“Applying strong First Amendment protections to bloggers and Web site operators, a San Jose-based appeals court today rejected Apple Computer’s bid for the identities of individuals who leaked confidential information on one of its new products,” Howard Mintz reports for The San Jose Mercury News. “In a 69-page ruling, the 6th District Court of Appeal broke new ground by concluding that bloggers and webmasters enjoy the same protections against divulging confidential sources as established media organizations. The decision sets up a likely challenge in the California Supreme Court.”
Full article here.
“The case began in late 2004, when Apple Insider and PowerPage published drawings, artists’ sketches, pricing and release dates for a planned product codenamed “Asteriod.” Incensed, Apple lawyers sued the anonymous sources of the information as Doe defendants, and promptly issued subpoenas to the bloggers’ ISPs seeking any e-mail pertaining to Asteroid, in a bid to unmask the leakers. That prompted the EFF to intervene. The trial judge sided with Apple, and EFF appealed. The ruling is a significant victory for journalists, and, I’d argue, the public. It’s also good for ISPs, says EFF lawyer Kurt Opsahl, because the court found that the federal Stored Communications Act protects private e-mail from civil subpoenas,” Kevin Poulsen blogs for Wired News.
Full article here.
Advertisements:
• Amazon.com: Switching to the Mac: The Missing Manual, Tiger Edition by David Pogue
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
Related articles:
Apple questioned in ‘Asteroid’ trade secrets case – April 20, 2006
San Jose court to hear Apple ‘Asteriod’ case, weigh in on bloggers’ rights – April 17, 2006
Apple wins initial ruling in ‘Asteroid’ case, can pursue publishers’ confidential sources – March 04, 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
first post of my-e-ine
Appeal.
Big whoop! Means nothing to the economics of the company. The only thing that this will do is to make them more secretive about their development (if it’s possible for them to be more secretive).
MafiaSoft owns the courts in California….
This is huge for journalism….
I don’t see how someone ‘blogging’ or even runnign a website where people are sending in emails and they are publishing them as stories could consider themselves a Jounalist who needs to protect their sources, but at the same time, does not see themselves as a Jounalist who needs to live by the journalism code of ethics – like don’t be evil.
Woo Hoo!
For once a legal judgment that leaves some of our rights intact!
Oh wait, the other POS things that steal our rights like DMCA and Patriot Act have never made it to court. Still, even a small win is good
MDN Mord “military” interesting
Apple is unique amongst tech companies in that it uses secrecy to create marketing splash. For example, we all know about PS3 and Nintendo Wii and upcoming chipsets and Blue Ray, well in advance of the actual products coming to market.
So Apple has a different approach wants to keep things secret. Fine. But that’s Apple’s problem, isn’t it? Not the blogger’s, not the webmaster’s, and not Think Secret’s problem. Apple’s problem. Period.
AWESOME. Now all we need is for the same kind of judgement being upheld against Bush and his cronies (or is Bush the crony?).
Sorry, fascists. This one goes to civil liberties. Of course, if it were anyone but Apple, no one here would be complaining.
No one here is complaining eggman. Where did you see anyone complain? And who’s a fsking fascist? For example: I’m an Apple shareholder and I applaud the decision. So next time have a point b4 you post.
Frankly, this is one I’m glad Apple has lost. Private emails need to be kept private and bloggers (such as MDN) should have similar protections as print journalists.
http://www.SmarmyComics.com/
Is what this must feel like to apple considering this product was vaporware from the start.
Glad I didn’t wait for it.
I still believe that if someone under a non-disclosure agreement broke that agreement – Apple should keep fighting for the names.
Journalism must be the only profession where the codes of conduct and standards of individual ethics permit all forms of self-serving, malicious, money-grubbing, and disrespectful behavior except plagiarism. Yes, folks, you may publish whatever you want regardless of the financial or emotional cost to innocent people, just don’t copy some other journalist’s work. Now, that would be heinous.
Apple has the right to protect themselves. But I don’t think suing bloggers and attempting against free journalism is the way.
I like Apple, I love the products, I love the innovation, but I agree with the decision. It’s a big step. Sorry, Apple, you blew this one.
But in your favor, I’ll say, you don’t blow as many as the competition.
Apparently NDA’s don’t mean anything anymore. Good for free speech, but it just weakened Apple’s ability to do what they do best.
So Apple has a different approach wants to keep things secret. Fine. But that’s Apple’s problem, isn’t it?
No, it’s the NDA holders’ problem.
Apple Insider and PowerPage had sources. Those sources are NDA holders, who had a CONTRACT with Apple to keep quiet. Those sources broke their contracts when they spoke to the bloggers.
Is it really that unreasonable for Apple to protect itself by pursuing people who betrayed Apple’s trust? Wouldn’t you be a bit incensed if you trusted a secret to someone under contract, and that person went and blabbed to the press?
If Apple loses this, expect a severe clamping down of all works in progress. Only the people who had advance knowledge of things like Aqua will be “in the loop” of anything anymore. Those not in the inner circle will be considered part of the general public, and will find out about new products when Apple announces them.
But by God the bloggers and their sources will be free. Enjoy it.
If I know about new device at NASA and I, as one of unidentified bloggers, share with you, I go to jail for sure. No question about it because leak of secret information of a new device threatened americans’ life.
I believe if one of arrogant-bloggers share unannounced Apple’s new product, Mac Community is in jeopardy.
Hey Apple! APPEAL!!!!!!!!!!!
Lets test the waters shall we?
“Steve Jobs slept with Bill Gates in Las Vegas on August 15, 1984 during a active trade show under a large display box in the middle of stage”
*ducks*
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Ok they were tired ok?
Ha Ha Ha. I will bury Apple. They ain’t so tough.
Now, if you will excuse me, I’m going to the bank and deposit my check from Microsoft.
Jason D. O’Grady (Powerpage.org)
Apple should just move to Area 51. Anyone who tries to sneak out secrets here ends up dead.
One legal strategy did not succeed. Do not accept defeat. Regroup and find a better way to protect Apple’s trade secrets. Non disclosure agreements mean what they say.
“private and bloggers (such as MDN) should have similar protections as print journalists.”
Oh, common this is completely phony. Journalists supposedly have some protection so governemt cannot silence critics by abusing their powers.
This is not the case here. A company has the right to protect its marketing secrets and sue anyone who violates THEIR RIGHTS.
I am no supporter of the Patriot crap, but this is completely different.
Good. And I am a supporter of the Patriot Act. The judicial system should not be perverted to rob people of their right speak about companies, schools and institutions and governments. I do make exception for real national security reasons. Kissing corporate ass is not a legitimate reason to make an exception, even when my favorite company is the one proffering up its vertical smile to be licked by the courts. Apple is wrong on this one.
Those who blabbed Apple’s trade secrets to the world (by sharing their information with journalists) violated their contractual non-disclosure agreements with Apple. The journalists who published that information, it could be argued, then made malicious use of that information. No one needs to know the product information that Apple wishes to keep secret. No laws have been broken (by Apple, that is) and no one’s best interests are harmed by Apple’s secretiveness.
On the contrary, it is Apple that is harmed by the publication of details concerning their upcoming products. If there isn’t a law against the willful and arbitrary public broadcasting of a company’s lawful “trade secrets,” there should be. “Freedom of speech,” my ass!
hey LinuxGuy and the rest of you,
Basically this decision says that if I set up a website called, oh let’s say
‘Someone f*cked your wife” and someone emailed me and said ‘hey, I f*cked LinuxGuy’s wife, and a couple other bimbos too’ I could blog about this without fear of legal reprisal because I am the press.
Now, no real offense to LinuxGuy intended, but if he says this is fine with him and I am the press, he’s made his point clear, but, if he doesn’t like the thought of this, then I’ve made MY point clear. So waddya say?
The problem Linux Guy is that no one is watching the watchers, and according to The “Patriot” Act, you can’t even question it.
Just the fact that they felt the need to call it the “Patriot” Act makes the entire thing seem suspect to me. And yeah I know it’s an acronym, but a forced one.
The judicial system should not be perverted to rob people of their right speak
In this case, the people in question surrendered their right to speak freely about Apple secrets when they signed the NDA.
Going by what several have posted here, in their views the following should be clear and legit:
1. You tell me a damning secret, and we both sign an agreement saying I agree to keep that secret to myself. (To make this easy we’ll say the secret isn’t about something illegal, so the contract is binding.)
2. I turn around and tell all to a journalist. They publish the secret to the world.
3. You’re SOL because the press and I have Constitutional freedoms.
Absurd and unfair, no?
If the leakers hadn’t signed the NDA, there wouldn’t be an issue. But they did.
There needs to be a solid ruling to finally settle this.
Apple can sue or prosecute, or both, signers of NDAs. No problem. The law allows this, and most everyone here agrees they can and should be free to do this.
The reason Apple is leaning on ThinkSecret and bloggers is that Apple can’t figure out who broke their NDA.
Boo hoo. That’s Apple’s problem. The signers of the NDA broke the law. Not the bloggers, and not ThinkSecret.
Apple did bloggers a big favor by fighting a week case. Now they have the same rights that print and broadcast journalist have.
That’s the way it should be, it’s not the government’s (or courts) job to determine who’s a journalist and who isn’t.
I never applied for a license to be a journalist and I never want to. (My police press pass doesn’t count)
A tribute to journalists every where:
I jotted down a note,
Upon the bathroom stall.
An explicit little ditty,
And, man, I told it all.
I spared no gory detail,
Pertaining to my tryst.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
No secret will be hidden,
Your privacy, be damned.
Your life is mine, you chump.
I’ve got you in my hands.
Spare me your cries for fairness.
The words that I may twist.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
I need no one’s permission,
To write what comes to mind.
I am the great anointed,
The saviour of mankind.
The truth as I define it,
Is the truth that will persist.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
The definition’s vague,
For journalist, I’m told.
So I’ll define it for you,
If I may be so bold.
It’s anything I want it,
Dissent is summarily dismissed.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
We will define our status,
We will remain aloof,
So hit the road, you bastards,
I’ve delivered you the proof.
Now go, I’m tired of you,
Depart my presence, I insist.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
The public has no comment,
The public has no say,
The public won’t define us,
The public has no stay.
A pen and paper only,
Make me the perfect snitch.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
Everyone has a reason,
A need to make a buck,
And if want a nickel,
Buddy, you are fucked.
The First Amendment, bless it,
It’s the reason I exist.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
I won’t make excuses,
For the things I do.
I obey a higher calling,
“Nothing is taboo.”
I have achieved my station,
As your antagonist.
Like Woodward, Paine, and Prentice,
I am a journalist.
So, bow to me, you cretins.
Acknowledge me, supreme.
I have almighty power,
The stuff you only dream.
1. You tell me a damning secret, and we both sign an agreement saying I agree to keep that secret to myself. (To make this easy we’ll say the secret isn’t about something illegal, so the contract is binding.)
2. I turn around and tell all to a journalist. They publish the secret to the world.
3. You’re SOL because the press and I have Constitutional freedoms.
No Steve. I’m not SOL. I can sue you for gazillions. I can’t sue the journalist, because, listen carefully now…I’ll say it really slowly so you can understand…I…DIDN’T…HAVE…A…BINDING…CONTRACT…WITH…THE…JOURNALIST.
“if I set up a website called, oh let’s say ‘Someone fscked your wife’ and someone emailed me and said ‘hey, I fscked LinuxGuy’s wife, and a couple other bimbos too’ I could blog about this without fear of legal reprisal because I am the press.”
I don’t know about the legalities involved, but if you charged a fee to look up the info you’d be rich! I think you’re onto something………
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
I’ll start looking for venture capital immediately.
Opus:
I witnessed you mother and sister raped and beaten (which is a violation of the law in most places). I would call the cops to come to their aid but …I’ll say it really slowly so you can understand …I…DIDN’T…HAVE…A…BINDING…CONTRACT…WITH…YOUR…FAMILY…TO…PROTECT…OR…DEFEND…THEM.
Now we know that journalistic integrity, decency, and social responsibility do not extend to anyone else but the journalist. How special.
Ouch-from CNET
” The judges said that the Web sites’ status as journalistic enterprises, coupled with Apple’s half-hearted efforts to investigate the leak internally and exhaust other sources of information, justified granting the order.”
Are we posters granted status as journalists?
Remember, this is a California case and California only. Therefore, it really doesn’t apply to anywhere else in the nation. Now it will be used as case law in other states, but those judges can rule either way.
Freedom, Ithink we’re on the same side, but…HUH??!?
Ampar! Ampar! Ampar! Make me laugh. Tis is getting way to serious.
I…DIDN’T…HAVE…A…BINDING…CONTRACT…WITH…THE…JOURNALIST.
No kidding.
However, the journalist was party to breaking the NDA. The source leaked to the journalist, thus violating the NDA. Knowingly getting NDA-bound info should be at least as bad as leaking it.
Anyway this case is small apples. Look at everything with “Deep Throat” and the Watergate scandal. If journalistic source protection held up under that kind of pressure, Apple’s suit isn’t even on the map.
All of which has to be driving SJ nuts. And probably means the end of Apple’s NDA program.
It’d be a shame to see Apple ran like a spy agency, where only a trusted few know the whole picture, and everyone else just gets scraps. But if that’s what it takes to stop the leaks then so be it.
“Remember, this is a California case and California only. Therefore, it really doesn’t apply to anywhere else in the nation. Now it will be used as case law in other states, but those judges can rule either way.”
Thank you…I was about to say the same thing. This ruling only applies to CA. And let’s not forget, Apple did win round 1. We just have to wait for round 3 now. It is an interesting case however either way.
Milo the Moron:
How stupid, phony, ignorant, and narrow-minded can you be? Is there anything in your life that you would want to keep private and confidential? Bank account and routing numbers? Health records? Academic records? Business plans? Annual budget? Annual employee review?
Perchance, without your permission or consent, a supervisor, banker, physician, psychiatrist, financial adviser, and/or registrar released these data for public access or someone associated with these individuals released these data for public access, would you care, jump for joy, or pee yourself with happiness?
Other than acts of criminality, malfeasance, or nonfeasance you should have the right to keep private whatever information you choose and so should any business, organization, or institution.
Freedom the fsckhead,
Is there anything in your life that you would want to keep private and confidential?
That’s my point. Please read my whole post, and think before replying.
If people can’t be trusted with secrets (even under NDA), and Apple can’t enforce the NDA & go after leakers, then why tell anyone anything?
No general NDA program = very few people “in the know”. Obviously there are people inside Apple who need-to-know to do their jobs, so they’d need non-disclosure as part of their employment agreement. But for anyone outside Apple, developers and all, forget it. You’ll find out about new products along with rest of the general public.
Sorry, Billy Bob! I had real life stuff to do.
MW: true
Q: How many lawyer jokes are there?
A: Only three. The rest are true stories.
Q: What’s wrong with lawyer jokes?
A: Lawyers don’t think they’re funny and other people don’t think they’re jokes.
Q: What do you call 25 skydiving lawyers?
A: Skeet.
Q: What do you call a lawyer gone bad?
A: Senator.
Q: What’s the difference between a lawyer and an onion?
A: You cry when you cut up an onion.
Q: What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 70?
A: Your honor.
Q: What do you throw to a drowning lawyer?
A: His partners.
Q: How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?
A: His lips are moving.
Q: What do you have if three lawyers are buried up to their necks in cement?
A: Not enough cement.
Q: What’s the difference between a lawyer and a vulture?
A: The lawyer gets frequent flyer miles.
Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?
A: Chelsea Clinton
Q: If you have a bad lawyer, why not get a new one?
A: Changing lawyers is like moving to a different deck chair on the Titanic.
Q: How does an attorney sleep?
A: First he lies on one side and then on the other.
Q: What’s the difference between a shame and a pity?
A: If a busload of lawyers goes over a cliff, and there are no survivors, that’s known as a pity. If there were any empty seats, that’s a shame.
Q: What’s the difference between a lawyer and a leech?
A: When you die, a leech will stop sucking your blood and drop off.
Q: How do you get a group of lawyers to smile for a photo?
A: Just say, “Fees!”
Q: How many lawyers does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Three. One to climb the ladder. One to shake it. And one to sue the ladder company.
From: Freedom the fsckhead
To: Milo the Mumbling Moron
“Anyway this case is small apples…”
This case is not “small apples” if you have taken the time to post your opinion. In addition, the fact that the courts decided to review the case means the issue of confidentiality and the right to keep confidential private information has some merit in society. Looks like I’m not the only one who disagrees with you on this point.
“It’d be a shame to see Apple ran like a spy agency…”
Everything that a business, institution, or organization does, plans, develops, or archives is not made available to every person from groundskeeper to CEO or dishwasher to president. Do you yourself have immediate and total access to everything that your employer possesses regarding financial, health, and employment records; or research and development documents? Still, I fail to understand your thinking how maintaining certain information private and confidential infers that Apple is also actively, surreptitiously, and, ostensibly, illegally, gaining private information “like a spy agency”. Does the fact that Apple does have trade secrets make you feel uncomfortable, make you feel uneasy, or offend your tender sensibilities? Does emotion rather than reason influence your thinking?
“…where only a trusted few know the whole picture, and everyone else just gets scraps.”
What advantage to Apple to broadcast sensitive information to people not intimately or actively involved in any specific project or program? Should untrustworthy people be given complete and unfettered access to sensitive information? Is there a reason why you yourself cannot be trusted? Are you suffering an inferiority complex?
“If people can’t be trusted with secrets (even under NDA), and Apple can’t enforce the NDA & go after leakers, then why tell anyone anything?”
Well, moron, most advances in technology arise from cooperation and collaboration of businessses, instituions, or governemnts; and the exchange of ideas and hard data between individuals. According to your thinking, if this interaction and information cannot be made secure then the only obvious answer is to do nothing at all. This is intuitively a stupid and illogical conclusion. Apple maintains that the real solution is to identify and punish those persons who violated their oath of fidelity. Certainly, it is better in the long run to locate and penalize liars, cheaters, and deceivers than limit the efforts of honest, faithful, and dutiful persons.
No Steve. I’m not SOL. I can sue you for gazillions.
How?
If the journalist runs the article, credits her info to “confidential surces”, and is protected from revealing her sources, how do you KNOW I was the leaker? How can you PROVE I was the source, if the journalist doesn’t have to divulge?
One aspect of the U.S. legal system that sucks, for better or worse, is when you know who the culprit is, you don’t have the hard evidence to press charges, and the person with the evidence is protected.
That’s the predicament Apple is in.
Apple maintains that the real solution is to identify and punish those persons who violated their oath of fidelity.
The problem is Apple CAN’T “identify and punish” Apple Insider’s sources because the 6th District Court ruled that they are protected!
What good is a toothless, non-enforceable NDA program?
How does Apple protect itself when confidential leaks to the press are protected?
BTW nice choice of big words in your lengthy posts. Did you learn those at myspace?
“BTW nice choice of big words in your lengthy posts. Did you learn those at myspace?”
So that’s why SAT scores are so low.
–The problem is Apple CAN’T “identify and punish” Apple Insider’s sources because the 6th District Court ruled that they are protected!
Apple’s problem is that it is difficult to identify vioilators of their NDA, but it is hardly a “can’t.”
What good is a toothless, non-enforceable NDA program?
NDAs are enforceable and they have teeth. It may not be easy but that’s Apple’s problem
How does Apple protect itself when confidential leaks to the press are protected?
Confidential leaks and the leakers who leak them are not protected. Just the press is. And so are we, when we speculate about a new product that somebody leaked to ThinkSecret. Not that it ever happens here.
One aspect of the U.S. legal system that sucks, for better or worse, is when you know who the culprit is, you don’t have the hard evidence to press charges, and the person with the evidence is protected.
OK, lets adopt the French system of guily until proven innocent. North Korea and Iran use that model as well.
If the journalist runs the article, credits her info to “confidential surces”, and is protected from revealing her sources, how do you KNOW I was the leaker?
I guess I’ll have to work harder to protect my secrets. Hire private investigators. Run sting operations to test if people break their NDAs. Use lawsuits to ruin the few people I do catch as a warning to others. Create false leaks to confuse the rumor sites. Et cetera.
Knowingly getting NDA-bound info should be at least as bad as leaking it.
Cringely last month wrote: “I’m told Apple has long had this running in the Cupertino lab — Intel Macs running OS X while mixing Apple and XP applications. This is not a guess or a rumor, this something that has been demonstrated and observed by people who have since reported to me.”
So, by reading this, didn’t I just “knowingly get NDA-bound info?” Didn’t you by reading it too? So…we’re “at least as bad as leaking it” ??!?
“NDAs are enforceable and they have teeth”
And that’s why, kids, you should ALWAYS swim with a partner.
From: Freedom the fsckhead
To: Milo the Mumbling Moron
If you believe that all legal decisions are unquestioningly infallible, that all legal decisions are undeniably irreversible, and that whatever is declared legal is also fundamentally decent and just, then you are either the most gullible or the most unintelligent person alive. According to your impaired thinking, slavery should have remained the economic practice of the South because the Southern courts decided that forced labor and racial bigotry were reasonable, permissible, useful, and socially acceptable.
“BTW nice choice of big words in your lengthy posts. Did you learn those at myspace?”
I suppose that the word “polysyllabic” is unfathomable for a person with your limited and rudimentary vocabulary. No. Where were you provided your education, assuming of course, that you actually had adequate and sufficient instruction? Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum.
You still haven’t answered any of my questions. By declining to answer, does this reveal that you have no intelligent counter argument?
“polysyllabic”
Ironically, only has five syllables. Kind of like “abbreviation” being so long for what it describes. Abbr makes more sense.
Love the self-referential contradictions. Check out Metamagical Themas by Douglas Hofstadter.
And whatever you do, eschew obfuscation.
you know what? i am glad they lost. apple goes to court like microsoft releases unfinished software.
so there was a leak, so what? this is not national security! THIS IS NOT NATIONAL SECURITY. ‘but a company has the blah blah blah…’ companies don’t have ‘rights’, people do. companies lobby congress to take away our rights.
would all of you be this upset if this were sony? wait, this is MDN, we know the answer.
yes, there was a breech of contract, and yes apple can sue, but they have to figure out who it was by another means now. i suggest calling those CSI guys, they are pretty good.
til then? who.cares.
Screw journalist, the world peddlers of rubbish. Apple can still take the the case to the supreme court.