“The 19-year-old publisher of a Web site facing a lawsuit over an article about a top-secret $499 Apple computer said Friday he can’t afford to defend himself,” Mark Jewell reports for The Associated Press. “Apple Computer Inc. (AAPL) is suing Harvard University student Nicholas Ciarelli’s Web site (http://www.ThinkSecret.com), alleging it illegally published company trade secrets. The Jan. 4 lawsuit also targets the Web site’s unnamed sources for the leaks.”
Jewell reports, “Ciarelli, whose identity as the site’s publisher and editor was only published this week, is not named as a defendant. But he still needs a lawyer, and said he is hoping to find free or low-cost legal help to argue that he deserves First Amendment protection and used proper newsgathering techniques to break news about the Mac mini computer and other inside information about Apple. ‘A lot of lawyers are interested in my case, but few are able to do it for free or low cost,’ Ciarelli, of Cazenovia, N.Y., said in an e-mail interview. ‘I’m seeking representation.'”
“Apple declined to answer questions Friday about whether Ciarelli, who called himself Nick dePlume online instead of using his real name, would also be sued. Ciarelli’s identity as the site’s editor and publisher had circulated recently on the Internet, but the information only became widely known on Wednesday, when The Harvard Crimson, the university’s student newspaper, confirmed it. At the MacWorld show on Tuesday, executives said the company is merely defending itself,” Jewell reports. “‘Innovation is what Apple is all about, and we want to continue to innovate and surprise and delight people with great products, so we have a right to protect our innovation and secrecy,’ said Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide product marketing.”
Full article here.
No question it made the keynote that normally is such a huge event a little bit of a letdown. I think Apple should rethink moving MacWorld back to the first week of the year, I know it conflicts with CES in Vegas but I think if they had done it the previous Tuesday none of the info would have gotten out.
Golly…
The New York Times and the Toronto Globe & Mail both reported on the possibility of a $500 prior to Apple’s announcement.
Both credited “internet chat”, but none mentioned Think Secret.
I guess Apple will be suing both newspapers now, huh?
Magic Word = “square” as in “How can Apple square this legal action against Think Secret without suing other “leaks” in the general media as well?”
Mackmaker, you are way too dramatic here. First of all, Steve Jobs provides extensive sneak peeks of its absolute crown jewel, OS X Tiger, months and months ahead of time. But a 19 year old kid shares the details of upcoming products a couple weeks ahead of time, and he’s going to bring down the Apple empire? Give me a break. Heck, all the stock analysts, like Piper Jaffray, were passing along the same information like it was gospel. Guess it’s ok for the investment fat cats to spread rumors, but a 19 year old has to have his nuts nailed to the wall.
Here’s the deal: The rumor sites are entertainment, and they have done more to generate buzz and excitement around Mac OS X than any Apple advertisement (Oh I forgot, Apple doesn’t advertise the best thing about using a Mac – OS X).
As long as the websites have not done anything illegal, they have a First amendment right to keep doing what they are doing.
Macmaker, your anger is displaced. Get your people back in line with the NDA’s they signed.
He’s at Harvard and can’t find an attourney, a First Amendment attourney? Oh the irony…..
There are scores of cases where the protection of trade secrets have been the decided victor over First Amendment rights.
And I can’t be made to feel any compassion for this kid. A person with the intellectual curiosity and the werewithal to attend Harvard should poke his head into their law library and pick up a copy of the Restatement of Torts, sections 757-9 (1939); the Restatement of Unfair Competition, sections 39-41 (2002); the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1986); and the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. sections 1831-1839). (I didn’t go to Harvard, and I’m not a lawyer, but it was easy for me to find all of this information on the internet, as he could have done.) He should read those sections and think about how lucky he has been that, up until now, Apple has been content to only send him cease-and-desist letters (which he repeatedly ignored), and that they’re not looking at pressing criminal charges, as is their right under the EEA. Individuals who violate section 1832(a) (domestic misappropriation of trade secrets) face penalties of up to ten (10) years in FEDERAL prison AND fines up to $250,000.
For all the whiners out there who keep quoting the First Amendment as this kid’s protection, consider this; Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution (an actual part of the Constitution, not some afterthought Amendment) “promote[s] the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discveries…”
By any reasonable standard, it’s apparent through common law, case law, federal statutes and rules AND the Constitution that this kid needed to stop the misappropriation of trade secrets a long time ago. There aren’t too many recent instances where the law was on the side of the defendant in these cases. And just because you don’t know that something is illegal or actionable doesn’t protect you from suffering the consequenses of your actions.
So hey, Nick, stop your whining and your continued pleas of innocence. That’s for the people who forgot to carry the one on their tax forms, who are now serving time. Or the elderly woman whose grandson borrowed her car and committed a felony, so now she’s doing time as well. YOU are complicit in the continual leak and dissemination of trade secrets, and it’s time for you to face up to your punishment.
Rogozhin, and that is why you should get a lawyer and not be left to try and interpret the law when you have no clue. Tradesecret law provides redress if someone basically paid for theft/espionage and/or blackmailed people in the company to steal the secrets away. If people at apple spontaneously find a web site and click on the “got dirt” and spill beans, that is protected. It’s protected in the auto industry. It’s protected in the game industry. It’s protected 1st amendment speech.
Here’s another way of looking at it. Certainly there are chemical companies that consider *every* part of their refinement process trade secret. Such companies have all employees sign NDAs as part of their employment agreements. And if such companies start dumping into a river, and one of the people there decide its wrong, and spontaneously contact their local “watchdog” news reporter and even tell them “look this is a secret and if someone finds out i can get fired” and the reporter goes ahead and publishes the story blowing the whistle, the reporter is NOT guilty of anything wrong and is protected by the 1st amendment. 1st amendment trumps. Even if at the end of any broadcast the reporter says “got any dirt on some company”, that does not cause people to lose their own will and start blabbing all tradesecrets to the reporter.
The reality is that MACMAKER should be mad that jobs, after all these years is purposefully having the information LEAKED (as Wired and others will tell you we are now all being manipulated by buzz marketing, with companies setting up fake websites and more to purposefully SPREAD rumors, or anonymously tipping outlets to spread buzz), or is so incompetent that he cannot keep his ship from leaking from the top.
Even if this goes to trial without a lawyer, thinksecret should not worry too much. The damages are a negative number. The info was and would have been released a mere week away. The buzz free-advertizing is more valuable than jobs boner for sprinking surprises during keynote, and, likely, there is an argument to be made that apple is abusing the legal system because they should be suing John Doe (aka workerbee) and subpeoning thinksecret instead of using the court system to bully and intimidate a teenager into pointing out apple’s problem employees (something that is apple responsibility to find and they consistently fail at). Personally I hope apple gets the crap sanctioned out of it.
I keep saying this, but if Nick was a real fan of Apple, he wouldn’t run a website that posted Apple product rumors, especially if he felt they were true.
Other than that, if Nick didn’t pay for the info, then he really can’t be held liable. I don’t think Apple even expects to get anything from him except the names of the Apple people who leaked the info, which is really the whole point of the lawsuit anyways.
Has everyone forgotten that this is no surprise to Nick. Apple has been warning him. You are telling me that he just let those letters pile up without consulting anyone. Also in a previous article someone mentioned his LLC under the web had a law firm represented with the same last name – coincidence? No one gave him free advice of what he could potentially understaking? It just doesn’t fly with me.
You can’t have it both ways. People have known for years who he is – not a secret – also previously reported were articles he wrote under his real name with another party. This is not a naive kid. That may be the role he is playing at this time, but to say poor Nick – NOT. Writing rumours vs. what you know to be authentic data – Nick’s sources are always “reliable” – he knew someone was breaking their NDA. His protection is to what degree of separation he has from those people I suppose. He wasn’t named in the suit either. I am only surprised that Apple has waited so long. I actually wondered whether they suspected their employee and watched when the leak would occur with Nick. That employee (or employees) should without question be bounced. We are not talking about whistleblowers here but someone who gets a ego thrill gabbing to Nick. They could just as soon participate in corporate espionage whether knowingly or not, poor judgement or not I wouldn’t want that person in my shop.
“I don’t think Apple even expects to get anything from him except the names of the Apple people who leaked the info, which is really the whole point of the lawsuit anyways.”
Exactly The NiceMike! Apple wants to scare the hell out of anyone even contemplating opening their mouth – frankly as it should be. This is business. If someone broke our NDA in such a manner I’d go after them.
I just cant help wondering how many of the posters here, who seem to be against “Nick dePlumes” plight… will continue to frequent his website when all of this is said and done …
While, Apple has a right to protect their intellectual property, and to keep their trade secrets as close to the vest for as long as they want to.. going after this college kid (with no obvious financial means) .. could end up backfiring…
The old saying ..”You cant get blood out of a turnip” .. comes to mind ..
So.. it seems to me that the goal of this proposed lawsuit, is to uncover Nicks sources… And on this score, I believe he is, indeed, protected under the 1st Amendment…
(If Im off base here, maybe someone with legal experience can enlightnen me ?)
Either way, I dont know how, by persuing this lawsuit, it can end with Apple coming out smelling like a rose…
Remember how the RIAA ended up appearing to the general public, after they went after the kid who wrote Napster ?
The First Ammendment protecting, among other things, free speech. What people fail to realize is that there are limits to free speech. For example, when the speech causes certain types of harm. I just cringe when I see people reciting the Constitution as though they understand it. Free speech doe NOT mean free speech in all cases. The kid used free speech to cause economic harm to a company we adore and skew its market value causing investors to make choices on rumors and speculation. Sure, the investors are responsible for their decisions. But so is the kid, and the kid made the decision to divulge trade secrets with full intent. The fact he was mostly on the money with the facts just solidifies the need for it to stop. He will be made and example of. I feel bad for him, but I also hate people who have contempt for the law and ethics. I also hate comedians who humiliate people who make mistakes just to get a laugh. Unfortunately, it’s the audience (including the curious Mac audience) that drives people to make bad decisions to satisfy our compulsive need to know everything. Don’t blame the kid alone. Blame the rest of us.
C’mon, how can a little website revealing rumored product information a few days ahead of the MWSF keynote do more competitive damage than Steve Jobs unveiling Spotlight, Core Image, Dashboard, Automator, Quicktime 7 etc. up to ONE YEAR ahead of its implementation?
Sure seems to give the competition plenty of time to copy these features into their next OS upgrade. Oh I forgot, MS is still trying to copy OS 8.
Seems to me that Steve Jobs is violating his own NDA by spilling all these trade secrets about OS X.
Oh, and why is everyone picking on ThinkSecret when at least a dozen major publications and investment analysts published the same information about the Mac mini and iPod shuffle without revealing their sources? Why is no one taking Merrill Lynch to task?
Could it be their arsenal of lawyers at their disposal? A 19 year old is an easy target.
Ok, the following publications/websites posted information about Apple “trade secrets” prior to January 11, 2005, WITHOUT NAMING SPECIFIC SOURCES, or when they did name a source it was a Wall Street investment firm. I could post a bunch more but you get the point. Again I ask, why isn’t Apple suing each and every one of these firms or individuals for revealing trade secrets? Why are they singling out ThinkSecret?
————————————————————
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yhoo/story.asp?source=blq/yhoo&siteid=yhoo&dist=yhoo&guid;={64A53F1A-6333-406C-BB7E-6CE7E392B408}
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=581&ncid=581&e=1&u=/nm/20050104/tc_nm/tech_apple_dc
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/205986_cheapmac31.html?source=rss
http://lowendmac.com/archive/04/1223.html
http://hardware.silicon.com/pdas/0,39024643,39126656,00.htm
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050107.html
http://au.news.yahoo.com/050105/20/sgen.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/03/wapple03.xml&sSheet;=/news/2005/01/03/ixworld.html
http://news.com.com/Will+Apple+flash+iPod+rock+market/2100-1041_3-5496110.html
http://www.forbes.com/markets/2004/12/27/1227automarketscan06.html?partner=yahoo&referrer;=
http://www.macobserver.com/stockwatch/2004/12/27.1.shtml
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=581&ncid=581&e=2&u=/nm/20041230/tc_nm/tech_apple_dc
http://www.forbes.com/markets/2004/12/30/1230automarketscan05.html?partner=yahoo&referrer;=
http://www.macobserver.com/stockwatch/2004/12/30.1.shtml
http://jeffcroft.com/blog/archives/2004/12/500_mac_must_be.php
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1750025,00.asp
http://yahoo.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2004/tc20041111_0481_tc056.htm
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/01/10/flash_based_ipod_to_.html
http://www.forbes.com/markets/2004/10/25/1025automarketscan07.html
http://www.macobserver.com/stockwatch/2005/01/03.2.shtml
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4270625
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/07/technology/poguesposts/07pogues-posts.html?ex=1105938000&en=5be75b1edc709710&ei=5070
Little Nick should learn a lesson. However, don’t forget here the real culprit is the person or persons who had sign a non-disclosure agreement with Apple and subsequently leaked information to others like Nick. Those are the people who broke the law and Apple has the absolute right to sue them!!!
Little Nick should learn a lesson. However, don’t forget here the real culprit is the person or persons who had sign a non-disclosure agreement with Apple and subsequently leaked information to others like Nick. Those are the people who broke the law and Apple had the absolute right to sue them!!!
Hey, you wanna be a hero, a stud? Post this stuff at your own risk – Apple has sued a lot of people over the years – if you do this, and you’re a college kid, you know what you’re getting into.
I’m not saying Apple is right or wrong, but he made his bed – he took his chances, so don’t come crying for help…
SB
Steve prides himself on being an asshole, so this is no surprise. Too bad nobody at Apple remembered the first rule of litigation: never, ever sue poor people — they have nothing to lose and you have nothing to gain. Just ask McDonalds about the famous McLibel trial, the most expensive in history: http://www.mcspotlight.org
I’m reneging.
I’ve read every comment attached to every MDN article on the Mini Mac while it was still a rumor (all 14 days):
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/4589/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/4594/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/4606/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/4629/
Most are celebrating, many about the the mini and some about ThinkSecret specifically. We’re happy with the news and happy to have it. No one even suggests the information should be ignored or rejected on any basis other than its accuracy, their only possible insult being leading us astray. Are our memories really that short?
BTW, here’s the perfect Mac mini monitor:
http://www.formac.com/
Don’t forget Steve Jobs in his younger days made (with the other Steve) black box’s that allowed one to make free long distance calls. If I recall correctly, Bill Gates once complained that Steve and his friends had copied and were using his Basic program without permission.
I believe in Karma. I think this is gonna come around and bite Apple. Mark my word.
Off topic:
Dan, have you used a Formac monitor before? I’m just wondering about any issues they’ve had. I considered getting one when I bought my PM G5 last year, but decided against it because of some negative things I heard about the company (IIRC, they were in the midst of buying out their German owners and were having a bad time communicating with their customers).
*sigh*
ThinkSecret was the SOURCE of the violation of trade secrets. Once the cat was out of the bag, it was no longer a trade secret, and others were free to publish the information. solid.. if you note the links you provided, they are ALL published after ThinkSecret’s article. Further, ThinkSecret has done actual damage to Apple. I’m quite sure that Apple invested multi-millions on release and marketing of the mini.. which was undercut by this Leak. Also, the two weeks lead time before the mac mini was officially released was enough time for competitors to unfairly compete. I do believe I saw an announcement of a new ‘cheap’ system from Dell just days before the mini came out.
Those who jump up to defend Nick are defending the right to conduct industrial espionage against Apple. Think carefully about that. Its not defensible for a journalist to conduct espionage of any type, and it would be completely destroy Apple NOT to defend themselves against it. Apple has not undertaken this suit lightly. ThinkSecret was warned MANY MANY MANY times to cut it out. They have continued to provide information gained through espionage even AFTER this current suit.
Quotes by Mac dood – my thoughts:
“I just cant help wondering how many of the posters here, who seem to be against “Nick dePlumes” plight… will continue to frequent his website when all of this is said and done …”
Sure they will – it’s gossip. Everyone loves gossip. I’m sure his site has gotten even more hits because of this issue. You can’t behave as an adult in one setting and then cry I’m a kid with the music “I need a hero” playing in the background. He has gotten great advice and this is all spin. There are too many lawyers who protect intellectual capital now for it to have gone unnoticed by Nick. He is working the poor college student angle. “Woe is me”. Smart. I personally am not for Nick’s “plight” because Nick knew what was going to happen. To expect a champion after the fact is a ploy. They are counting on outraged fans to yell at mean ol’ Apple. May happen – it may not. We do not have the files of Apple legal. For all we know many sites have received warning. I just think that Nick’s sites had too many bullsyes to go unnoticed.
“So.. it seems to me that the goal of this proposed lawsuit, is to uncover Nicks sources…”
Or the goal of this lawsuit is to ensure that people think twice about opening their mouth when they have a NDA.
“Remember how the RIAA ended up appearing to the general public, after they went after the kid who wrote Napster ?”
I think there was more backlash over their overzealous prosecution of tweens purchasing illegal music vs. the kid who wrote the program.
to turn off the flow one turns the tap off then follow the pipe to the source not the other way around so I guess thats what Apple is doing.