Peter G (sinetimore) wrote,
Peter G


The ruling in the Apple vs. Psystar case came down yesterday. Psystar, as you will recall, was attempting to use "First Sale" as a defense for making Mac clones. I wouldn't have a problem with Psystart trying to make cheap versions of Macs, except the license for OS X states that it can only be run on Apple hardware. Indeed, Apple's hardware is so specific, Psystar had to make a lot of changes to account for drivers the OS was never intended to have.

Anyway, the "First Sale" defense, had it worked, could have been used to undermine the protections of the GPL. In fact, ALL software licenses could have been reduced to public domain (this is why some of us smell the hand of M$ involved in all this).

Thankfully, the court didn't buy it. How bad was the ruling against Psystar? Can you say, "scorched earth?"

Copyright violation? Upheld.

DMCA violation? Upheld.

What's left for trial? Induced breach of contract, trademark infringement; trademark dilution; trade dress infringement; and state unfair competition under California Business and Professions Code § 17200; and common law unfair competition. All with Psystar on the defensive.

Which means the whole scheme to nullify the power of the GPL didn't go splat. It cratered.

God bless Richard Stallman! Long live the GPL!
Tags: computers, digital rights, foss, linux, open source, patent law
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 1 comment