Apple and Psystar have agreed to extend the period of time in which Apple has to respond to Psystar's Counterclaims, filed on August 28, 2008, until September 30, 2008. Apple too granted Psystar not one, but two such response extensions in the past months, since the Cupertino-based Mac maker filed its original suit against the Florida-based Mac cloner, alleging copyright infringement.

Apple stresses that Psystar's Mac clones violate its EULA, which says no other computers, except its own, are allowed to run OS X Leopard. Psystar, for its part, claims Apple's EULA itself conflicts with US monopoly laws.

World of Apple reveals that Apple hasn't actually committed to answering the Counterclaims, but rather “to answer or otherwise respond,” to Psystar's requests that the Court find Apple's EULA void, which could include “Motions to Strike or Dismiss amongst others,” the report reads.

Also revealed in the news report is that, while the case is as serious as it gets, attorneys of both sides are apparently “behaving in a professional and courteous manner towards each other.”

Psystar's attorney, Colby Springer, states that "the present litigation is more complex than the misinformed and mischaracterized allegations of copyright infringement. The litigation involves the anti-competitive nature of the Apple EULA and similar anti-competitive tactics related to the misuse of Apple's copyrights. Issues related to the fair use of various intellectual properties by Psystar also come into play."

Not surprisingly, Rudy Pedraza, Psystar's CEO, reveals that, ever since Apple filed its suit against the company, "we have seen increased interest in OpenComputer with only a slight decrease in sales.” With OpenComputer, "we are allowing more people to take advantage of a great operating system that Apple has created at a more accessible cost than the pricey MAC," Pedraza added.

Members of the Carr & Ferrell Litigation team include partner Robert Yorio, Colby Springer of the counsel and associate Christine Watson. According to various reports, the legal trio have reportedly beaten Apple in court before.