When Psystar responded to Apple's OpenComputer lawsuit last week, it came out that the company had retained law firm Carr & Ferrell LLP to defend it. Carr & Ferrell happens to have had some success with lawsuits filed against Apple in the past, and Psystar's move seems to have signaled the company's willingness to tango with Apple. And now, although Apple isn't saying anything about the case, one of the Carr & Ferrell lawyers spoke to Computerworld about where the case could go if Apple decides to tango as well.

According to attorney Colby Springer, the issue has been "mischaracterized" and isn't just about trademark or copyright infringement. The other significant issue that could be involved is antitrust, which would likely be related to the Mac OS X licensing agreement. Springer didn't say much about what such a defense would look like, although he did point out that Apple's lead attorney has antitrust experience, and was on the legal team that won an antitrust suit against Microsoft.

If you're curious about the antitrust defense for the OpenComputer might look like, Psystar's claim would probably be that the Mac OS X EULA is a form of illegal tying (making the sale of one good conditional on the sale of another), and thus isn't binding. As you're all well aware, I'm no lawyer, but if you'd like to learn a bit more about tying, the Department of Justice has a good article on the subject. Of course, the case may never get this far and Psystar's lawyers may take a different approach, so we'll just have to wait and see if Springer's plan gets put into action.