Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Appeals court: Apple can still limited to Mac OS X hardware

Apple has the right to continue to restrict their operating systems for their own hardware, thanks to a decision issued by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday. Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder wrote in his opinion that Apple Mac OS X license agreement was made effective against Psystar, which sold no Macs with Mac OS X installed.

Psystar had been held in violation of Apples copyrights by a district court, and not to appeal the ruling. However, in its action, Psystar argued that OS X license agreement was an illegal attempt to extend copyright protection to products that are not copyright-an argument that the Ninth Circuit has rejected . The legal row between Apple and Psystar began in July 2008, several months after Psystar made a team of bargain at $ 399 that can run Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard). Apple sued and Psystar countersuit against Apples original was released in full, a bankruptcy later revealed that Psystar to his law firm more than $ 88,000. At the same time, Psystar continues to sell products and even new market, as a clone of Xserve EFI and a tool to assist individual users to Mac OS X on your hacktintoshes. In late 2009, United States District Judge William Alsup ruled that violating copyright by distributing Psystar Apple Mac OS X machines. Psystar counterclaims were dismissed and sealed documents at the request of Apple, the company said that the presentations might reveal some of the technical property measures used to limit the distribution of Mac OS X on unauthorized machines. Psystar did not appeal the decision violated the copyright of Apple, but Apple was the claim that participation in the misuse of copyright against competition by limiting their software to Apple hardware. The company claimed he had bought copies of Mac OS X and included when no Mac computers sold to customers should be protected under the doctrine of first sale. Schroeder judge sided with Apple, however, said that Psystar had not shown evidence that the OS X license agreement limiting creativity or competition.

[Software license] Apple did not undermine the ability of competitors to develop their own software, customers or preclude the use of non-Apple computers Apple components. Instead, Apple [License Agreement] simply restricts the use of software for Apples own hardware, Schroeder wrote. Psystar produces its own computer hardware and is free to develop their own software. Chicago-based intellectual property lawyer Evan Brown described the decision as a kind of big deal. This is a major victory for Apple, since the legal support screws tight control of Apples closed ecosystem. Since the courts have determined that Apple is not playing unfairly to keep its users from the burden of Apple software in non-Apple hardware, the company can also maintain engineering controls to ensure that only approved applications are used in connection with operating systems, Brown told Ars. A world in which there were legitimate third-party markets hardware using Apple software greatly reduce the barrier of entry for hackers and hobbyists to play outside the rules. This court decision maintains the rules in place. The only part of the decision of the District Court that Schroeder did not agree with one who sealed the documents of the trial. She wrote that the court did not articulate specific reasons to comply with the request of Apple, and therefore vacated that part of the sentence and remanded for further consideration. As noted in 2009, when Apple won the first round against Psystar, the decision undoubtedly limited companies trying to make a commercial business re-selling software from Apple, with unauthorized equipment. What can not be limited to fans creating their own Hackintosh at home with their own equipment and installations OS X. In fact, business has largely moved on already with the sale of tools hackers at home (instead of software and computers themselves), that the implementation of Apples licensing agreement with questionable effectiveness for users. Tags: apple, MAC, Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard, OS X MAC, Tech Ten, technology news

You might also like