toggle

AAPL Stock: 509.46 ( 0 )

MacNN News

Apple sues rumor site, adds credibility to rumors

updated 02:20 pm EST, Wed January 5, 2005

Apple sues rumor site

Apple today has in an attempt to close down and curtail product leaks as well as help protect what it alleges to be its trade secrets. CNET.com reports that the lawsuit against Think Secret lends credibility to published rumors about its plans to offer a cheaper Macintosh and its own line of office software. "Apple on Tuesday sued the publisher of Mac enthusiast site Think Secret and other unnamed individuals, alleging that recent postings on the site contain Apple trade secrets. The suit, filed Tuesday in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, Calif., aims to identify who is leaking the information and to get an injunction preventing further release of trade secrets. However, in filing the suit, Apple identifies specific articles that contain trade secrets, indicating that at least parts of those reports are on the mark."

by MacNN Staff

(32)

TAGS :

Apple

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

shawnce
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

01/05, 02:35pm | report spam | close Reply |
Support this...

I support Apple in going after folks that breach NDA and related confidentiality contracts and those that attempt to persuade such breaches by others (within the legal definition of persuade in this case, IANAL so I don't know what that is).

With Apple stock so hot recently and priced well ahead of current earnings Apple needs to take steps to insure that market expectations don't go outside what Apple is actually planning to release, etc.

JHromadka
Mac Elite

Joined: Feb 2001

0

01/05, 02:39pm | report spam | close Reply |
Good Gravy

It looks like most of the rumors will be true. Time to get out your credit cards. This could be the biggest MacWorld ever!(tm)

Roehlstation
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

01/05, 02:41pm | report spam | close Reply |
Tactics

Does everyone remember the number of patents that Apple has filed and led to nothing? I wonder if this is just a tactic Apple is using to run interference.

shawnce
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

01/05, 02:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: tactics

One reason Apple is doing this is because as you noted some of the things they have patented, copyright, etc. never became a real product. They may very well be working proof on concept, etc. products in all kinds of categories but decide never to make them into a real product but if a rumor gets out about one of those and set the wrong expectation in the market place then the Apple name and brand is hurt.

Of course the other side of this is Apple wants to control their IP and they have contract with folks to assist in that. It is obvious that contracts have been broken, so the have a legal write (in some cases a requirement) to prosecute.

shawnce
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

01/05, 02:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
errr..

right not write

iolaire
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2001

0

01/05, 02:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
question

If Think Secret doesn't know who gave them the info - say it was called into their phone hotline - do they have to comply and remove the info? If this was the Washington Post I'd think they would not?

jpellino
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 1999

0

01/05, 03:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
either way...

Some schlub signed an NDA and then spilled the beans. He can't be surprised that Apple is exerting its rights under the terms of a binding contract. Neither can ThinkSecret be aghast or self-righteous, as they were in knowingly in posession of trade secrets - code names covered by an NDA, interference or not. If it were legal, they'd go for broke - have a QuickTime stream of someone getting famous by demoing the thing.

But it ain't, and they know it. Especially when they have a banner on the top of their site for 'anonymous' voicemail and email.

And how addled do you need to be to not realize that Apple can subpoena the residue of your 'anonymous' info - including voice message and/or caller ID and/or IP info in the server logs when posting a form?

BTW the leak of a specific project code name, while ostensibly adding cred to their site, might also serve to trace back to particular labs or testers. We were once under NDA with Apple and the docs included a code name for the project. Depending on which Apple folk were were talking to, they also referred to that project with a number of other code names - it would certainly be a useful way of tracking the potential leakers and leak-ees.

Maybe leaking helps stock price, maybe publicly chasing the leaks does too, but mostly what helps the stock price is selling a lot of stuff and making more money. Which they'll do or not do for real on Tuesday.

And if they didn't defend their rights, those rights would evaporate practically if not legally. Just ask Mrs. Seuss.

driven
Addicted to MacNN

Joined: May 2001

0

01/05, 03:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
tough one ....

Apple contends that they (ThinkSecret) knowingly helped violate various NDAs. Should they be allowed to do this?

There have been similar cases in the past with automotive rumor sites (blueovalnews comes to mind).

It should be an interesting case if it gets to trial.

freakboy2
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Oct 2002

0

01/05, 03:22pm | report spam | close Reply |
just more and good press

for apple this is a no brainer.. 35k$ to get their names in lights all over the place. Makes the news coming out even bigger!

go apple!

gambit-7
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2001

0

01/05, 03:28pm | report spam | close Reply |
giddy!

I tell you what: Tuesday is gonna be awesome. haha Can't wait for the Stevenote!

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

01/05, 03:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: question

If Think Secret doesn't know who gave them the info - say it was called into their phone hotline - do they have to comply and remove the info? If this was the Washington Post I'd think they would not?

No, of course not. But, then again, the Washington Post is run by "real" journalists and know better than to run "rumors" that aren't substantiated, nor to divulge "intellectual property" or "company secrets" without just cause. [Just cause isn't "I've got info, I need to share it!", its more like "Hey, I've got info that Apple's defrauding their users by not admitting that their laptops will cause severe sterility (can sterility be severe?) even though these internal memos say they know of the problem!" And, even then, substantiation is required.

slipperfrog
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2002

0

01/05, 03:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
Couple points...

First off, they're only soliciting information. They're not forcing it out of the people who signed the NDAs. They cannot know what information is legitimate and which is not (though they've got an excellent track record).

But it's up to the people who signed the NDAs to keep their stupid mouths shut. Otherwise this is just gossip, and rumour and speculation about upcoming products have been a mainstay of the Mac community for a very long time.

This is simply bullying and I've a feeling they're going to get their backsides handed to them if this actually goes to trial.

slipperfrog
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2002

0

01/05, 03:50pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: question

"But, then again, the Washington Post is run by "real" journalists and know better than to run "rumors" that aren't substantiated,"

Yeah, like Dan Rather and those memos. Boy, those sure were "real" all right. 8^P

Your arguements are specious. If I know something, I can tell it to whomever I like, as long as I am not bound by an NDA or other confidentiality agreement. I can also keep my mouth shut. But the point here is Apple is trying to roll over this site's opeator's first amendment rights.

Should he be forced, legally, to still his tongue just because Apple is afraid people will be less interested in the products if they know what they are before they're announced? Should a corporation's legal rights trump a private citizen's CONSTITUTIONAL rights?

If so, why?

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

01/05, 03:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: couple points

If this is just about the NDAs, then they really can't go after a website, even if they know specifically that the stuff they're printing is coming from someone breaking their NDAs.

The problem for TS is the phrase "alleging that recent postings on the site contain Apple trade secrets". Trade secrets aren't just covered by NDAs. You can get into trouble passing along trade secrets and IP. Imagine if news of the iMac broke months before the iMac was released, such that a competitor came out with a look-alike prior to that WWDC. Apple would've lost (a) the buzz, as well as (b) sales. Which could've strongly changed Apple's turnaround efforts (to the point we could be talking about Apple's imminent demise and low market share and, oh, wait, I forgot, its apple, we always do that, but, hey, maybe they'd have gone under, and then what would we have to fret about...)

jimothy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2000

0

01/05, 03:59pm | report spam | close Reply |
iPod flash

Apparently, the lawsuit does not name any of the articles referencing a flash-based iPod, adding credibility to my contention that those rumors are complete bunk.

medmuse
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2002

0

01/05, 04:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
Well,

common sense would dictate that the signers of the NDAs were not induced to break their agreement as they received no compensation whatsoever. A website is generally protected speech. Of course common sense and the Law don't often go together. A judge might very well compel TS to open its' IP logs and ID the leaker but I can't see that they can be held liable for the anon report. If that were true why doesn't Apple sue MacNN tomorrow for posting secret info about Apple's planned G6 Laptop? "Apple is planning on adapting the G6 chip currently under development for it's laptop line of products."

MarkLT1
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Nov 2002

0

01/05, 04:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
Maybe it doesn't mean..

One thought, is that maybe these items (say the headless iMac), may NOT be released at MacWorld. Look at what has happened in the past month- Wall Street analysts have upped the ante for Apple stock, based on what they beleive will be a strong first quarter in 2005. A big reason for this belief, are the rumored products in the pipe line (specifically, the new headless iMac, and the 'halo' effect from iPods).

Now, zip forward to Tuesday afternoon, if, say, these products AREN'T to be released. Now there is a huge let-down on wall street, and you'll see the stock plummet. Just a thought.

Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN

Joined: Oct 2001

0

01/05, 04:53pm | report spam | close Reply |
Sue me...

...I didn't sign no NDA.

Oh wait... you can't.

Well, you can, but you won't win.

cgmpowers
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2003

0

01/05, 05:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
Retail Gossip

Some of Apple's retail employees (especially the newer ones, who might not have benefited from proper training/threatening) often help fuel speculation.

I've witnessed a couple of Apple retail store employees speculate what might be coming out & even pursueding a customer NOT to buy a product before the expo...just incase a new ibook is released or whatnot.

Chris

p.s. Its Apple's own fault, they build this mystique about their products and blanket the area with NDA's and threats and yet feed the hype at the same time. Its almost a Roswellian approach. I swear there must bee Airforce Generals at Apple somewhere....or at least little blue/aqua martians.

PookJP
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2001

0

01/05, 05:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
This seems unreasonable..

Shouldn't they also sue any publication that discusses Apple rumors, not just online sites? WSJ, for instance, wrote about the Headless iMac based on rumors. Why aren't they being sued?

gwangung
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

01/05, 05:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Ummm....guys...

You should really look up stuff about trade secrets before bashing Apple. Apple DOES have the right to shut down disseminators of trade secrets and demand damages.

DaveyJJ
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2004

0

01/05, 05:57pm | report spam | close Reply |
Legal precident says ...

It's apparently legal precident for Apple to go after TS. An analogy is in order:

If you rob a bank and then give me some of the haul and I know you robbed the bank, then I am an accessory after the fact to the criminal act and can be charged.

That's what Apple is saying TS is guilty of ... TS published confidential information from an inside source at Apple who signed an NDA to not pass info along and can be held liable for any such leaks and TS knew that the info they got was under such an NDA. TS is, therefore, knowingly passing along illegally obtained information and can be charged along with the original info supplier.

Apple may also be using this legal action to find out who leaked such info and I wouldn't want to be that Apple employee (having spent time on campus myself and signed not a few NDAs in my time). Thye may also be furious about product info that may have been leaked that isn't coming to pass at MWSF but shortly thereafter making Apple look like to bad guys here for not introducing the [insert miracle Apple item here] in time for MW.

This wasn't publically available information, it is information that affects Apple's business (i.e., their ability to earn $$$) and under a contract of non-disclosure.

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

01/05, 06:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
c***

Sue the individual(s) leaking the info, not the website that posts it. The website is just reporting information from a source. It's the source that's abusing apple's trade secrets, not the website.

dece
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2003

0

01/05, 06:24pm | report spam | close Reply |
The argument goes...

I used to have this girlfriend I was with so long she knew all my stories, and she had this nasty, stupid habit of finishing them for me. I have some pretty long stories, and it would really bug me to get halfway through and have her just steal my thunder. Even worse, I could see her watching me, waiting to jump on my story as I was telling it. It was really irritating.

TO quote Chris Rock about OJ Simpson, "I'm not saying he should have killed her... but I understand."

slipperfrog
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2002

0

01/05, 06:38pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: sue me

" ...I didn't sign no NDA. Oh wait... you can't. Well, you can, but you won't win."

By jove, I think he's got it! 8^)

slipperfrog
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2002

0

01/05, 06:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: Legal precident says

"If you rob a bank and then give me some of the haul and I know you robbed the bank, then I am an accessory after the fact to the criminal act and can be charged."

TS has no clear way to verify whether a piece of information is coming from someone under an NDA (say, a project engineer) or someone who's privvy to a secret which he shouldn't know (but is not covered by an NDA) or whether it's coming from someone making an educated guess, or whether the person is just making stuff up.

If it turns out that TS is paying people to break their NDAs, they should be shut down and the operator(s) sued. Apple will be within their legal rights to do so. But otherwise, this is an example of a large corporation suing a private citizen to stifle his constitutional first amendment rights.

phillymjs
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2000

0

01/05, 08:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Retail Gossip

"I've witnessed a couple of Apple retail store employees speculate what might be coming out & even pursueding a customer NOT to buy a product before the expo...just incase a new ibook is released or whatnot."

So? I've been selling and/or supporting Macs for 13 years, and I've been giving that same advice for just as long.

With or without rumors, innuendo, gossip, etc.-- unless you absolutely, positively need a new Mac immediately, it's just plain dumb to make a major Apple purchase right before MacWorld Expo.

~Philly

chas_m
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

01/06, 12:53am | report spam | close Reply |
ThinkSecret

I think it's become obvious that the person running/writing ThinkSecret is a developer.

chas_m
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

01/06, 12:56am | report spam | close Reply |
re: Dan Rather

Just a point in reference to the comment about Dan Rather:

It should be noted -- and not forgotten, as it has been -- that although the COPIES of the memos were found to be forgeries, the INFORMATION in the memos was agreed by ALL SIDES to be *accurate.*

Something to think about.

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

01/06, 11:29am | report spam | close Reply |
Law shmall

"If you rob a bank and then give me some of the haul and I know you robbed the bank, then I am an accessory after the fact to the criminal act and can be charged."

Oh god. Now you're a criminal if you know something criminal has happened, even if you weren't the one the performed the act? Give me a break.

The only reason people can even remotely accept this kind of c*** on the internet is because nobody can seem to find the actual criminals. It's easier to blame the ISP, website, etc. for criminal activity then it is to find the person responsible. But that doesn't make it a good solution.

At any rate, apple was stupid to not shut down Think Secret years ago. Anybody that has any clue knows that much everything Think Secret reports on with regard to apple actually happens. It's the only rumor site I read anymore because it's the only one that consistantly gets things right. I'm amazed it's taken apple this long to respond. RIP Think Secret, the corporate dogs are coming for you :-(

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

01/06, 12:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: law shmall

Oh god. Now you're a criminal if you know something criminal has happened, even if you weren't the one the performed the act? Give me a break.

Umm, its not 'Now', its always been that way. For example, if you're driving the getaway car in that bank robbery, and someone gets killed in the bank, you're up for murder, even though you stayed in the car.

The key point is 'knowing' the crime was being committed. Accepting stolen money without knowing it was stolen is not a crime. Knowing it was stolen is.

Blanchard
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2003

0

01/07, 12:57am | report spam | close Reply |
Deceptions...

I can'T wait for next Tuesday. All those lame comments on CNN of utterly deceived Apple fans praying for a headless Mac under 500$...

YEAH SURE...

WOULD YOU LIKE A BMW WITHOUT A ROOFTOP FOR 10 GRANDS WITH THAT?

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/15	Apple asks to sue bankrupt Kodak in...
02/15	Apple voluntarily pulls iPads from...
02/15	Gartner: Apple No 1 vendor in Q4, but...
02/15	Proview: Chinese customs 'unlikely'...
02/15	Cook: iCloud over 100M users, Siri...

Show All

02/15	Apple asks to sue bankrupt Kodak in...
02/15	Apple voluntarily pulls iPads from...
02/15	Gartner: Apple No 1 vendor in Q4, but...
02/15	Proview: Chinese customs 'unlikely'...
02/15	AMD Radeon HD 7750, 7770 GHz Edition...

Show All

02/14	Apple attempting to disrupt Siri hacks...
02/14	Readability iOS app delayed, Android...
02/13	Apple launches 2012 back-to-school...
02/13	Sony Music caught inflating price for...
02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...

Show All

02/14	Refurb. 16GB iPhone 4, now only $259...
02/13	Refurb. Flip UltraHD Pocket Digital...
02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...

Show All

toggle

Apple sues rumor site, adds credibility to rumors

updated 02:20 pm EST, Wed January 5, 2005

Apple sues rumor site

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Support this...

Good Gravy

Tactics

re: tactics

errr..

question

either way...

tough one ....

just more and good press

giddy!

Re: question

Couple points...

re: question

Re: couple points

iPod flash

Well,

Maybe it doesn't mean..

Sue me...

Retail Gossip

This seems unreasonable..

Ummm....guys...

Legal precident says ...

c***

The argument goes...

re: sue me

re: Legal precident says

Re: Retail Gossip

ThinkSecret

re: Dan Rather

Law shmall

Re: law shmall

Deceptions...

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace