Apple v. Psystar: Discovery Dispute Set for Hearing
- May 1st, 2009 - 9.18 pm UTC
- Apple Legal News, Psystar
- dizzle
As discussed at length in yesterday’s article, Apple had put the Court on notice that it believed that Psystar’s discovery behaviour consisted of an “inordinate failure to produce and testify.” As I had suspected, Judge Alsup didn’t let too much time go by before taking this matter to hand. Within the past few hours, he issued an Order Scheduling a Hearing on the Discovery Disputes to take place on May 5, 2009. He further ordered that Psystar must respond to Apple’s allegations by May 4, 2009. As usual, check back here for the latest. Psystar’s attorneys have surprised me before with their cleverness, I am sure the response will at least be interesting. We may learn that Apple has not been entirely forthright in the way they represented the situation. You know how it goes: get two attorneys in a room and receive five different opinions.
Comments
Tony Mills 2nd May 2009, 10.19 am
Apple have not issued a single legal paper against PearC, the German clone maker leading many European commentators to believe that Apple stand little chance of winning a case. If (still an “if”) they beat Psystar they may have a bigger battle in Europe when more companies within Germany start installing OS X onto Intel machines.
dizzle 2nd May 2009, 16.32 pm
Well we don’t know for sure if Apple has not sent out cease and desist letters. Do we have an official statement by PearC that they have not received any?
And I agree that Europe would be an entirely different landscape, no matter what happens here. I likely wouldn’t report on it as I am pretty ignorant on European law, and what I do know, I have a visceral hostility towards.
For instance Mozilla’s IMHO disgusting behaviour towards Microsoft over in Europe has caused me to cease using and recommending their browser.
Tony Mills 8th May 2009, 22.23 pm
PearC went public, Apple have not even contacted them.
dizzle 8th May 2009, 22.50 pm
Again, do you work there? If not, you don’t know if Apple contacted them or not, do you? How precisely do you know that? You keep repeating that, but I am asking for your support for that claim.
Second, seriously, what does an American lawsuit, which is what the article is about, have to do with an overseas product. What does PearC have to do with a discovery dispute in this case?
The following tweetbacks have been made to this entry: