Fire Up The Lawyers: Company Makes Illegal Mac Clone

no response fromserver :(

site taken down:(

Here’s the Google cache: http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:8-nCAPGr2SYJ:www.psystar.com/

You can get the rest of the cached pages here: http://www.google.com/search?q=+site%3Awww.psystar.com

Seems to me that the only significant legal issue is the preinstallation of Leopard. If they just sell the computer without an OS, it’s just a collection of parts, and it leaves the user to break the EULA. I guess the name OpenMac is also fuzzy, seeing as Apple goes after anything remotely resembling their trademarks.

I wonder too if they could just buy and resell Apple logic boards with a case and parts. I remember XtremeMac trying to do that many years ago (never actually shipped though, if I remember correctly)

Why does this headline say “Illegal Mac Clone?” Has this issue been settled in some court I’m not aware of? Is “Dan” a judge or even an attorney? This just in: “Blogger jumps to conclusion and (allegedly) posts Illegal headline.”

the website isn’t down anymore, i don’t know why all the news sites are saying it “disappeared”… it probably just went down from a huge traffic hit. anyways, it’s up now

“Robert” from Pystar, is taking it to court and comparing it to: “What if Honda said that, after you buy their car, you could only drive it on the roads they said you could?”

The idiot said “after you buy their car”, so the ‘driver’ should have been aware of it.

i.e. he should have been aware of the Mac OS X EULA before he tried selling this and stirring trouble.

And every Apple product has that “Mac” is a trademark of Apple, Inc., whether he loopholed it by calling the computer OpenMac, but I don’t blame Apple for being pissy.

They make ‘sexy’ and ‘quality’ products, to have a $399 computer come out could potentially ruin the Mac reputation (apart from smugness), can you blame them for wanting to get rid of this?

BTW: I am a Mac user, and relatively smug about it, so I can say that based on me.

It seems to me that “Nigel” is a bit worried? if apple hardware/design is as good as you claim then they should have nothing to fear from Pystar or other companies using their OS. The computer can’t be called a Mac or any other of the trademarked names. This could ruin Apple’s —– business plan but would potentially give them more market share.

Oh no, would it be possible that some company could make better hardware than apple? Its my understanding -feel free to correct me- that other companies already make most of the hardware for Apple’s products, I’m sure some of them would love to do so out of contract and sell the products themselves. That would cut Apple’s protits.

I wish Pystar luck with their legal battle….

Ian, I don’t know what you think you are referring to in your comment about XtremeMac. Our company has never made or even debated making such a product offering. You must be remembering something from another company. Just setting the record straight.

Gary Bart
CEO
XtremeMac

Gary – My apologies :) Yes, I know the company I was referring to isn’t yours, but it either had a very similar name or the product itself was labeled the Xtreme Mac. I remember it being announced around 1997 or so and promised to be a 1200mhz computer. Basically, the company would buy a stock Apple computer, then using the motherboard add on a new processor and accessories, thus getting around the licensing requirement. The case looked god-awful, something like an old microphone from the 1930s. Anyway, sorry about the confusion.

http://gizmodo.com/380488/psystar-exposed-looks-like-a-hoax