Do Red Light Cameras Help?
Would You Pay $4 A Month To Get Rid Of A Few Sheets Of Paper?

Is Apple Taking Its Secrecy Too Far?

Legal Issues

from the who-broke-the-law? dept

Wed, Jan 5th 2005 7:24pm — Mike Masnick
Last month, we wrote about Apple suing some people for releasing secret information about future products. Everyone knows that Apple is pretty secretive, and that they get upset when product info is released outside of Steve Jobs' big announcements. However, the latest info shows that they're suing ThinkSecret as well. ThinkSecret is one of the sites that published the info. They didn't take the info -- they simply published the info that someone sent them. Court rulings have shown that simply passing on information does not make you liable for its contents. Apple may have a real complaint against whoever internal at Apple revealed trade secret information. However, suing the site that publicized the info is an over reaction, and is more based out of a desire to intimidate such sites than to actually protect their trade secrets. On the flip side, this may be another example of the Streisand Effect. By pointing out which articles on ThinkSecret were problematic, Apple effectively shined a big bright spotlight on the info they wanted to keep quiet.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

10 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    DT, 5 Jan 2005 @ 7:49pm

    No Subject Given

    If ThinkSecret actively encouraged an employee or person with restricted knowledge (ie. under NDA - ie. a contract) of future Apple products to break that contract and disclose that information to ThinkSecret for publication, then Apple has a case against ThinkSecret themselves - in addition to the persons who actually provided the information.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    b0b, 5 Jan 2005 @ 10:50pm

    No Subject Given

    thinksecret is nothing more than a rumor troll. They should know better about publishing stuff like that anyway - prototypes/etc are covered under non-disclosure agreements & trade secret laws.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Steve Mueller, 5 Jan 2005 @ 11:42pm

    Trade Secrets?

    They should know better about publishing stuff like that anyway - prototypes/etc are covered under non-disclosure agreements & trade secret laws.
    So? I'm sure the Pentagon Papers published back in 1970 were covered by national secrecy, but the New York Times published them, probably knowing they were secret. If ThinkSecret didn't sign an NDA, didn't work for Apple and didn't encourage anybody to break NDAs or other contracts or laws, why shouldn't they publish the information?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike (profile), 6 Jan 2005 @ 12:27am

      Re: Trade Secrets?

      Yeah, I'm with Steve on this one. ThinkSecret has no agreement with Apple not to publish this stuff. If they receive it, they can publish it. It's whoever leaked it that should be in trouble.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2005 @ 5:24am

    No Subject Given

    Or perhaps its all just a marketing ploy to bring about this 'Streisand Effect'? They seem to have done this in the past...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      DV Henkel-Wallace, 6 Jan 2005 @ 9:23am

      Streisand effect

      I think Anonymous has it right. I've always assumed these lawsuits are a way of building escitement before Macworld. Notice how they always happen shortly before "the big announcement?' Very rarely do they happen for products that are years away. And how do these things end up? Apple drops them, right? You might think that Apple would have a bigger impact if they could really surprise people with the macworld unveiling, but that's too risky -- what if people don't immediately see the impact? Instead, by leaking it early they get people starting to think about why the new announcement is important, which gives the reporters something to write about after the product finally is announced. I am a happy Mac user, have been for years, and encourage many other people to use Macs. But the Mac "fanatic" thing is a real turn-off, quite frankly.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ted Brown, 6 Jan 2005 @ 11:05am

    Perhaps it's not Think Secret that they want

    Jon Gruber at http://daringfireball.net/ notes that, if Think Secret fight this in court [an expensive proposition], it's quite likely that the sources of these leaks will have to be named in the settlement. Then Apple can proceed to sue the sources of the leaks, and Think Secret won't be considered a safe haven anymore.

    It's a good read.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Steve Mueller, 6 Jan 2005 @ 11:33am

    Revealing Sources

    I didn't read the daringfireball story (because this is the 21st Century and you didn't post a live link), but I doubt ThinkSecret would have to reveal their source. If they're considered part of the "The Press", they can hide behind the precedent that journalists don't have to reveal their sources.

    Apple would still require a preponderance of evidence that ThinkSecret did something wrong, a more difficult task if the source isn't known. If they can't show any wrongdoing without the source, Apple could be out of luck.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Ted Brown, 8 Jan 2005 @ 11:18am

      Re: Revealing Sources

      Sorry, didn't realize that we still had to hard-code links on message boards in the 21st century. :p

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Steve Mueller, 9 Jan 2005 @ 1:00pm

    Live Links

    Which is why you should always preview a post (especially if it's a system you're not familiar with).

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]


Do Red Light Cameras Help?
Would You Pay $4 A Month To Get Rid Of A Few Sheets Of Paper?
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

19:39 Important Announcement: Techdirt Is Migrating To A New Platform (0)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.