http://daringfireball.net/2005/03/new_york_times.php

sorry, duplicate post

sorry, triplicate post

http://daringfireball.net/2005/03/new_york_times.php

Apple should be allowed to protect it's intellectual property. If a site wants to speculate on what may be next based on logical assumptions thats oen thing. To however publish confidential information and then hide behind first amendment protections when you are called out is ridiculous.

If I buy a stolen car from someone and get caught, not only do i not get to keep the car, but I also can be charged with receiving stolen proprery. What's the difference here. It's about taking responsibility for one's actions, which is apparently no longer applicable to anyone in our society.

If people want to exercise their rights to protect the constitution, perhaps they should start by looking at citizens being held without legal representation or being charged with a crime. That would seem to be time better spent rather than worrying about what Apple's doing.

It's a sad day when someone who uses a fake name tries to pass himself off as a serious journalist. Writers stand by their work because it represents their professionalism. Appearantly this guy has none.

Quote

Guest wrote:
It's a sad day when someone who uses a fake name tries to pass himself off as a serious journalist. Writers stand by their work because it represents their professionalism. Appearantly this guy has none.

You are all morons. Today there is a blogger in the White House press corp. Get over your luddite attitudes and pedigree issues. If someone disseminates information to the public at large, theare news people/journalists.

Mac users have so many unjustified elitist snobs it's annoying to use the same platform with such a group of idiots.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:

You are all morons. Today there is a blogger in the White House press corp.

Here's a big idea for you: We're basing our comments on these web pages based on WHAT THEY DID, not what OTHER BLOGGERS are doing.

Does that make sense? What OTHER bloggers do has no bearing on what Thinksecret does.

OK, lets define some things for the guest who called mac enthusiest 'snobs'....

ThinkSecret is NOT a blogging site. ThinkSecret is an Apple rumors cite, complete with advertising. The author reports what he believes are rumors or recent news about Apple. If anything, he TRIES to make his cite look professional.

Blogs, or web logs, are personal cites that are one step away from "dear diary" letters. Some people like to set up their personal web log as more of an opinion site, were they can talk about sports, news, etc;. Just because they write about news does not make them a journalist.

I know people disagree, but being a journalist requires an education. Journalist are not pundits or talking heads on TV. Almost all journalist have formal training have professional experience.

It's like calling someone a teacher. Yes, someone could have 'taught' you something. Think of your mother and father, they taught you many things when you grew up. But they are not teachers. To be an actual teacher (as in your teacher in high school or elementary) you have to have an actual education and certification in what you do.

And yes, journalist stand by their work. They don't make up fake names. If you make a fake name, it's for a reason - perhaps because you know what you're doing isn't right.

Take it easy... I bet there are circumstances & facts in these suits that NONE of us know about.

Did the sites ASK for NDA information? or was the information leaked to them?
--Leaks occur all the time from "classified" gubmint sources to journalists and you don't (usually) see Rummy suing those journalists.

Was the journalist hanging around the Cupertino eavesdropping on Apple employees?

What exactly IS a journalist? -- I think this is going to me the courts biggest stumbling block.

There is stuff we do not (and will not) know till after this is all over. Please, until we have all the facts let's be civil to each other. After all this is only speculation.

Just my 2¢
Thanks,
John Boyarsky
RSMS ISS Guy, Tutor & Dirt Burner
Fairbanks, AK

All of you and the Mercury News need to read the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (google it) and understand what a trade secret is and what it means to misappropriate protected information. The newspaper of course is self-serving in siding with the journalists; don't you think there is some conflict-of-interest since according to the act it is illegal, even for journalists, to acquire or disclose trade secrets. (There is an exemption for disclosing improper (illegal) activities of a business or government, but that's not what we're dealing with here.)

Apple doesn't care whether rumor sites exist and publish rumors. As long as none of your rumors are directly associated to protected information (an example of which is information protected via NDA), you can write all you want. The sites being sued all released info that was directly related to protected information - we know that because they used the code names in conjunction with the descriptions of the products. If only the sites weren't so proud as to indicate that they had seen internal documents...

And even Apple doesn't sue on first publication. They notify the site that info is protected and request its removal, because a site may truly not know that it is protected. But Think Secret has repeatedly chosen to ignore what Apple thinks is best for Apple, and rather think first of its own economic benefit.

Remember the big picture. Apple wants to stop people from breaking NDAs. The demand comes from competitors and from rumor sites. Given that the info leaked this time doesn't seem to be worth that much (Mac mini info leaked too close to release date to allow competitor to really act, Asteroid info seems either too vague or too similar to products already in the market), the fear is that in the future someone will leak really important information too far in advance, and truly sabotage Apple's future.

One last point: Thurrott had an article on Office 12 on his winsupersite that he pulled by request of Microsoft. That article claimed it had seen internal documents that described the vision for Office 12. Now we all dislike Thurrott, but even he pulled it because he is a true MS fanboy (or he is a coward!).

Think Secret is not a true Apple supporter, so people need to stop claiming that he does it for the Apple fans - Nick does it for his own profit. None of Apple's true supporters really need to have rumor info; we'd be just as glad to be stunned by Steve himself. At this point, I'd be glad to see Think Secret go under.

The Merc - which I've always been a fan of, particularly for their coverage of silicon valley - is exactly right.

Take a look at PowerPage.org and you will see that what they say is completely true.

Sites like salon.com and cnet.com publish the same kind of material - but they have deeper pockets and thus aren't likely to be sued.

I also note that MacWeek published the same kind of information back in the early 90's. Apple hated it, but it they never sued.

If you think Rummy won't respond if you leak classifed (and protected) on our next JDAM, by all means *do*. I will pray for you, of course, but when you're being traded for cigarettes, I hope you will understand you brought it on yourself.

If anyone can leak information of new products whenever they choose, and then hide behind the 1st Amendment, what possible reason could any company have for innovation? This isn't about Apple -- it's Apple suing right now, to protect their livelihood and IP, but if this were to happen to your company and you lost your job because the company folded, you'd probably blame Apple for not fighting to establish a legal precedent.

Today these guys are shanking Apple, tomorrow, it might be you.

The O'Grady PowerPage is in a different ball park. This guy is knowledgeable and puts together REAL INFO, in the sense that he develops ideas and solid arguments, as well as thorough technical analysis. The other 2 are RUMOR SITES, the rough equivalent of the Enquirer …
I'm sorry for O'Grady, but apparently he had a lapse of judgment when he published what he did, and it's quite possible that he will end up having decent-and quiet-settlement terms …
The other 2 are only chasing NDA stuff, ThinkSecret openly advertized it on its own site … that was definitely an enticing attitude with a promise of total anonimity and protection from legal liability. Let's now see if he can deliver on his promise, as he's being called ! Free speech does not cover enticement to break one's legal contract, IMHO. I'm surprised that this aspect of the problem is never really stressed, simply because the little twerp is a teenager … Does teenage excuse every damn thing ???? It never did for me …
All these journalist apologists are self-serving hypocrites, they raise the flag in favor of people they would never accept to work with or (even less) for, simply because they're in a VERY LOOSELY similar type of occupation. The right to be assimilated to a journalist comes with the requirement to adhere to a journalistic code of ethics. Period.''