Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Apple
Psystar bankruptcy dismissed, stays against Apple blocked
Over the weekend, The Mac Observer posted a detailed analysis of the latest chapter in the Psystar saga. It's taken me a few days to come down from vacation and try to wrap my brain around the legalese, but here's the condensed version of what happened.Psystar was granted its motion to dismiss its Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the State of Florida. The judge in the case must feel that Psystar will either try to file for Chapter 7 (liquidation) bankruptcy or try to delay Apple's case in California against the clone maker (now scheduled to start on January 11, 2010) with another Chapter 11 filing. Why? The judge has stipulated that Psystar will not be granted an automatic stay in the case if they file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and has blocked Psystar against filing Chapter 11 again for another six months.
Translation: "Hey, Psystar! You can't use bankruptcy to weasel out of Apple's case against you."
We don't know if Psystar has been selling a lot of Mac clones or if there is a secret admirer with deep pockets lurking in the wings, but by removing Chapter 11 protection, creditors who are owed money can now file suit for financial relief. Those creditors include Psystar's previous law firm, Carr & Farrell, which is owed about $88,000. One of the other companies that may line up for compensation could be Apple, which may very well be owed payment for shrink-wrapped copies of Mac OS X that were purchased by Psystar.
More legal moves will undoubtedly unfold in the months leading up to the January court date, so keep your browser pointed to
Get a WordPress.com Blog
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Ryan Trevisol said 2:24PM on 8-11-2009
*sigh* there were so many better ways for Psystar to approach this business model.
For one, they could've sold pre-built, hackintosh friendly computers with no OS or Linux installed, leaving people to install their own versions of Leopard or whatever on them.
I haven't kept up with the specifics of the hardware they use, but at one point I thought they had the ability to load Leopard directly from the Retail CD-ROM, which would have been questionable legally but probably wouldn't have ended their company so soon.
If they had done something along those lines, I would've bought one of their computers. Right now I'm collecting parts to build an Ubuntu server, which I will use to host a Raid array, as an AFP share that I will use for Time Machine backups that I can actually rely on.
But it would be much simpler if I could do a cheap hackintosh and not have to resort to a morass of USB and/or firewire enclosures.
Reply
Noah Ramon said 5:23PM on 8-11-2009
"For one, they could've sold pre-built, hackintosh friendly computers with no OS or Linux installed, leaving people to install their own versions of Leopard or whatever on them. "
I don't THINK they ever had "install direct from retail media" capable machines - part of their delivery was that they gave you their hacked OS X install along with the original media.
I could be wrong - I know that hardware hackers did get to that point with the Dell Mini 9 and some other netbooks - but I don't think Psystar ever succeeded with this matter. (Or felt like they had to accomplish it, for that matter.)
(But yeah - if Dell can make money hand over fist selling the Mini like that to Mac enthusiasts just by making a tacit nod towards the innate hackability of their platform, it seems like a dedicated company should have had a great time with it...)
Ryan Trevisol said 7:00PM on 8-11-2009
Well I did done research, and you should look up Chameleon. Apparently with a c2d machine, it's easier than I thought
Tim said 2:32PM on 8-11-2009
How cool would it be IF Apple = Pystar and it will come to light this Fall. Rumors are cheaper iMacs, but what if Apple opened 10.6 to all hardware. It makes me all warm and fuzzy just thinking about it.
Reply
Quinn Taylor said 2:51PM on 8-11-2009
(sigh) How hard is it to remember that Apple is (first and foremost) a hardware company, and hardware is where it makes its margins? The rest of the PC industry is essentially crashing and burning by comparison. What possible business sense does it make for Apple to allow clones or push commodity hardware?
Aaron said 3:37PM on 8-11-2009
Exactly. Windows has a majority of its problems because it tries to support every device ever made with buggy drivers and questionable hardware quality. If Microsoft put their foot down and dictated a "supported spec" of hardware for Windows, they could make an operating system that was solid like Mac OS X too.
Scott McLeod said 4:42PM on 8-11-2009
QFT, Aaron.
LAGal said 5:08PM on 8-12-2009
chaos supporting them, loss of hardware sales which makes Apple more money than the software actually does and a potentially fatal rise in market share which will put Apple at risk for some of the same trouble that Microsoft has had.
don't see it happening
Thomas said 5:57PM on 8-11-2009
Apple can always add code to OSx so that it will only run on genuine Apple hardware.
Reply
Byrdman said 7:53PM on 8-11-2009
and then a workaround will be made by the hackintosh community to circumvent it.
LAGal said 5:09PM on 8-12-2009
Apple already has. and are arguing that the code is a form of copyright protection, which makes the code that Psystar was using a violation of DCMA.