Once "unauthorized" Apple clone maker, Psystar, was sued by Apple, we fully expected it to challenge the legality of Apple's EULA (end user license agreement) which forbade putting the software on non-Apple hardware (a provision that even Apple has been known to ignore ). The comments to our post suggested that a more likely option would be for Psystar to claim that Apple was violating antitrust laws in requiring the software and hardware be bundled that way. Indeed, it looks like both of those predictions were correct. Psystar's response is likely to focus on both the legality of the EULA and whether or not Apple violated antitrust law . As predicted, this case may be very interesting to watch -- and the end result could be very important for many other companies in the tech space. Permalink | Comments | Email This Story ...
Anytime
