http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/14/psystars-lawyers-regroup-try-another-tactic-against-apple/
A very interesting little piece, that says that Psystars battle against the Apple copyright infringement is that Psystar is selling copies that it had bought ala fair use laws in the United States.
Supposedly though, Apple says that if you're using OSX you're leasing it from them.
I highly think that's unlikely, because there are no continued transactions after initial purchase, also because you can sell a used mac without having to have the person purchase a new copy of the OS.
Apple is also trying to say that Fair Use shouldn't apply to software...
I really hope Apple loses this case, not for Psystar, but for consumers in the United States.
Being able to resell something your bought, be it software or etc, is important. If you can't resell software like an OS, then you can't buy a used computer.

This seems to be part of the much larger offensive alot of software companies seem to be mounting against reselling and Fair Use.
This to me is another of those 'people with no idea about gamers or gaming trying to squeeze every penny from whatever company they latched their slimey leech like body unto' idea's.
I am surely not the only person who for example sometimes trades in old games to get that new game I really want? Or sells that old computer to help afford that new one.
Gragleble!

this is a lot like Gamestops rebuttal to game companies.
Do you think car companies would sell more cars if you couldn't sell your old car?
Of course not!

At the very least, I hope this suit forces the court to make a definitive decision on the whole first use/re-sale issue. I would definitely prefer that the court rules in favor of Psystar, but a ruling of any kind would at least end all the confusion and arguing.

Well...exactly. I know in the UK the two major game retailers (GAME and Gamestation) have a system where you can get cash, but you'll get less of the value then if you're exchanging them for other games.

There have been a fair number of court rulings already regarding the first sale doctrine, EULAs, and the DMCA, but these cases have gone in a variety of directions leaving no overarching precedent. Also, the highest any of these cases have ever made it is to a few of the Federal Circuit Courts, so until one makes it to the SCOTUS there won't be any definitive answer on the matter (and that's not even addressing how the rest of the world is handling the issue). And since this particular case is currently only in a state court the outcome won't have all that much an effect beyond the immediate case.
As for the actual case, I'm of the opinion that EULAs are complete bullshit, but I don't expect the courts to share this view anytime soon. I personally expect companies to keep pulling stuff like this, the courts to keep backing them up every now and then, and consumers to pretty much keep doing whatever they feel like as all the EULA bullshit runs contrary to what is sensible to them. In the meantime IP laws will continue to stifle innovation and business in general until the entire system collapses under its own weight.

Everything Apple gives me the willies. They're constantly trying to make you buy everything from them, and it's working. People buy into the lie that is Apple, and that may really cause the death of PC and PC gaming. I hate them so much...but I own an iPod...
I can't point fingers, can I? I'm just as much a consumer whore as everyone else who buys Apple; the only way I differ from the crowd is I know I'm getting screwed over.

Sometimes it's only ten percent that can define the rest of the world..
how many republicans are redneck white people who have incestuous relations?
how many democrats are black and homosexual?
Yet, easily these strawmen are placed before us, when really it's probably even less than ten percent who fit under those categories.
Also, if I made one tiny device that could transport matter only two inches to the left, that's one device, but as a proof of concept everyone is going to want to have one, and all subsequent matter transporting devices will have the same image and feelings attached to it, that the original device had, even if I only ever made the original proof of concept..
my point is, is that even if it's small, Apple is a big name company, if only in name. While any device they make or decisions they actually make shouldn't have an impact on anything, if people are watching, it could have an affect on software developers world wide.
sure, me sitting here in my underwear while I post has no effect on the majority of the internet, but if the world was watching me, it would. This is an important case in my opinion, because if it is the truth that you're leasing software from apple instead of owning it, then i'll have to flash my ipods, i'll have to erase both OS's off my macbook.
Well, legally it would be the right thing to do.
And just because I'm defending this.. it doesn't mean at all that I'm an apple fanboy, as I've probably only booted up in macosx 3 times since I got my macbook, which if you understand the context, I didn't even buy new.. i actually traded it with a friend, why? because the laptop I had was an intel 945 and this is an intel 965 chipset, meaning it has software shader 3.0 so I can play Team Fortress 2 and other Orange box games, as well as L4D.

Leasing an OS? What has this world come to?

This brought to you by the company that doesn't let you use their music player for anything related to nuclear warheads, as stated in their EULA.

That sounds like something Microsoft would love to do.

I am sure they have plans for a MMUOOS in the works. Massively Multi-User Online Operating System I coined it first heheh.