Apple's recent lawsuits

Heh... but that's what they're going after -- to lift the veil of anonymity. These third-parties are the only ones that think they're anonymous, and they're thinking that mistakenly. Any fool knows that sending an email or using the internet automatically dissolves any notion of being anoymous, since you or your hardware can be easily tracked. Sure, we may not know your name, but we can follow the trail back to you.

If they wanted to remain completely anonymous, they'd have sent a letter via the USPS. Instead, they goofed, used the internet to leak sensitive, protected information, and thus are not anonymous. Of course, I'm assuming that these tips came in via email or some electronic means... do we know for sure?

It's like being in a public place and getting upset that people can see you.

I'm with Apple on this one, which I know will draw a lot of flak, but I can't help it. Everyone is screaming, "It's the big guy going after the little guy!" Close your eyes to the accuser and the accused, and it's simply one person going after another for publishing things that are protected and supposed to remain secret. I'm sure we'd all back up the little guy if the tables were turned: what if the little guy was suing Apple because Apple published the little guy's trade secrets? Who would you support then?
 
I am with Mr. Caca on this one. While it may not seem "nice", if Apple does not take steps to at least attempt to enforce the NDAs which have been violated this will happen over and over. Further ThinkSecret in particular is not exactly as pure as driven snow. Actively requesting for others to break their contractual obligations on the promise that they would not get caught is of questionable ethics and illegal in California at least.

If someone were to come to Mr. DePlume of their own free will and without coercation to give him trade secrets of Apple's, then it is still somewhat questionable ethically IMHO but well within the bounds of journalistic integrity. Further this is Apple's information, they can choose when and when not to release the information, because it is theirs. It does not matter if it is release a year, a week, or seconds before intended. The secret is theirs to keep.

Apple thrives on anticipation and mystery. How many people do you know who have said "I would have waited 2/4/6 months if I had known <X> was coming out." The lack of customer presience makes flow of the current product easier since, as a niche industry, anticipation can kill product sales. You don't see rumor sites about Microsoft or Intel do you? They thrive on a different type of customer anticipation.
 
It's kind of "caveat emptor" in a way... ThinkSecret, being the "purchaser" (even though no money changes hands) is solely responsible to make sure that the information they receive and publish is coming from a respectable source and that said information was given to them in a legal and legitimate fashion.

Like buying a PowerBook from some schmoe on the street for a ridiculously low price. It's probably stolen, and it's the purchaser's responsibility to make sure that the goods are in fact good and legal, and if any question about the goods come up, the buyer should not buy. If he/she went ahead and purchased it, even though they didn't steal it themselves, they're still responsible for any consequences and in possession of stolen goods.

The fact that an NDA was broken makes that information tainted, and ThinkSecret has the responsibility to say, "Hey, we don't know where this came from or whether it's protected under some agreement, so I alone take full responsibility for any consequences for publishing it." The fact that the seller (or giver of information) wanted to remain anonymous should send up a red flag in ThinkSecret's head, and they should have refrained from publishing it.

He's getting exactly what he asked for. The action of knowingly publishing information that he knew (or even didn't know) was protected under an NDA put him in the "big boys" league. It's like a little-league baseball player getting a shot in the pros and expecting the pitcher to go easy on him. Gimme a break. The fact that ThinkSecret's editor is 19 years old, a college student, poor, rich or whatever has no bearing in this case at all. The fact that an NDA was broken and information was published by him is all that matters.

No more hiding behind mommy or the First Amendment (which, contrary to popular belief, is not the end-all be-all law of free speech and free press). There are many, many, many laws that supercede the First Amendment's rights -- such as contract law, which is completely applicable in this situation.

Even if your boss is truly smelly, do you think you'll be able to keep your job if you send emails to all your coworkers telling them how smelly he is? Even if you used your own home internet account? Even if you sent emails from your home internet account to their home internet accounts? Wait! I thought I had free speech!
 
What about sending anonymous messages from an internet cafe through a form? how the hell are they gonna find you then? Especially if it's a dodgy internet cafe in a back suburb that doesent have proper security etc...

And what if within the website agreements there is a clause that states that any posted message is the sole responsibility of the emailer, poster, etc or a warning message prior to even clicking a button. This can be a massive legal debackle and will go no where even on a freedom of speach, speculation, or level.

It will end up being a case of human rights.

Apple has every right to complain which is also a right in itself.
 
Quicksilver said:
What about sending anonymous messages from an internet cafe through a form? how the hell are they gonna find you then? Especially if it's a dodgy internet cafe in a back suburb that doesent have proper security etc...
Click to expand...

Then they will have an approximate location, which narrows down the subject some. If they have the original emails they will also know all documents leaked, which might help based upon who has access. Writing patterns of the email as well, and perhaps the informant was just plain stupid and signed the mail. If they can get the MAC address of the sending machine this could be very useful for tracking down the individual as well.


Quicksilver said:
And what if within the website agreements there is a clause that states that any posted message is the sole responsibility of the emailer, poster, etc or a warning message prior to even clicking a button. This can be a massive legal debackle and will go no where even on a freedom of speach, speculation, level.
Click to expand...

If they have a click through it means little. If the information is the sole responsibility of the poster, then Apple informed the hosting site that the poster did not own that information. At that stage the hosting site would need to remove the information or be at fault themselves. A click through helps mitigate legal culpability but does not remove it. This much is clear and difficult to argue actually. The best defense in the cases Apple is starting seems to be the shield laws, which of course hinges upons whether bloggers are classified as reporters.
 
I believe that the top people at Apple, Jobs et al, think that there is at least one mole at Apple; this mole is fairly highly placed. The main interest is in finding out who these insider might be. If they are holding off on the lawsuits, then they must be close to identifying who some of the moles are.

If it were simply and NDA problem, then a "sting" could easily be used to nab the culprits.

Or am I reading too much into this?
 
I think you are reading too much into this. The leak is not some plebe, but I doubt he is highly placed. To leak the information that Apple is up in arms about the leak has to be inside the design team or have access to the design specs at some level. That does narrow down the scope to people who Apple is very concerned about keeping quiet.

A leak here or there about Tiger is not a big deal. $500 U.S. and willingness to sign an NDA can get that information. Access to Hardware design is more restricted though.

I think the hold on the subpeonas is less Apple being nice so much as the request would have been delayed until such time as the current defense motion is decided.
 
Yep -- what fool, in a high-ranking position, would risk their high-paying job so that the people of the world can know about Apple's upcoming hardware? Only a fool indeed.

Besides, some mumbo-jumbo "disclaimer" on a website isn't going to hold up in court. You can't simply place a disclaimer on your site requiring a click-through and expect it to be a legally-binding contract.

Besides, the guy at ThinkSecret isn't being sued for money, nor to have his site taken down, nor to be thrown in jail, nor any kind of penalty. Apple simply wants him to divulge his sources, and if he wants to have the image of supporting Apple, then he'd do right by the law and fess up.

I guess we'll have to see what exactly the law says in this situation.
 
ElDiabloConCaca said:
Besides, some mumbo-jumbo "disclaimer" on a website isn't going to hold up in court. You can't simply place a disclaimer on your site requiring a click-through and expect it to be a legally-binding contract.
Click to expand...

Very true at the moment... But i know that in some well developed countries this law is being discussed and argued that by owning a computer and having a unique assigned ip/mac address that you can be legally bound to any act of click-throughs etc. some of these clauses are also bound im sure in the contract when signing up to a new ISP. And if not now, it will soon because of possible government regulations.

The only thing stopping this is the fact that 1) human rights and privacy related issues, and 2) user security. Number 2 changed dramaticly when fast user switching became available on operating systems, thus narrowing down a users details and pin pointing user activity within a group using one machine, etc.

Take my word, im convinced things will be very different in a few years from now. Even on a board like macosx.com, the net is getting tighter every day with internet law. iTMS Is also a classic example

----------------------

Some links
Negotiating, drafting and reviewing agreements in relation to e-commerce including website development and hosting agreements, privacy statements, click-through agreements. Information like this is foundon a law firm website.

Internet law library

This is a good article i found that might be of interest too.
click here
 
Standard disclaimer IANAL nor do I play one on TV. Everything below is my opinion and not necessarily fact. I have done some research since I am under so many NDAs that I sometimes wonder if I can go to the bathroom without violating at least one clause. I have an active interest in law as it pertains to electronic medium, as should all software developers, but that does not mean I know what the heck I am talking about. Except the last paragraph though this post is off topic. Skip to the bottom for the why.

Right now a click through agreement can potentially be considered legally binding in the U.S. as I understand it. (e-sign act and UCITA potentially depending on the state) This does not necessarily protect the site owner from culpability. In the case of libel it offers some protection, but in the case of trade secrets and copyright the publisher (website) could still be guilty of contributory infringement.

As an example if I were to make a post detailing Tiger on this board with screen shots, API analysis, or documentation then I would be knowingly be breaking my NDA on a subject that could be considered a trade secret. Apple would be within their rights, and required by law, to request that macosx.com remove the information. If they did not then the status of the information as a trade secret could be invalidated. If macosx.com refused to take the information down then they could potentially be held liable for contributory infringement. This is somewhat weak in that Tiger would be difficult to call a trade secret IMHO, asteroid on the other hand was.

A better example would be if I released details on an IBM project that I have worked with and gave examples of use. There is not any informaion available for this project anywhere on the web and IBM has gone to significant measures to keep it quiet. If the information became public and IBM found out about it there would be a gag order produced fairly quickly. IBM would be well within their rights to demand of macosx.com to remove this information from the site that they control even if they do not "own" the post.

On the other hand if I were so say "Steve Jobs was an incompetent weenie who is out to take as much money as he can," macosx.com would be protected to some extent because this is my opinion and there is no express or implicit approval on the site. (Note, I do not think Mr. Jobs is a weenie, it is just an example.)

All of this is moot however since the articles in question are not being posted directly to the sites. The information is being given to the site maintainers who then wrote articles based upon the information. No click-through will make a difference when the information is published by the site maintainer under the site maintainer's name as is the case with these law suits.
 
I think Apple management should let out a few decoy product plans to find exactly who the culprit is. Mabey in groups of three or four and see whos rumor spills the most. This would be a good management excercise too.. it would of course have to be close to a top level and then worked down to a less responsible level. what a pain, but it could work.
 
But how would fake plans differ from real plans? If they're having trouble locating the guy/girl who leaked the real plans, how do fake plans make it easier? Plus, with the whole lawsuit thing, I don't think that person is going to jump at the opportunity to leak more information...

...but, you never know!
 
Quicksilver said:
What about sending anonymous messages from an internet cafe through a form? how the hell are they gonna find you then? Especially if it's a dodgy internet cafe in a back suburb that doesent have proper security etc...
Click to expand...
Look around... Even at that cafe that give free internet access, I bet there is a video camera or two near by.

Even if you bring your powerbook, they'll have your MAC address and some fo the basic info about your computer. So sitting on the bench OUTSIDE the cafe will keep you off camera, but not invisible.

BTW, if you don't use a VPN while surfing from a cafe you should be!!!
 
Unless you are smart about things, and use a USB wireless adapter, instead of the built-in Airport Extreme. Once you've done your thing, you casually walk to the nearest bin and dump the USB wireless adapter in there.

There isn't much information you can get from a computer that's merely connected to the net. I think these guys won't get caught. Even if there were camera footages, how long will an internet keep those records?

I think if these guys/girls who leaked the information stay low, they're pretty much home free.
 
ElDiabloConCaca said:
But how would fake plans differ from real plans? If they're having trouble locating the guy/girl who leaked the real plans, how do fake plans make it easier? Plus, with the whole lawsuit thing, I don't think that person is going to jump at the opportunity to leak more information...

...but, you never know!
Click to expand...



"But how would fake plans differ from real plans?"
Could you imaging if it was somthing totally not apple to release? like a skateboard or a dog kennal somthing that the person doing this would wonder for a moment but would they let it out, an example would be an apple branded television or even a ergonomic chair somthing we couldnt imagine apple releasing. I understand where your comming from though in terms of a possible effect on share/stock prices it would be a bad idea for apple to do it.


"If they're having trouble locating the guy/girl who leaked the real plans, how do fake plans make it easier?"
well there must be a point where there is a certian amount or small group of staff members can see these plans at a certian point in time, i don't know how many but i would think it could start at a level in upper management somewhere. Then move down from there to the next group of staff members the marketing dept or even the package designers which could be a larger/smaller group of people, this is how i see somthing could be easly posted or emailed to rumor sites.

Mabey if next time somthing was said/shown/plans to a specific person/dept they could time it to the point after somone told to the point of it being posted on a site somwhere, that would have to narrow it down.

its just a guess but thats one way i could see it happen.
 
TommyWillB said:
Look around... Even at that cafe that give free internet access, I bet there is a video camera or two near by.

Even if you bring your powerbook, they'll have your MAC address and some fo the basic info about your computer. So sitting on the bench OUTSIDE the cafe will keep you off camera, but not invisible.

BTW, if you don't use a VPN while surfing from a cafe you should be!!!
Click to expand...


your very right but you only have to travel 10 - 20 mins to find one that dosen't have any cameras around hell you could even do it from a department store or a store that has no cameras or even travel to small country town for the weekend and post it there.

ok ive had enough now..

cheers :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top