Last month Apple filed a lawsuit against Psystar, a Miami-based start-up that had begun to sell computers with Mac OS X pre-installed. Under Apple’s Mac OS X end-user license agreement terms and conditions, customers and third parties are not allowed to install the OS on non-Apple hardware. Thereby, Apple’s suit alleges that Psystar has violated the licensing terms.

In response, Psystar has unabidingly hired a prominent legal firm, Carr and Ferrell, to defend its case. They claim Apple is unlawfully preventing competition in the Mac market by forcing consumers wanting to run the Mac OS to purchase its own hardware.

It is worthwhile remembering that, back in 1983, in the case that opposed Apple to Franklin Computer Corp., an appeals court had ruled in favour of Apple by concluding that operating systems coded in computer hardware are subject to copyright.

However, a year later, the US Court of Appeals had ruled that minicomputer maker Data General’s refusal to license its copyrighted software to those who didn’t purchase its hardware was an unlawful tying agreement.

Hence, there may be signs of hope for consumer’s to see more reasonably priced Mac clones in a not too distant future as the likes of DELL and HP would probably join the fray should Psystar win the battle. It could also mean that Apple may, unwillingly, gain considerable market share from its OS in the light of Windows Vista’s shortcomings! Unless, that is, if Apple doesn’t use the same strategy it is currently adopting with the iPhone, which consists in updating firmware on a regular basis to render jailbroken iPhones inoperative. This scenario would lead clonemakers to constantly play catch-up to ensure Mac OS X compatibility which could seriously dent consumer confidence.