Apple seeking 10 ‘John Does’ in expanded PsyStar filing
Have you wondered how a fly-by-night outfit like PsyStar can afford such a high-profile law firm, let alone their audacious business practices? So have Apple’s lawyers. The Mac maker has expanded their lawsuit against the Florida-based cloner to find out who’s behind the curtain.
Apple filed additional charges with the court on the day before Thanksgiving and are seeking the identities of 10 people and / or companies—John Does 1 through 10—they think may be behind PsyStar’s audacious, in-your-face product and marketing efforts, as well as the company’s top-shelf legal team.
Groklaw, the open-source community’s source for legal news and views, points out this poignant clause in Apple’s latest filing:
On information and belief, persons other than Psystar are involved in Psystar’s unlawful and improper activities described in this Amended Complaint … On information and belief, the John Doe Defendants are various individuals and / or corporations who have infringed Apple’s intellectual property rights, breached or induced the breach of Apple’s license agreements and violated state and common law unfair competition laws. Apple will seek leave to amend this complaint to show the unknown John Doe Defendants’ true names and capacities when they are ascertained.
Like a lot of people, the folks at Groklaw have wondered how PsyStar could afford not only to be so bold, but also gain representation by Carr & Ferrell, a high-profile and, one assumes, rather expensive legal firm that has prevailed against Apple in court in the past.
Also, Groklaw has looked at PsyStar’s End User License Agreement (EULA), the first paragraph of which reads:
Please read this License carefully before downloading this software. By downloading or using this software, you are agreeing to be bound by the terms of this License. If you do not or cannot agree to the terms of this License, please do not download or use the software.
Of course, the flaming irony and bitter hypocrisy here it that PsyStar has flagrantly violated Apple’s EULA in building and equipping computers preloaded with OS X.
Thereupon, wouldn’t it be hilarious if it was discovered that PsyStar’s sugar daddy, or daddies as the case may be, turned out to be Bill Gates or Michael Dell? After all Microsoft was in part behind SCO’s attack on Linux and Dell has said he’d jump at the chance to ship PCs running OS X…
What’s your take?
Related Posts:
December 5th, 2008
That would be funny and it was the first thing I thought of when I started reading the blog.
December 5th, 2008
This is almost like a soap opera. Should make for good reading over the next few weeks and months.
December 8th, 2008
This is a very interesting development, and it will be interesting to see who really is behind PsyStar. It could be someone quite unexpected, though obviously someone with very deep pockets.
November 15th, 2009
I’m glad to see a scum company like Psystar go down, but don’t believe that Apple has won the clone war. Some countries have already ruled that the provision in Apple’s EULA to only use OS X on an Apple branded computer is unenforceable. I suspect the only thing this will really accomplish is the relocation of Mac cloners to such countries. From there, others who like OS X but not belonging to a marginware cult will get their clones.