sits back with popcorn

This is gonna be a good show!

"Psystar argues that while a company may technically operate within the boundaries of antitrust law, copyright claims can nevertheless be abused to block competition"

That is such a dead end. Apple does not use it's end user license to block competition. Make your Psystar machine that runs your Psystar OS, or any other OS but Apple's.

How many OS options does poor, pitiful, put-upon, Psystar have besides Apple's?

It really would be interesting to know who is supporting Psystar's stupid "hit me" sign.

How does this company have any money for lawyers?

Nobody is buying their hack scheit

I use the EFI-X dongle to instal OSX, just insert DVD in drive, and install, no mods, no hacks...I used all the recommended hardware and it rocks!

http://efi-x.com/index.php?language=english

The phrase "grasping at straws..." coes to mind!

It doesn't prevent anyone from making a mac-compatible computer. Create away!
Without the OS, it is just a mac-compatible computer with no OS you can legally install on it.

The OS, by the way, is Apple's. I don't know if I can stress that more. The product can be protected under law. Period. It is Apple's.

After creating your mac-compatible computer, you cannot legally encourage others to install OS X on it, nor offer, for a fee, to do it for them. It's Apple's software. The license agreement allows installation of one copy on one Apple made machine, or up to 5 Apple made machines with purchase of the family license.
There are probably other Apple OS licenses available, but I'd bet money that they are bound by the same restriction to Apple hardware. It's Apple's software.

You can make a mac-compatible machine and install some other OS on it.

The argument, "How many hardware options does a consumer have for an OS X computer?" is stone-blind-stupid at best.

locking the iPhone. I want Microsoft to stop creating Office Outlook only for Windows. I want to play all the music created by many artists and not pay them. I want to go and walk in to a movie theatre without paying the ticket price. I want the TV channels (all HD and 'pay') delivered without a fee. I want the 'patent' office closed. Any invention or thought should become open source. I should have the right to malign it, misuse it, profit from it.

Psystar is a representation of socialists. What they say is completely wrong. If Apple has created the OS, they have the rights how others use it. If I do not want to pay for the hardware and the service they provide, then I must go and get what is available in the market. As with an of the books written, or songs, or movies, the art and anything that is created and copywrited, the Mac OS is a copyrighted work. It cannot be said that the company should be forced to forego its rights. No way should Apple cow down to these jokers.

I am a fanboy and I will help fund Apple to fight these jokers if ever Apple were to need the funds. These jokers from Psystars should be sent to Cuba (not too far from where they come from).

"Psystar moreover says that it reserves the right to resurrect antitrust charges, should it find enough evidence to back them up."

And as soon as I can find enough evidence to back up my claim that Steve Jobs has been swiping my black turtlenecks from my bedroom closet while I sleep, I'll be filing my lawsuit too.

As with an of the books written, or songs, or movies, the art and anything that is created and copywrited, the Mac OS is a copyrighted work. It cannot be said that the company should be forced to forego its rights. No way should Apple cow down to these jokers.


What? According to your arguments, if the RIAA says it is illegal to rip a CD to put on your iPod, then it should be illegal to do so. Right? Oh, wait, no, that's music, which you bought and should be able to exercise your fair-use rights.

But then isn't it a consumer's right to buy a copy of OS X and use it as they see fit? Or are we going to argue that EULAs should be strictly adhered to and valid documents? So if the RIAA starts putting an insert into every CD stating "You can only play this CD on a single CD device and aren't allowed to copy it" you would abide by that too?

And when an artist tries to exercise their rights (say, by only allowing an album to be sold as a whole) they are ridiculed and mocked.