Process between Apple and Psystar may proceed with reference to Mac OS X Snow Leopard

The struggle by Apple and Psystar to bring their respective lawsuits to trial before 2010 made the clone maker file an injunction in the case, preventing it from using Mac OS X Leopard on its computers. With neither company selling the previous version of the system, their legal proceedings are likely to focus on the current Snow Leopard.

Psystar fight Apple

Last month, Apple wanted to force Psystar to give up an open process regarding the new system, claiming that it was nothing more than a derivative project just like Leopard also derived from the original Mac OS X, a fact proven by some lawyers. The objective now is to simplify actions with as much justice as possible, so that trials do not have to take so long to occur.

The requests for advance of each of them underwent some changes to be able to go public, something that was requested by Apple itself due to them discussing technical aspects on how to block their system from being installed on clones of Macs. For her, this should be kept secret, while Psystar complains that this information must be exposed which makes no difference, considering that there are several ways to obtain versions of Mac OS X for installation on PCs, over the internet.

Recently, a lawyer for the clone maker also spoke to the Macworld on the allegations made by your client, in order to reduce the waiting time for the trial. For him, what Apple calls “copyright and DMCA infringement (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) ”Is an omission from the fact that users not only own a DVD that contains Mac OS X, but also own the system on it, being able to make copies and use them as they see fit.

Thus, a copyright holder cannot license something the way it wants if it does not have ownership rights over what is delivered to the customer's hands, which in the case of Apple could be being done to impose an unfair monopoly on the market, harnessing the use of Mac OS X to machines produced by it. But what Psystar does not notice is that Ma's products are not in a Mac market, but in a PC (personal computer) market, where a company cannot impose an unfair monopoly by controlling less than 10% of it.

Even though Apple's representation in certain niches of that market is large, its global market share that matters; In fact, no one ever said that it has any intention of restricting the competitiveness of other companies. According to the company's lawyers, Psystar “free to compete with Apple just as other companies do by developing their own operating system, using open source code or licensing products from other developers”, but Psystar is not free to distribute Mac OS X violating copyright or software licensing agreements for end users, which are available on the internet to those interested in checking them out.

The case is quite complex and, by the way, judging it before 2010 will be very difficult. In order to hear requests on the matter, Judge William Alsup scheduled a hearing to hear statements from Apple and Psystar, whichever happens on 12 November.