home

Apple Wins Ruling Against Websites in Trade Secrets Case

A judge today ordered three websites to comply with a subpoena by Apple Computer and turn over information about their confidential sources in the Think Secret case.

"Unlike the whistleblower who discloses a health, safety or welfare hazard affecting all, or the government employee who reveals mismanagement or worse by our public officials, (the enthusiast sites) are doing nothing more than feeding the public's insatiable desire for information," Kleinberg wrote.

In the ruling, the judge largely brushed off the question of whether the publishers were journalists and therefore protected from facing contempt charges for refusing to divulge sources under California's shield law. "Defining what is a 'journalist' has become more complicated as the variety of media has expanded," he said. "But even if the movants are journalists, this is not the equivalent of a free pass."

The Judge made it clear that the property at issue was stolen.

The information about Apple's unreleased products "is stolen property, just as any physical item, such as a laptop computer containing the same information on its hard drive (or not) would be," the judge wrote. "The bottom line is there is no exception or exemption in either the (Uniform Trade Secrets Act) or the Penal Code for journalists--however defined--or anyone else."

Maybe someone ought to be raising the 5th Amendment instead of the 1st Amendment - by further disseminating stolen information, could they be charged with receiving stolen property or aiding and abetting the theft, if prosecutors were so inclined? Could disclosure of the source lead to evidence against them? Our prior post on the case is here.

Update: Jeff Jarvis says bloggers lose big time with the decision.

< Frank Rich to Return to NY Times Op-Ed Pages | House Ethics Committee Fails to Adopt New Rules >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • I just don't understand why Apple's doling this. What these sites do is generate a huge amount of anticipation prior to a product release, and that results in people watching the MacWorld and WWDC keynotes like a hawk and then pulling out their credit cards en masse and buying very expensive things. This is all about Steve Jobs's insatiable and irrational need to control everything, with no thought as to the positive effects these sites may have on Apple's bottom line.

    Re: Apple Wins Ruling Against Websites in Trade Se (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 01:50:28 PM EST
    It does seem odd Mike. I still say Apple's beef should be with whoever is leaking the info w/in the company, not some college kid who loves their product.

    "Doing this" even. That'll teach me to write without wearing my glasses--I couldn't distinguish the "i" from the "l".

    Well technically it is-- they are trying to get these sites to reveal their sources so that they can go after them.

    Any first year law student could've guessed this verdict! Come on! It's a no brainer!

    The idea of who and/or what a journalist is hasn't yet received the kind of judicial scrutiny it should. If history is to serve as a precedent, however, the pamphleteers of the 18th and 19th century weren't essentially any different in terms of intent as are today's bloggers. jus' a thought.