Apple wins antitrust fight with Psystar, judge tosses claims

Apple isn't a monopoly; judge calls clone maker's arguments 'contradictory'

A federal judge Tuesday dismissed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple, shutting the door on Psystar's attempt to force the California company to let it install Mac OS X on its Mac clones.

Calling Psystar's claims "internally contradictory" in his order to dismiss, US District Court Judge William Alsup tossed out all six claims that Psystar made in August when it hit Apple with a countersuit charging restraint of trade, unfair competition and other violations of antitrust law. Psystar has 20 days to plead against the dismissal.

Psystar, a company that has sold Intel-based computers pre-configured with Apple's Mac OS X 10.5, aka Leopard, since April, filed the countersuit in response to Apple's lawsuit of early July, when it said Psystar had broken multiple copyright and software licensing laws. The Mac OS X end-user licensing agreement (EULA), for example, forbids users from installing the operating system on hardware not sold by Apple.

Apple's lawsuit prompted Psystar to fire back with one of its own, which argued that Apple is a monopoly by virtue of the uniqueness of its operating system, and therefore violates the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Antitrust Act by tying Mac OS X to its own hardware. In a news conference at the time of the countersuit filing, Psystar attorney Colby Springer called Apple's EULA "a restraint of trade."

At the end of September, Apple scoffed at the idea that it's a monopoly and said that Microsoft's Windows, not its own operating system, dominates the market. Nor, Apple said, should it be forced to help Psystar, a hardware competitor, sell systems.

"Neither federal nor the state antitrust laws require competitors to stop competing with, and instead to start helping, each other," Apple's lawyers argued then.

Judge Alsup agreed. "The [Psystar] pleadings, however, fail to allege facts plausibly supporting the counterintuitive claim that Apple's operating system is so unique that it suffers no actual or potential competitors," Alsup wrote in his order.

"If Mac OS simply had no reasonable substitute, Apple's vigorous advertising would be wasted money," Alsup continued, referring to such marketing as Apple's aggressive "Get a Mac" television ads. "The advertising campaigns suggest a need to enhance brand recognition and lure consumers from a competitor."

Elsewhere, Alsup called Psystar's allegations "circular" and "internally contradictory," and concluded that the company's claim "does not plausibly allege that Mac OS is an independent market."

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags Applelawsuits

More about ACTAppleIntelMicrosoft

Show Comments

Market Place

[]