Psystar Back To A First Sale Defense Against Apple: Software Was Legally Purchased...
from the and-we-can-do-what-we-want-with-it dept
Psystar tried and failed to pin an antitrust case on Apple in its fight over whether or not Psystar can install MacOS on non-Apple hardware. Now, it appears that the company is back to where we thought it would originally focus: on whether or not a software license agreement can preclude the first sale doctrine that allows you to resell software you legally purchased. It's still a long shot -- but a few recent rulings suggest the courts are at least more open to these discussions. Of course, if Psystar wins, it could severely limit the power of end user license agreements (EULAs) that software companies often use to limit uses of software.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, eula, first sale, macos
Companies: apple, psystar
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Resale
Installing a modified version of the software onto a machine and then reselling both isn't the same thing at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seconded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EULAs
Nobody reads EULAs!
Proceed...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Does this really matter?
In fact, the OS X EULA specifically allows for transferring ownership of the software to another party, so Apple's already addressed the first-sale issue and specifically said that they're okay with it.
What Psystar's doing isn't the same as buying a CD and reselling it on eBay - it's more like buying a CD, re-mixing all the tracks, adding their own beats and changing the lyrics, and *then* selling it on eBay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Does this really matter?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Macs will soon learn...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Does this really matter?
Nope. Psystar's claim to fame is that it can run Mac OS X without modification.
The point that's being contested in this case is simply that Apple's EULA prohibits third-party installations on their operating systems.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Macs will soon learn...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
omitted fact: Psystar has their own EULA
It seems highly unlikely that Psystar would really want to fight against all EULAs, when they have one of their own.
I'd have expected Techdirt to include this rather significant information in their opinion on the subject.
For more detailed and superior analysis, you can read more here: http://news.worldofapple.com/archives/2009/01/14/psystar-files-its-reply-to-apples-response-to-psyst ars-motion-for-leave-to-amend-its-counterclaim/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Resale
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Does this really matter?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hate to break it to them, but *anyone* even remotely aware of copyright knows that all countries following the Berne Convention have automatic copyright.
No paperwork necessary.
It seems our "champions" of OS X on vanilla PC hardware are completely ignorant. How lucky can we get...?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
An easier way?
Psystar could then simply sell their computers with no software included or installed, and leave it up to the buyer to purchase and install OS. Then at least it would be the end user that's violating Apple's EULA and not Psystar.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
True. But what they didn't do was file the proper paperwork in the allowed time period for more damages! So, you do have to file for certain copyright protection in a way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You can't resell it, borrow it, lend it, or in many circumstances even share it with members of your own household.
That's the "convenience" of downloadable content for you...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Does this really matter?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: omitted fact: Psystar has their own EULA
Now why would you expect Techdirt to include your strawman?
Yeah, like an Apple fanboi site is going to be real objective. You sound like you work for them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: An easier way?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Resale
I bought a used textbook the other day that had some notes scribbled in it. So you think that sale of a "modified" book should have been illegal, huh? Man, you industry shills can be really extreme.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What Skill?
I'm only bringing this up because letting the customer buy and install OS X instead of shipping the computers with it preloaded would solve almost all of Psystar's legal problems overnight, at least the ones coming from OS X's EULA.
If Psystar stops preloading OS X, and instead just sells a computer that "happens to work perfectly with OS X", should the customer decide to install it, I don't see how any of Apple's current legal claims against Psystar would still be applicable. Instead, Apple would have to go after the individual end-users, which would be a lot more difficult and unpopular.
[ link to this | view in thread ]