing boils down to the how much power the copyright holder has. Psystar feels that the lower court did not follow rulings by the 9th circuit court regarding the power of the copyright holder.

Psystar desktops and laptops were not inferior to Apple products, but they were less expensive. So how well would OS X do on affordable computers? My guess is much better than it is doing now.

I'm sure Psystar sales would have been much larger if the spectre of an Apple lawsuit had not been hanging over their heads.
0 Votes
+ -
Doubtful...
olePigeon Updated - 16th Dec 2009
Doubtful considering Apple already got a permanent injunction
against Psystar. If Psystar isn't making any money, they can not afford
to appeal the decision for years on end.

Also, Psystar is very likely violating several software licenses with their
Rebel EFI, which apparently will be tried separately.

It appears that Psystar is using GPL code from OSX86 project, as well
as ASL code from Apple's open source projects in their Rebel EFI
software. Psystar is not only marketing and selling it as their own
product, but they aren't including the source code. Both instances are
in violation of GPL and ASL.
0 Votes
+ -
Rebel EFI
use_what_works_4_U 16th Dec 2009
Adrian Kingsley Hughes' blog (read it here http://bit.ly/5rJRhR ) on the
subject quotes Judge Alsup as saying that Rebel EFI is a matter for a
contempt of court hearing and Psystar to continuing to offer it is done at
Psystar's potential peril.

?Whether Rebel EFI violates the terms of the injunction set forth in
this order is a factual issue more appropriate for a contempt action ?
this order declines to ?bless? a product about which it knows little of
substance ? and Psystar - if it continues to do so - sells Rebel EFI at its
peril.?
0 Votes
+ -
The irony of the situation
NonZealot 16th Dec 2009
We have the DoJ punishing MS for preventing OEMs from
shipping anything but Windows PCs (since this reduces
consumer choice) while the California courts punish OEMs
when they dare increase consumer choice by shipping
something other than Windows PCs. Apple must be laughing
at this one. happy
0 Votes
+ -
then how do you get a license if all are upgrades....
dougogd@... 27th Dec 2009
If this is true you are saying that mac is not ever offering full licenses ever including what is installed on a mac. Makes no sense to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix