Attorneys expect decision ‘early next week’ on Apple trade secrets hearing

“Lawyers for Apple Computer and a trio of Mac enthusiast Web sites met in court here Friday in a case that could have wide-ranging implications for the future–and even the definition–of online journalism,” John Borland reports for CNET News. “Apple is seeking the right to subpoena the e-mail providers of three Mac-focused sites that published information documenting details of future Apple products. The company says that information was stolen, and is seeking legal action against employees who leaked the data. But it says it needs the Web sites’ sources in order to identify the employees.”

“A California state judge issued a tentative ruling late Thursday that would give Apple the go-ahead to pursue that information from the Web sites’ Internet service provider, but the judge did not issue a final decision at Friday’s hearing,” Borland reports. “Judge James Kleinberg said he would consider both sides’ arguments and rule as soon as possible. Attorneys said they expected a ruling by early next week.”

Full article here.

Related MacDailyNews articles:
Forbes writer wonders if Apple is the new Microsoft – March 04, 2005
Apple wins initial ruling in ‘Asteriod’ case, can pursue publishers’ confidential sources – March 03, 2005
Apple suspends legal action against three journalists – February 17, 2005
Stop the presses! Apple sues ThinkSecret over ‘Headless Mac,’ ‘iWork,’ and other rumors – January 05, 2005
Apple Computer sues three for posting Mac OS X ‘Tiger’ on Web – December 21, 2004
Apple sues anonymous people over leak of unreleased Apple product info on Web – December 17, 2004
RUMOR: Apple preps analog to FireWire audio device for GarageBand users – November 23, 2004

9 Comments

  1. Let’s see what the judge says next week. But why does the seriuos media even want to defend the journalistic credentials ofthe gossip/blogger sites. A flashy HTML does not make a blogger a media outlet.
    Dothey have editors qualified in media law? Do they have in-house legal advice vetting text? If not (and there are other measures of professional journalism) they deserve no special protection.

  2. Bloggers are not reputable journalists any more than Dan Rather, USA Today and NYT reporters are reputable journalists.

    Welcome to the machine

  3. Mike
    I am very disappointed with Apple, I am sure Steve knows about this yet he was making black boxes ( phreaking) at the same age of the defendants and selling them for profit. If he had been an exemplary citizen I will have less of gripe but a socialized thief sueing for theft is an ugly sight in my book.

  4. So called serious media outlets should be running scared. While websites and blogs may be on the outer limits of recognized journalism, any judgment against them wilol set a precident that can and will be used against the major news outlets.

  5. there already is a precedent, set back in 1970:

    [url=”http://www.law.uconn.edu/homes/swilf/ip/cases/e_i.htm”]431 F.2d 1012

    E.I. duPONT deNEMOURS & COMPANY, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rolfe CHRISTOPHER et al., Defendants-Appellants

    No. 28254

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT[/url]

  6. Cpt. Obvious, what you seem wholly unable to grasp is that the fact that this case is all about defining a journalist only as those who are part of a mainstream corporation. This, if you haven’t guessed yet, means that mainstream corporations will then be the gate-keepers of the definition of “journalism”. If you can’t see how that threatens journalism and the 1st amendment you are a truly naive creature.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.