Apple backs down on Psystar Case

Hey that's geat. Supurlub, even.

I'm vrey hapy all bad things was avoidded by it niot going to "tria".

Incidentially, do you have any openings for an editoral position there? I's a geat spellur!


All this secret carp that goes on is wrong. I see the need (rarely) to have "State" secrets and Business ones "secret plans for a new product" but it has gotten out control. I hope Psystar wins for the fact I would love to see OS X take over Microbloat and give them a run for the money. Apple could still make gorgeous Ferrari computers and third party manufactures could make their own OS x Machines. Apple could make sure they get a nice royalty fee for each one and make a killing!
I am watching this one close.

iCapitulation!

Dogs to the left, Ponies to the right.

Steve says "Nothing To See here..."

The Grauniad... er... Inq writes: "Basically this means that both sides have agreed to meet and work out a resolution in lieu of going to tria."

It's IN ADDITION to trial, not in lieu of trial. ADR may, of course, result in a settlement, but that's not it's primary purpose. The primary purpose is to streamline the findings at trial and ultimately save on attorney fees. The neutral party who coordinates the ADR is NOT asked to make any kind of "decision" or suggest terms.

And the "secret" portion of this is required by law, not by Apple or Psystar.

My opinion is that Psystar is stalling, as this process won't even begin for another 90 days, rather than having the trial start nearly immediately. They're probably running out of cash.

Actually, ADR is a standard part of Fed cases. Lets wait till the actual trial starts before we have another news story on it 'eh?

...a right to a trial. Where did you get that idea?

Wow, so many misconceptions!

1. No one has "caved" to anything yet. They have merely agreed to *start* an ADR ("alternative dispute resolution") process (of which private arbitration is just one option). The ADR is non-binding and is not necessarily the end of the line. Given what both parties are saying, it is *very* likely that the ADR will fail and a trial will happen anyway.

2. It's pretty obvious why they chose ADR. The judge forced them to do so before he would even consider a trial. In the court district where the trial is being held, mandatory ADR is a common practice.

3. Just for reference -- there is nothing specific about ADR that makes it any more or less likely that the settlement would be sealed. Apple is free to request that as part of the settlement, and they're free to request that at trial. This isn't some sneaky attempt by either side to side-step public scrutiny by staying out of court.

..of poop from the crystal bothering gitwizard. Rip off other peoples' under-researched articles much?

Should have done your cut'n'waste from California's legal system, or a better news site- a better example from 

http://www.internetnews.com/government/article.php/3779041/Apple+Psystar+Pushed+Into+Mediation+Talks.htm

reads thus:

***OMG PASTE0RZ

The two sides were pushed into mediation by the court because such attempts are standard practice, according to Colby Springer, the attorney representing Psystar with the firm of Carr & Ferrell, based in Palo Alto, Calif.

"It's a standard requirement, we have to do it," Springer told InternetNews.com. "What the parties think doesn't matter, it's up to the judge." He can order both parties to talk until he or she feels things are not progressing. A mediator informs the judge of progress, or any lack thereof.

"If the judge thinks one party is being stubborn, he can keep them there, but if there is no honest chance for resolution, he says 'ok let's move forward'," said Springer. 

***END PASTE0RZ

Still, better to slap something trite and smug together, and stumble down the pub, eh?