[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple |
Date: |
Wed, 01 Dec 2010 13:15:27 +0100 |
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>
> Oral argument in Apple Inc. v. Psystar Corporation:
>
> http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2010/11/30/10-15113.wma
Summary:
Apple suggests that replacing OS/X bootloader with Psystar's bootloader
creates utterly forbidden "derivative work of OS/X".
Apple is utterly unaware of private adaptations under 17 USC 117 and
suggests that creation and private use of such derivative works is also
forbidden under copyright law.
Apple confuses its monopoly on OS/X compatible computers with imaginary
monopoly on operating systems.
Psystar points out that Apple attempt to block Psystar from breaking
Apple monopoly on OS/X compatible computers using copyright law remedies
is utter misuse of copyright.
Well, if Apple wins on appeal it would simply prove one more time that
the ca9.uscourts.gov is indeed full of sillies very often overturned by
Supremes.
regards,
alexander.
--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, (continued)
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, David Kastrup, 2010/12/08
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, ZnU, 2010/12/08
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/08
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/08
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, Ivan Shmakov, 2010/12/09
- Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/08
Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08