Apple ahead in secrets case
p2pnet.net News:- It seems Apple has scored the first round in the fight to stop it from compelling PowerPage, AppleInsider and Think Secret to reveal where they gained confidential information relating to new Apple products.
A preliminary ruling says the three must disclose where they got information concerning the releases, says the San Jose Mercury-News.
“Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg refused to extend to the Web sites a protection that shields journalists from revealing the names of unidentified sources or turning over unpublished material,” it says.
And he’ll be the judge listening to arguments, today, from Apple’s attorneys and the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation).
Stay tuned.
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
===================
See:-
San Jose Mercury-News – Apple wins early round over blogs, March 4, 2005
March 4th, 2005 at 6:14 pm
So does that mean any story that does not appear in print (ie in the NY Times print edition) but is on their website as ‘breaking news’ etc etc is now NOT protected by the constitution (free speech)????
if so, I have a feeling the appeal will be instantaneous and supported by a lot of entities not involved with this case at all…lots of amicus briefs me thinks…
TT
March 4th, 2005 at 6:48 pm
It really baffles me how they would do something like this. It’s just so myopic when you get down to it. Apple is one of the few brands that has religiously dedicated customers who are totally fanatical about anything with the brand name on it. Here we have several blog operators, whose love for anything mac prompted them to dedicate their own time and money to build these sites. Moreover, what these sites amount to is a ridiculous amount of free publicity for Apple, creating buzz about new products, so that the market is saturated with customers chomping at the bit to be the first one to own the new mystery product. As it stands now, because they didn’t have the tact to handle it discreetly, they’re taking legal action against some of their biggest proponents, and it makes them look like monsters, much the same as the RIAA.
Depending on how things out I’m of half a mind to contact the site operators and try to convince them to change the sites from pro-apple to anti-apple. What reason do they have to stand by a company that treats its supporters with such blatant disregard? Maybe their idiotic actions will come back to bite them in the ass when people come to realize that ipods are inferior machines designed for form over function.
-Nev
March 4th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
It seems like someone at “Apple Computer Inc.” will be FIRED when it is reveal that it is an Apple Employee.
March 4th, 2005 at 7:07 pm
oh that would be so sweet and poetic…
<crosses my fingers and hopes that it happens>