Psystar, the Florida-based Mac clone maker, now alleges Apple misused its copyright to prevent competition. The new legal theory is part of a modified countersuit the company hopes to file in a California federal court Jan. 15.
The U.S. District Court of Northern California recently dismissed Psystar’s original countersuit, rejecting the company’s claims Apple violated the Clayton Act and Sherman Act antitrust laws.
In a response to the court’s rebuff, Psystar said it “respectfully disagrees” with the ruling by judge William Alsup, who in November granted Apple’s motion to dismiss.
Psystar now alleges Apple violated a “misuse doctrine” disallowing companies to use copyright protections simply to derail competition. In November, Apple alleged Psystar’s Mac clones violated the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
The alterations by Psystar bypasses the more stringent requirements of proof needed for antitrust claims in favor of simply showing Apple violated the spirit of copyright laws.
As part of its proposed countersuit, which still needs court approval, Psystar alleges Apple’s end-user licensing agreement (EULA) allows the Cupertino, Calif.-based company to exercise excessive control over its hardware. Apple’s lawsuit claims Psystar’s Mac clones violate its EULA.
Additionally, Psystar argues selling computers that behave like Apple machines doesn’t violate copyright laws.
Psystar explained the amended countersuit only simplifies its original response to the Apple lawsuit and that the company may reintroduce antitrust claims when and if it obtains more supporting evidence.
4 responses to “Psystar Drops Antitrust Claims In Favor Of Copyright Misuse Charge”
what a joke. they aren’t making computers that act like apple computers, they are making computers that run with Apple’s software, in violation of Apple’s copyright.
someone shut these guys down before they expose even more of their moronic attitudes. oh wait, let them keep it up, they will kill themselves.
Lucas, you’re an idiot. When you buy a Mac from Psystar you pay for a licensed copy of OS X. Apple gets the money — no copyright is violated. Only a highly questionable and probably illegal licence agreement which tries to dictate where you can install it is ‘violated’. This is much better than the antitrust argument — Psystar has a real case.