Apple: Somebody’s Behind Psystar, And We’ll Find Out.

By  |  Wednesday, December 3, 2008 at 9:07 pm

Well, the neverending saga that is the Apple v. Psystar court drama continues to get even more interesting. According to a copy of an amended complaint filed by the Cupertino company, and initially reported by Groklaw, it appears as if the company now believes there is either a major backer or corporation behind Psystar.

Jobs and Co. must have some pretty trustworthy leads if they are going as far as to include such an accusation in a legal document. Here’s what they are saying:

“On information and belief, persons other than Psystar are involved in Psystar’s unlawful and improper activities described in this Amended Complaint … 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.”

These John Doe suits have been used in the past, most notably in RIAA/MPAA anti-piracy suits. Here, it seems to be that Apple has reason to believe that as many as ten individuals and/or companies may be supporting Psystar in its efforts. What happens next, now that essentially all of Psystar’s case has been thrown out, is in the hands of the law.

The company will now be either found guilty or not on Apple’s own claims, while at the same time Apple will be working to uncover the identities of those who may be supporting Psystar. If these companies are revealed, you bet Apple will publicly expose these folks, and likely sue them too.

Not everybody’s buying it though. Devin over at CrunchGear had this pithy little comment:

Good lord, how mysterious! Can they really think that someone like Dell for example, jealous of Apple’s increasing market share, would set up a shell company to sell pieced-together Frankenmacs? I think Apple needs a drink.

Yeah, it does smell a little bit of paranoia, and I do support the effort to break free Mac OS of Apple’s complete control (I’m one of those folks who believe an open OS X will be the only way to truly compete with Microsoft). But Apple does have its right to find out if its rivals are attempting to sabotage its business.

 
3 Comments


Read more: ,

3 Comments For This Post

  1. John Hope Says:

    I always told it, from beginning. There must be somebody strong behind Psystar. If the would win, Apple would die. So it’s dramatic.

  2. dizzle Says:

    It’s not a “pithy comment,” its a potentially libelous comment. Lawyers are under a very strict code of ethics of what they can present to the court. What Devin is suggesting is a perpuation of a fraud upon the Court. If Apple’s attorneys did not have credible and reasonable belief in this claim they could be subject to incredible censure including disbarment. Yeah I know, blogging is fun, we can all be journalists! But folks think about what you are saying and be sure that you are really behind what you are insinuating.

    @John I have predicted from the beginning that Shystar were just patsies for some larger interest. And I have circumstantial evidence that leads me to believe this is a reasonable belief. Another legal assistant (yes I am a legal assistant) PJ at Groklaw agrees, and for the same reasons.

    Apple could turn out to be wrong, but their attorneys would not present a “paranoid” claim to the Court but one that is believed in good faith and reason.

  3. dizzle Says:

    >>The company will now be either found guilty or not on Apple’s own claims, while at the same time Apple will be working to uncover the identities of those who may be supporting Psystar. If these companies are revealed, you bet Apple will publicly expose these folks, and likely sue them too.>>

    First Psystar’s countersuit is not yet “thrown out of court.” It was dismissed without prejudice and they were given a time frame to cure. Until it is dismissed with prejudice, I wouldn’t be so hasty. I think it will be, but let’s be accurate that the Judge gave them opportunity to cure.

    Second, I don’t need to “bet Apple will publicly expose these folks, and likely sue them too.” Why? Because they HAVE ALREADY SUED THEM. That is the purposes of adding them in as defendants NOW. And they represented to the Court that they WILL name names once found out. No betting required.