Psystar Loses Key Copyright Ruling In Apple's California Lawsuit

By Tim Elfrink Sun., Nov. 15 2009 at 9:00 AM

Categories: News

This past week, we brought you the story of Rudy and Robert Pedraza, the Miami brothers who have taken on Apple by hacking its OS X to run on cheap PCs.

by C. Stiles

Robert Pedraza at Psystar headquarters in Doral.

Although the self-funded, self-taught programmers are taking on a computer giant, we wrote, they might just have a chance to win on their legal merits.

That chance just got slimmer. U.S. District Judge William Alsup has granted Apple a summary judgment, agreeing that Psystar infringed on its copyright.

"Psystar infringed Apple's exclusive rights to create derivative works of Mac OS X," Alsup writes, "by replacing original files in Mac OS X with unauthorized software files."

Alsup also agreed with Apple that Psystar violated portions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The judge, in the same ruling, tossed out all of Psystar's requests for a summary judgment.

So is this the end of the line for Psystar? No. There's still a good bit of legal conflict to sort out.
"We think that the court got the law wrong, particularly on copyright misuse," Kiwi Camara, Psystar's lawyer, tells Riptide. "Psystar will fight on in Florida and in the Court of Appeals."

Alsup still has to rule on Apple's claims that Psystar violated contract law by going against the click-through agreement on OS X. Complaints over unfair competition, trademark infringement and trademark dilution remain unresolved.

And Psystar's separate lawsuit against Apple in Florida, claiming that the company violated anti-trust laws, is ongoing.

But there's no doubt: Alsup's ruling is a Messi-esque kick in the balls for Psystar and the Pedrazas. Alsup has set hearings for later this month to decide how much money Psystar owes Apple for the violations, and there's a good chance the answer will be "a hell of a lot."

But let's be clear: No, we don't regret profiling these guys in light of Alsup's ruling. Why would we?

The Pedraza's personal story is damned fascinating, and was never told before we reported it. The legal arguments we've explored are valid and interesting. None of that changes because a judge in California has agreed with Apple on some key issues.

Read the full ruling: Summaryjudgment.pdf

Tags:

Psystar

Write Comment

Email to Friend

Print Article

Related Content

More About:

Hi Nodrog, I had two court case in my life. (One against a country and promise you will win also) One that had against a famous Air company without a lawyer I won. One of their lawyer told at the end that I have no clue about the laws. He was right and I just smiled because I won anyway. An other word: not the lawyer win who knows better the law. The lawyer win who prepare better the case. All what I write is my thoughts only and believe me Apple not treat well his clients. I have my design faulted G4 ibook and it is broke after 14 months and to repair was cost 75 % of the price. (without repair the mistake in the design) SO I really think that the public has the interest that Psystar win. Laszlo
Hi, You are right I am not US citizen and not live there. Even do not know the laws. But I think and you can check there are laws against monopole. Do you think it is good for the consumers that you can use the Mac software only with one factory made computer? This called freedom of consumers? I think the consumer has the right to chose what hardware and what software he want. This is a real consumer right issue. I think the real correct judgment is that Apple let the freedom to chose fro anybody what hardware they want. I think the consumer have to use this right. Laszlo
Laszlo, using a universal, standardized oil grade for a car is far and away different from using software code that is unique. Apple sells it's OS separately, so that computers that still would be able to run the newer version of the OS can be upgraded. Even there, support is at the discretion of Apple. I have a 2003, 867 Mhz G4 Powerbook. Apple has stopped supporting the G-series models with Snow Leopard. And subsequent versions after the original version that shipped with the Powerbook that I own have systematically excluded certain hardware (the 32 MB nVidia gforce4 420 Go graphics chipset) from full featured functionality that the software code was written to support. This isn't unusual for PC's as well. I've read where others have written code for unsupported Macs to upgrade to an unsupported version of OS X, much the same way Psystar has fooled OS X to install on a PC. The difference, these cases are installations on Apple hardware, the developer doesn't sell this and it's a "try at your own risk" endeavor. Apple won't warranty damage for any disasters that might occur. At the end of the day, Apple has every right to indicate their code is limited to run on hardware they dictate at whatever level of support the hardware limitations are. Don't like it, don't buy it. Some Apple titles run on PC's too in a Windows environment. That again is at Apple's discretion to support, especially since those are free downloads and application installations. I'm talking about iTunes, QuickTime and Safari web browser.
Well Laszlo, it would appear you think you know more/better than the US law and judicial system. Would you like to re-write our laws for us? Or perhaps go study law and get a clue?
...One more personal word.... I think that Psystar make against only what written Apple. But this not mean that Apple has to right write it. If Apple is right tomorrow every car factory can write use the oil what they are selling, etc. Why Anybody has to buy the expensive Apple hardware if want to use Apple software? If Apple selling operating system separately why Psystar can not buy and use it in any computer? Only because somebody write it that can not. I think the writing is not correct. Losonci Laszlo
cn, no matter how you spin it, Apple was right, Psystar wrong. Discounting a judge's summary judgement is pathetic. A jury will find the same, unless as you indicate they are "peers" and in this case every one of them would have to be software pirates to muster a single vote in support of Psystar. Put that operation down and end this baseless defense of piracy. Any jury that would let Psystar continue to operate would just as soon let Bernard Madoff free for his Ponzi scheme ?
Dear Robert Pedraza, I like to contact yo a long time and tell (or list try help) how can win Apple. I base it on a general case and not a specific personal problem. More details if you contact to my address.laszlol@gmail.com I bought an Apple iBook laptop. Sure it has a design mistake. Apple never admitted that. So they sold their product with a bad hardware and you have to say in the court that a lot of people want the Apple software but not their forced uniqie and expensice hardware. Looking forward receive your reply. Best regards, Laszlo Losonci
Ok, but it's summary judgement. It's a judge. It's not a jury, it's not really "taken before the peers". Apples are a status symbol. But most folks who buy them can't afford a Rolls. So there's the cognitive dissonance, and so forth. How many people get mad at an individual for fixing their own car (because it costs them less than taking it to the mechanic). Outlaw fixing your own car 'cause it causes cognitive dissonance in wannabe Rolls owners? No. Having someone fix your car isn't a status symbol. It's the status quo. A _general_ purpose OS sold as a separate product is also the status quo. Open Solaris, Linux, BSD, Windows, etc... It may be an important legal victory, but it is, after all, just a judge doing the thinking and the ruling. There is every reason for OS X to be available like Windows is (activation is a roadblock, but so what? Apple is more than capable of doing that). Inside sources suggest there has always been rampant piracy of OS X even before they went Intel -- it's almost a sense of entitlement to share the disks if you own a "real" Mac. Apple can step back and everything will be OK. This is the information age. If someone is using crappy parts for a clone, reviews will show that. We know what's good and what isn't. Everyone does. Everyone knows Lexus is good, Honda is good, Buick has JD Power and so on. It's just a judge. It's not anyone's peers, it's just the way that the courts work. Might does not, ultimately, make right (although in a way it does).
These guys are criminals. Does your rag profile rapists, drug dealers and murderers as well? No wonder print is dead. The sooner your little scandal sheet folds, the better.
Since Psystar has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, when do we get to see criminal prosecution of the Pedraza Boys? After all, breaking digital rights management according to the DMCA is a felony - a federal offense - punishable by years in a federal prison. I am waiting for some aspiring Miami prosecutor to charge the Pedraza Boys with a felony. It should be easy since they openly admit to what they are doing.
The trouble with the last post was that it read like a fluff piece praising 'our enterprising Miami boys' It was totally inappropriate. The court decision says - rightly, that they criminally used the IP of another company for their own personal profit. - and yet you still manage to paint them as guilty of a prank, rather than the deliberate law breaking criminals that they undoubtedly are. The Sunshine State certainly has an odd attitude to the law, that's for sure
Anybody who knows anything about copyright law would know the Pedraza's had a very slim chance of winning in the first place. They essentially were stealing Apple's OS to take sales away from Apple in terms of hardware, which where Apple makes money.