First, yes Psystar is producing a shoddy product in the opinion of many, but let’s pretend for the sake of argument that they were not, how is that relevant? The legal rights of companies and people are not conditioned upon our comfort or whims, but upon principles of law. I believe that Psystar’s attempt to co-opt the creative sweat and money and good will that Apple has built up is parasitic at best.

I hear so many people say, oh I hope Psystar wins because I want a cheaper computer. But this case isn’t about me or you. It is about the law. And I would hope that no one would want you to lose a lawsuit simply because it would benefit them, regardless of the law.

It would be horrible for our free market ideals IMHO if Psystar were to win this case and worse for the consumer in the long run. Companies make innovative products for profit. If they are forced to innovate for someone else to leech, there is no motivation. It is a good thing this is a publicly traded company because I believe that if it were owned by Steve Jobs, and the case was lost, he would say “screw you” to everyone and pull the product entirely. Apple did not work to build themselves so some young punks could ride in on their work. Yes, I am saying how I really feel. I believe in capitalism. I believe in innovation and rewarding people and companies for their own hard work. As such, I do not like leeches. Most especially obnoxious ones. Psystar, has, in my opinion, gone about this in the most classless way possible, which is why I call them punks. I hope they get their tail kicked from here ’till next Tuesday.

Who is John Gault?

So if you are telling me that the Psystar is a shoddy product, then by all means, shut them down, but if the product works great and is a viable offering to open up the Mac market, then take the claims and stuff them.

As a long time Apple supporter, Mac User, Geek, and Mac Programmer, (We have 5 macs at home now) I understand the need to keep things under wraps and in control for quality and and consistent usablity, but they go off the deep end sometimes. (if they are so worried, why manufacture them out fo the country? Why not make them more consistent. look at the discussion boards for bugs and issues, not the “how do you do this” boards, but the boards where one has a problem and another does not. All computers are not made equally.

All around I think Psystar is at fault, and I said from the beginning when writing about the case: I am definitely biased in favour of Apple but will report facts neutrally. I want Apple to squish them like a bug. However, all that being said, Psystar’s legal team is doing a very good job for them. They have made some very clever arguments. However, this turns out, that firm has earned their fee.

Now wouldn’t it be interesting if in the discovery process we find out who Psystar’s backers are (if any)? If I were Apple, I would want to know. I don’t know if it would be considered by a Court as within the scope of potentially relevant evidence. I suppose that it might come up in the confidential arbitration. Very often, arbitrations are conducted like non-jury trials with witnesses and the presentation of evidence. I have never personally attended an arbitration, I wish I had. I have assisted at several mediations and am familiar with the way that mock trials are conducted.