In my recent article titled ""Intellectual Property" a Violation of Real Property" I've laid down the reasoning behind my rejection of the intellectual property idea, primarily in recognizing that it cannot exist without the medium and that in fact it is the medium itself - a specific property of the medium such are the dents arranged on the surface of a compact disc or energy patterns within the brain, and so on.
Unless you really want to believe in something you know is a lie you probably wont be inclined to believe people who express inconsistent ideas.
Free Software or Open Source Software have been typically attacked by people who do appear to believe quite strongly in property ownership. If you create something, they would argue, then you are entitled to control it. How else are you gonna get compensated for it?
When an author signs a publication contract, insofar as it contains strict and traditional copyright notices, he is pretty much signing his life away. It used to be that the publisher would maintain control only so long as the book is in print. Today, with digital printing, this means forever: your lifetime plus 70 years.
I have no idea whether Psystar is right here or not, nor does that even matter to me. I just realize that if Psystar was to anyhow successfully defend against this lawsuit it would set a rather interesting precedent.