

 Apple Wins Like a Champ - Psystar is Toast -- What? You're Surprised? - butterfi
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091114101637997
"Psystar just got what's coming to them in the California case. Here's the order [PDF]. It's a total massacre. Psystar's first-sale defense went down in flames. Apple's motion for summary judgment on copyright infringement and DMCA violation is granted. Apple prevailed also on its motion to seal."
======
nkurz
Interesting judgment, but I could do with less attitude in the writeup. But I
suppose that that without the opportunity to perform the summary would never
have been written.

 _They'll say, but, but, but ... what if they hadn't used the master and just
used each copy, then would it work? Sons, why do you think Psystar used the
master copy? Because it's a business, and in a business, efficiency is money._

Psystar used a master copy because it was more efficient, and because they
thought it would work. But this still leaves the question of whether their
operation would have been be legal if they had paid someone $10 to rip open
the box and install the DVD manually. Perhaps this fits within their
efficiencies, or perhaps it doesn't, but for me it's a legal question that I'd
like to know the answer to.

~~~
tptacek
They still would have been creating a derivative work, and so they'd probably
still be screwed.

~~~
mbreese
I'm not sure about that. I don't know much about their process, but if they
treated each individual machine as a separate "walled off" machine and
installed a retail copy of OSX, I don't think that they would be creating a
derivative work. Even if their updates/hacks were scripted, I don't think that
this would be a derivative work. In this case, first-sale doctrine might
apply.

~~~
carussell
I'd like to point you to Section 2(C). Judge Alsup's words indicate that,
under your conditions, he would have found Psystar still in violation.

------
yardie
I never understood how they could think a business model that circumvents DMCA
was going to succeed. Folks, every hackintosh uses a kext called dsmos.kext.
It's purpose is to decrypt Apple encrypted system binaries. It wasn't written
or authorized by Apple.

As an avid OSX86 tinkerer I was conflicted about the case. Part of me wanted
Psystar to win while the other part wanted the entire thing to go away. If
Psystar had prevailed it would only bring difficulties for the hackintosh
community. Apple would have taken drastic measures to secure their business at
the expense of hackintoshers.

~~~
drewcrawford
False. The new fakesmc.kext replaces dsmos and doesn't perform any decryption.
It simply fakes the SMC hardware device and provides the same encryption keys
to the software that a real mac has in hardware, allowing Apple-provided code
to do all the decryption just like what happens on a real mac.

This is still a violation of the DMCA. But it's no more of a DMCA violation
than selling software that plays DVDs on Linux, something that, IMHO, should
definitely be legal.

~~~
drinian
Unfortunately, "should be legal" and "is legal" are not the same thing. AFAIK
there is, or was, a "legal" DVD player for Linux that pays the CSS
patentholders' license fees.

The situation is ridiculous. I was hoping that Psystar's case would at least
help expose some of the DMCA's problems.

------
sfk
They should move their business to Europe. Here, overly restrictive EULAs are
regularly ignored by the courts. Which is a good thing.

------
indiejade
This is bad, bad news! I wish that for once, the little guy could go up
against the big monster and actually win.

~~~
ghshephard
Read Pamela's comments. I couldn't agree with her more. If you want complete
freedom to duplicate and distribute, do so with software that guarantees you
that freedom with an appropriate license.

As a Linux fan, I actually approve of anything that encourage people to
enhance that platform with better graphics, fonts, and software.

Apple has made it very clear that they are going to actively oppose the
commercial distribution of hackintosh system, so hopefully that will encourage
the freedom loving hackers to develop for platforms more accommodating to
their world view.

~~~
wmf
Psystar doesn't want complete freedom to duplicate and distribute OS X so
that's a bit of a strawman. They're willing to pay for every copy that they
distribute.

~~~
gamble
They're willing to pay ... all of $35 for the Leopard->Snow Leopard upgrade
disks. Psystar wouldn't even shell out the full $150.

~~~
wmf
This lawsuit is only about Leopard, so Psystar was paying $130 per copy.

------
alaskamiller
A profile of the Psytar brothers two days ago:
<http://www.sfweekly.com/content/printVersion/1744650>

~~~
felipe
Excellent article. The author does a great job highlighting the parallels
between the Psytar and the rebellious early stages of Apple.

I find this Shanzhai phenomenon fascinating. These are the true hackers of
today.

<http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanzhai>

~~~
tptacek
The true hackers of today create pirated electronics?

~~~
felipe
I really wish you could take a look at the link I posted before calling it
simply "pirated electronics"

------
JamieEi
Apple has always had good lawyers.

