“A lawyer specializing in freedom of speech and the Internet said Wednesday he will defend free of charge a 19-year-old publisher of a Web site facing a lawsuit over an article that revealed trade secrets about an Apple computer. Nicholas Ciarelli, publisher of the site http://www.ThinkSecret.com and a Harvard University student, will be defended by Terry Gross, of the San Francisco-based firm Gross & Belsky,” The Rapid City Journal reports.
“Ciarelli said last week he could not afford to defend a lawsuit that Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple Computer Inc. filed in San Jose County on Jan. 4,” The Rapid City Journal reports. “Apple sued a week after Ciarelli’s Web site published an article that revealed details of the $499 Mac mini computer. Defendants include Think Secret and unnamed sources who tipped off the online publication two weeks before Apple’s Jan. 11 Mac mini introduction. Apple has said the Web site ‘solicited information about unreleased Apple products from these individuals.’ Gross said in an interview that Ciarelli and his Web site used proper newsgathering techniques and deserve First Amendment protection. He said he plans to file a motion asking a judge to immediately dismiss the lawsuit,” The Rapid City Journal reports.
Full article here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
ThinkSecret’s Nick Ciarelli says he can’t afford to defend himself against Apple lawsuit – January 15, 2005
Harvard Student and ThinkSecret owner Nick Ciarelli faces Apple’s legal wrath over product ‘leaks’ – January 13, 2005
Stop the presses! Apple sues ThinkSecret over ‘Headless Mac,’ ‘iWork,’ and other rumors – January 05, 2005
I think it should be dismissed, and I think Apple made thire point.
All in all a Win/Win.
er, their point
Apple should find out themselves who is giving away their secrets. Thinksecret has done nothing wrong.
Hope Nick wins. If Apple’s dam is leaking, suing those who get leaked on ain’t gonna’ do it.
The question is the psychological pay-off the leaker gets from leaking.
Perhaps if they felt more loyalty toward Apple, or if they weren’t being harassed to get coffee all the time for the big kahuna, or having to iron Steve-o’s smelly ol’ iPod socks (medium starch)…
This is lapsing into a confession…
Apple needs to cool it, at least with respect to attacking the press. (yes…ThinkSecret qualifies as the press). These aren’t exactly national security secrets.
that’s pretty nice of NPR’s Terry Gross to take time out of her busy ‘Fresh Air’ schedule to help this kid out, eh?
If I were a lawyer I would have jumped on this right away. 99.9% of the pro bono work they do gets no press and no attention. This case is a lot of free advertising for Gross and Belsky. I think Apple is gonna try and get the name of Nick’s source(s). The way I hear it he has set it up so he can claim he has no idea relatively easily (anonymous ways to give him information set up). Once Apple realizes they are not going to get the information they should give up on this.
Actually, they should give up on this right NOW. They could give the impression they decided to let this one slide THIS time (to avoid bad PR) but that they are serious and plan on finding and prosecuting anybody who leaks. If they continue and reveal that they can’t actually get the leaker then they could start spouting leaks like a sieve. Of course if they get the identity of the leaker and prosecute him then future potential leakers would probably think twice.
Soooo this is a bit of a gamble for them. Their lawyers had better be providing them with accurate assessments of their chances of actually getting the leakers name. Apple has to look at the whole picture on this one.
I hope Ciarelli loses. He has clearly demonstrated that he has no integrity. And he has shown he has no true love of Apple.
It’s truly amazing how entitled everyone feels to Apple’s property. Open up the iPod! License FairPlay! License the MacOS! Wah! Bunch of pussies. Make your own shit!
I’m on Apple’s side, but I don’t the laws are. Unless Nick used foul play to get the info, AND Apple can prove it, it will be tough for Apple to get much out of this. Personally I think Nick (and everyone doing the same thing) should let Apple keep their secrets. What good was Nick doing Apple by scrounging up and sharing company secrets? How can he call himself a Mac supporter with his behavior?
Isn’t Apple just suing to get the source of the leak? Their not suing Nick for posting the news are they? Anyone know the details?
As far as I know Apple is just seeking the names of the informants.
Say there is a popular author. This author’s editor subcontracts the copy editing to some schlub, who is of course bound by an NDA. In comes this blogger who enjoys rooting out such inraods as this copy editor and goads him into divulging the first and last chapters of this highly anticipated upcoming novel. He subsequently publishes said chapters on the internet before formal publication. Has harm been done? Should the author be able to seek redress?
I’m sick of ThinkSecret. If I was Apple, I’d sue also. ThinkSecret directly effects the bottom line of the company. How many morons are always running around going “Ooooohhhh I better not purchase a computer! ThinkSecret says something new is coming someday!”
The rumor sites (including ThinkSecret) are often wrong. They are usually read with more than a grain of salt. ThinkSecret does have a better track record than others, but these sites are an interesting diversion for Mac enthusiasts. If similar rumors hit several sites, they are more likely to be reliable – but, not necessarily.
I do not think for a minute that Nick wants to harm Apple. No one running a site like his would do so if they were not excited about Apple and its products. This whole thing is interesting to follow. I am happy that he did get representation so that we have a better chance of hearing the real arguments on both sides – if it even gets that far.
[Brought to you by, “truth.”]
If Think Secret affects the sales of Apple Computers, then Apple has bigger problems than to worry about Think Secret. Its a rumor site. If someone posted information about a mac mini, so what. Did it cause Dell to create a small footprint PC in 2 weeks? No.
I’ve been predicting a G5 laptop for the last year. Should Apple sue me? If Think Secret posts that a G5 laptop is just around the corner, why is this wrong? Does Think Secret have so much influence over the public that they will keep people from buying computers? If they do, then like I said, Apple has bigger problems to worry about.
HE COMMITTED A CRIME!!!!
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1832NEW.htm
If Apple wanted to, they could easily find a federal prosecutor in their jurisdiction and convince that prosecutor to bring this MAN up on criminal charges. There are people in federal prison who have done less than Ciarelli has done. And all this talk of him being a poor, defensless boy is pure spin. He was repeatedly warned to stop what he was doing, and he chose to ignore these warnings. New York (where he’s from), Massachussetts (where he is now) and California (where the court has diversity jurisdiction) ALL consider nineteen year olds to be adults. And if you want to cry about ‘poor’ defendants, you’re better off looking in the Yard at San Quentin than the Yard at Harvard to find the truly destitute who get railroaded by the judicial system.
He’s getting off easy with Apple keeping this in civil court, because (i’ll repeat this for the slow people in the crowd) his actions fall under FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE!!!
Rogozhin,
Good point. I agree that this guy (Ciarelli) is getting off easy. Apple has every right to pursue this matter as they see fit.
I meant to say “If Apple had wanted to, instead of a civil suit they could have just as easily found a federal prosecutor…”
damned conditional verb tense…
It is, of course, immoral, unethical and illegal to coerce settlement of a civil suit with the threat of criminal charges. So Apple couldn’t go the criminal route now.
Of course, who’s to say that a federal prosecutor, acting in the best interests of the United States, doesn’t do some investigating on their own?
Mac mini not in the headlines anymore. iPod shuffle not in the headlines anymore. AAPL down .83% today.
WAIT! OH OH OH. That…that kid that’s gettin sued…ah ah Ciarelli…yeah Ciarelli…who runs that site…ah…ah Thinksecret yeah! Let’s drag that story back out there and slap it around sumore. That’s the ticket!
D-E-S-P-A-R-A-T-E
Hey Rogozhin, that law is for the people who leak the information not the people who report on the leak. Otherwise many other people would be in court too, including MDN!
Also, 19 year olds may be legally adults, but a kid going through college Vs a multi billion dollar corporation looks like David V Golliath in my book. At least he was reporting the truth, not like many in the media nowadays who collude in the big Iraq lie …
Marry Goround,
MDN had to go all the way to Rapid City, South Dakota to find that story for us…
The Rapid City Journal would have ran the story last week, but the stagecoach carrying the mailbags was held up by some bushwhackers and varmints looking for the big gold shipment from San Francisco… Oh, and the telegraph wires were cut…
Benn,
please read subsection (5) if 18 U.S.C. 1832 again.
go ahead, I’ll wait.
…
…
Ciarelli OPENLY SOLICITS anonymous trade secrets on the front page of his website, a fine but important distinction between ThinkSecret and other rumor/news sites like MDN. By soliciting that information AND BENEFITTING FROM IT (he admits in print that the ad revenue from the site is paying for his Ivy League education), he is clearly violating this statute, or at the very least complicit in the crime. And much like the guy driving the getaway car in a bank robbery, he could be sentenced to the same punishment that the thief would get if the thief gets away.
Of course, the point of even referencing the possible criminal charges in a case like this is (admittedly, by me in a previous post) moot; I was only bringing it up for those who insist that Ciarelli has done nothing wrong. Just because you want to BELIEVE he’s done nothing wrong doesn’t necessarily make it so, especially when federal criminal statutes come into play.
Uhhh rogozhin it is a stretch to say that simply reporting on a secret product and making money from ads is really “to the economic benefit of anyone other than the owner thereof”. There is a serious freedom of the press issue there (and Massachusetts, New York, and Cali all have press source secrecy laws). Keep in mind that ThinkSecret was not posting engineering drawings or anything that could help someone replicate Apple’s efforts, much less selling those items, that would clearly violate the federal statute you referenced.
Also keep in mind that what Apple really wants is the name of the scoundrel who violated his NDA so that they can takes the appropriate sanctions spelled out in that contract.
Of course if ThinkSecret gives out that info, they’ll never get another tidbit again. So they’ll fight Apple tooth and nail. The worst that could happen is a six month stint for contempt, but that all goes back to how applicable the state press secrecy laws are.
Look: It’s a simple matter of respect. For others and their labor, and for the concept of law and order. Ciarelli knew he was straddling a line. In such a position, it is up to the individual to make a choice: to return to the clear confines of the law, or to rummage through those nebulous areas of legal oversight. He clearly chose to distance himself from the law. Regardless of whatever technicalities that might get him off, he is petty thief at heart. Whatever fame, opportunity and sympathy this jerk gets, it’s all ill-gotten gains.
What is all this noise about what America is really about? Personal resposibility and moral values, right? Anyone who defend this kid should be ashamed.
And great comments, rogozhin.
from 18 U.S.C. 1832, section (a):
“and intending or knowing that the offense will, injure any owner of that trade secret, knowingly–“
So has ThinkSecret’s ‘revelation’ of the Mac mini & iPod Shuffle hurt Apple? Can you legally prove that said rumours have injured Apple, in whatever sense you believe constitutes harm, and that would be upheld in court?
If you can’t, then I don’t believe that portion of the criminal code is applicable. But then, I’m a) not a lawyer and b) not a US citizen. Doesn’t affect me, realistically.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
~A~