MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

ThinkSecret has been publishing the total ABUSE that apple has committed on independant retailers doing great journalism there. They have been the one site that has dedicated in showing apple's predatory tactics in building stores right across from successful retailers targeting them for destruction after using them like market research scouts. Did anyone think that maybe why Apple SINGLED THEM OUT FOR A SUIT!?!?!!? Nahhh, couldn't be. Granola apple thinks so different, they'd never be such low corporate scum like that. No way. Not our apple run by an a-hole cult of personality. No way. Couldn't be.

Nonsense: "Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg ruled that no one has the right to publish information that could only have been provided by someone breaking the law."

Does this mean that members of the White House press corps no longer can quote their favorite Executive war criminals?

The way I see it is someone at Apple broke the NDA, and Apple has every legal right to subpoena, or otherwise collect information to uphold their end of the agreement: that disclosure of protected information "may subject you to both civil and criminal liability". Everyday, lawyers get court orders that allow them to look at a company's records to help solve these "crimes". Apple's lawyers aren't doing anything radical here, they are simply asking the courts to help them gain access to this information. It's part of the discovery process and it happens evryday. I hope the guy who leaked the information is penalized to the full extent, and the sites that publish this information know their sources are breaking the law, so that makes them culpapble as well.

"Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg ruled that no one has the right to publish information that could only have been provided by someone breaking the law."

Yeah, I admit this bothered me. There are lots of things that are "Company Confidential" and this is real slippery slope stuff.

For example, the cigarette companies' studies on the health effects of smoking were "Company Confidential" and were leaked to the press to show that the cigarette companies knew of the health effects of smoking when the leaders of the companies testified before Congress that they had not. The person who revealed this information certainly broke a non-disclosure agreement.

ThinkSerect does more harm than promoting interest in Apple. Its operator, Nick is not a true fan of Apple. A true fan will NOT do any thing illegal or accept information illegally obtained and in turn jeopardize Apple's trade secret and the livelihood of Apple's many employee who work hard for the projects and make an honest living. Nick's dump act affects adversely many people and I don't think he realizes that. Nowadays, most young people have false sense of what is right and what is wrong without thinking deeper. I hope young Nick will learn a lesson this time.

"Kleinberg ruled that Apple's interests in protecting its trade secrets outweighed the public interest in the information."

"Unlike the whistleblower who discloses a health, safety or welfare hazard affecting all, or the government employee who reveals mismanagement or worse by our public officials, (the enthusiast sites) are doing nothing more than feeding the public's insatiable desire for information,"

It seems to me that this judge made a very rational and understandable decision. This isn't a "governement is taking away our rights issue", it's a business protecting it's right to do business in a FAIR market. And it's kind fo hard to do that if everyone knows what your up to. Especially if your in the tech business.

Yea a true fan would mindlessly say anything apple does is great!

Ahhh, deep six the data.

Where is 'data loss' when you need it? For Christs Sake, cant someone deliver a virus when we at last need it?

Gentlemen, start your shredders!

Nonsense: "Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg ruled that no one has the right to publish information that could only have been provided by someone breaking the law."

Does this mean that members of the White House press corps no longer can quote their favorite Executive war criminals?
------------
war criminals? i assume you're trying to be funny. In the case where the CRIME is stealing/spreading confidential data, then it makes sense that anyone spreading such data should be questioned/prosecuted.

In the case of some war crimes, and then a reference to a quote.. I mean, you're twisting what is actually a logical statement..

Good.

And if you worked for Apple and saw all the angles you would agree (in case you don't)

I'm a photographer and I would not want my competition to know what I was working on, or what images I would be releasing for sale months before they were available.

It's a gas to have prior knowledge of what Apple is going to do, and fun to leak it. But if we KNOW that something that crosses our path is meant to stay secret, let's obey Apples's wishes.

No babies are going to die if we keep a secret about Apple. And it's not our call to decide if the information is red hot or ho-hum, or whether it would be 'safe' to release it.

Leaks have caused big problems for computer companies in the past. and Apple has a right to be paranoid, and in a position to decide who knows or who doesn't.

And to nail someone who clearly ignores Apple wishes.

When I was working for Megabloks I signed a NDA where I agreed to keep secret from any outsiders whatever I learned from within the company. The NDA made me liable to be prosecuted for up to CAD $100,000.

Does that mean that if I was in the USA i could have spoken to a teen and got away with it? Shoud the tee have been a reporter for a web site, a major news outlet or his school newsletter? Is there a law in the states that says as long as you speak to a teen you are protected from the law? Or is there a law in the states that says that as long as you speak to a journalist you don't have to honor a contract you signed? Tat speaking to a journalist frees you from prosecution?

So what happens to Jobs when Think Secret reveals that he is the mole?

Hysterical post Jeff.

For example, the cigarette companies' studies on the health effects of smoking were "Company Confidential" and were leaked to the press to show that the cigarette companies knew of the health effects of smoking when the leaders of the companies testified before Congress that they had not. The person who revealed this information certainly broke a non-disclosure agreement.

And like I've been saying in every one of these articles: Those people breaking their NDAs to report illegalities are protected from prosecution under Whistle Blower laws. It is an entirely different circumstance to violate your NDA because you want to, as opposed it actually being the right thing to do ethically and legally.

If the people Apple are after were reporting illegal activities Apple was engaged in, this ruling would have been the exact opposite. As it were it's a couple untrustworthy assholes who violated a legal contract, and like everyone else who breaks a law or legally binding contract they should answer for their actions.

Act Responsibly.

The Judge's ruling is available on line: the best link I have found is at news.com.com (CNet). 13 pages, but worth reading. IANAL, but it looks to be very carefully drawn and limited to one subpoena (Nfox, the ISP, not the "publishers"), and explicitly refuses to be drawn on the who is a journalist question, as well as other questions. It only addresses the issue of discovery, and takes no view for example on whether the material published meets the standard for a trade secret, though prima facie it does.

That said, he handles the EFF lawyers pretty roughly, and they may want to consider carefully before rushing to appeal, unless their dignity is offended.

Tom S

Appeal

2 words: DEEP THROAT

Joe,

4 words

Whistle Blowers are protected.

"Yeah, I admit this bothered me. There are lots of things that are "Company Confidential" and this is real slippery slope stuff.

For example, the cigarette companies' studies on the health effects of smoking were "Company Confidential" and were leaked to the press to show that the cigarette companies knew of the health effects of smoking when the leaders of the companies testified before Congress that they had not. The person who revealed this information certainly broke a non-disclosure agreement."

Peter, there are sometimes exceptional circumstances that make it OK to break an NDA. For example, if a corporation is doing something illegal, you have a right to break your NDA and file for Whistleblower Status. If you get Whistleblower Status, then you are allowed to break your NDA and leak the relevant information.

Apple did not do anything illegal in this case, so the people who leaked the info are not Whistleblowers. Instead, they are criminals, and to publist their information is a criminal act.

Freedom wan not given to us once for ever. We need figt for liberty every day. This was a victory of freedom. And an ugly day for Bill Gates.

Hmm.. Thurrott must be pretty depressed that this story is now 'done'.. he got so much mileage out of calling Apple an abusive and ungrateful company..

kinda like when the Clinton Scandal died down.. Leno and Letterman had nothing to talk about..

This may take a long time to resolve, but however long it takes, it will end badly for ThinkSecret. There is simply NO WAY the courts will issue a ruling that will allow trade secrets to be freely disseminated on the open market. And if I'm wrong, I'd bet the farm that Congress would get involved. You'd have every industry lobbying organization pushing for legislation to protect their intellectual property.

One more comment: I continue to be flabbergasted by the contradictions expressed by the fan sites' behavior. I mean, clearly they think Apple rocks, right? Why else would they be so interested in inside information on the next cool thing from Cupertino? But on the other hand, Apple is clearly the enemy, why else would they decide to fight them to the death in court rather than simply ceasing when they were first asked to?

I see ThinkSecret quoted on MacSurfer as announcing yet another juicy rumor, and my head starts to hurt. What is the mindset of these people??? "You'll never silence us Apple, you evil corporate monster! I will fight you to the death!! Ohboyohboyohboy NEW iPODS!!!!!"

If I were Nick, I'd look around my living space at all the Apple stuff I own, think about how I'm in a vicious fight with the company that made it all, and be very uncomfortable. Maybe he should dump it all and get a Linux setup. How can you be such a big fan of a company you obviously don't like??

LordRobin. Nice. You have said it all. Thanx.

Quoth LordRobin:

"You'll never silence us Apple, you evil corporate monster! I will fight you to the death!! Ohboyohboyohboy NEW iPODS!!!!!"

Or, as the cockroaches said in Bloom County:

'Imperialist pig! Give us your Wheaties!!'

It seems to me that the future recourse for rumor sites is clear. As long as they don't KNOW who the source is or that the source is actually an Apple employee or privy to confidential company data, they could report on rumors and state that the information is based on unconfirmed sources.

I don't think this would be breaking the cited trade secrets law. In this case as far as the rumor sites know, they might have been fed wild speculation by anybody. This may have even been what happened in this case. If I remember correctly, ThinkSecret has an email link for anonymous tips.

The question that would remain would be whether it would be possible to trace who the anonymous email was from. As long as the the person breaking their NDA (and the law) covered their tracks well they would be safe.

That said, I don't know if I think they SHOULD be safe. What they are doing is blatantly breaking the law and their word and that is wrong and is damaging to Apple besides. I think I could handle letting Steve have his surprises. People should not be breaking their NDAs. They in effect promised not to and are slightly slimy for breaking that promise.

I think this whole thing will mostly have the effect of making people think twice before breaking their NDAs casually for sensationalistic purposes.

As for the the rumor sites, well, as their name implies, as long as they restrict themselves to having what they hear about and report being just RUMORS they should be fine. They are not "confirmed, illegally-given information sites", and that would seem to be what they are in this case.

All I can say is rumour sites need to be taken with a grain of salt. They dont always get it right.

I dont know, Apple are better off spending their time, money and energy doing other things. After all, they create the interest through secrecy. They embraced the web. Its a bit late in the day, isnt it Apple?

Apple are better off spending their time, money and energy doing other things. After all, they create the interest through secrecy.

Yeah. Way to completely contradict yourself in an incredibly short amount of time.

This ruling is great! People claiming to be journalists knowlingly publishing info that they know is provided by someone breaking the law SHOULD be punished. I just love it when people start quoting the Constitution as they know what they are talking about. Free Speech! Free Press! Free to Publish INFO PROVIDED BY PEOPLE BREAKING THE LAW!!! We live in a world of arrogance, selfishness and narrowmindedness. Laws are the only thing that keep us from total chaos. I hope Apple makes a huge statement with the lawsuit. Nuff Said!