Court Rejects Psystar Countersuit Against Apple

Ed Sutherland ()

Court Rejects Psystar Countersuit Against Apple

A California judge Tuesday preliminarily dismissed Psystar’s antitrust lawsuit against Apple. Judge William Alsup rejected the Mac clone-maker’s counterclaim, writing Apple’s computers and Mac OS X software “are not wholly lacking in competition.”

Alsup gave Psystar until Dec. 8 to amend its countersuit to bolster its argument that Apple was preventing third parties from selling computers based on its Mac OS X operating system.

In a 19-page opinion siding with Apple’s motion to dismiss Pystar’s August countersuit, the judge ruled that Pystar’s legal team failed to support the “counterintuitive claim that Apple’s operating system is so unique that it suffers no actual or potential competitors,” according to AppleInsider, which first reported the decision.

DON'T MISS
Psystar Drops Antitrust Claims In Favor Of Copyright Misuse Charge

In August, Psystar filed the countersuit following Apple’s July lawsuit alleging the Florida company infringed its copyrights and patents by selling computers with a modified version of the Mac OS capable of running on PCs.

2 comments »

About the author

Ed Sutherland

Ed Sutherland is a veteran technology journalist who first heard of Apple when they grew on trees, Yahoo was run out of a Stanford dorm and Google was an unknown upstart. Since then, Sutherland has covered the whole technology landscape, concentrating on tracking the trends and figuring out the finances of large (and small) technology companies.

(sorry, you need Javascript to see this e-mail address)| Read more posts by .

Posted in Apple, Hardware Hacks, News, Top stories |

  • http://www.idrankthekoolaid.com dizzle

    In a 19-page opinion siding with Apple’s motion to dismiss Pystar’s August countersuit, the judge ruled that Pystar’s legal team failed to support the “counterintuitive claim that Apple’s operating system is so unique that it suffers no actual or potential competitors,” according to AppleInsider, which first reported the decision.

    I know this will seem petty to some, but I worked very hard at making sure that World of Apple was the first site to report this decision, and we were. I expended (for me) significant funds out of my own pocket to be sure I was up to the minute, and to my information and belief, World of Apple reported the news that Apple prevailed within minutes of it appearing on the docket, and certainly hours before AppleInsider’s report. AppleInsider’s report was at 3:00pm EST. World of Apple’s report was prior to or just about noon EST.

    AppleInsider certainly provided a detailed analysis first, but they were not the first to report the decision. And to anyone who thinks I am being petty, if you worked really hard at something, and this wasn’t the first time you had been overlooked, you would be frustrated too.

    I am not claiming that AppleInsider was even aware of the World of Apple report. I am just correcting the factual record. I don’t accomplish that much in my life that I feel truly proud of, but I do feel. truly proud of the detail and timeliness in which I have covered this case for World of Apple.

  • http://www.idrankthekoolaid.com dizzle

    PS: for the interested reader here is the World of Apple report link:

    http://news.worldofapple.com/archives/2008/11/18/apple-prevails-on-its-motion-to-dismiss-psystars-counterclaims/

    Later that evening I provided an analysis of the decision which I believe nicely supplements AppleInsider’s fine article:

    http://news.worldofapple.com/archives/2008/11/19/more-details-on-apples-court-victory/