• This forum is for posting news stories or links from rumor sites. When you start a thread, please include a link to the site you're referencing.

    THIS IS NOT A FORUM TO ASK "WHAT IF?" TYPE QUESTIONS.

    THIS IS NOT A FORUM FOR ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW TO USE YOUR MAC OR SOFTWARE.

    This is a NEWS and RUMORS forum as the name implies. If your thread is neither of those things, then please find the appropriate forum to ask your question.

    If you don't have a link to a news story, do not post the thread here.

    If you don't follow these rules, then your post may be deleted.

Apple is set to attack the first ammendment

Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
63
Reaction score
2
Points
8
Location
Warwick, UK
It's sad to see Apple going that way although as you get bigger you have to protect your self, but about some FireWire thing for Garageband.....
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
184
Reaction score
0
Points
16
thats pretty crummy of apple...anyone have a rebuttle to the article to make my day better? Lol.

Smeshy
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
1,509
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Location
Cape Cod, MA
Your Mac's Specs
iBook
you can't take others information. period.
 
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
3,169
Reaction score
164
Points
63
Location
North NJ
Your Mac's Specs
i dont have no mac's
he posted that all in a blog, a blogger is not necessarily a journalist, bloggers should be subject to the interpretation of the first ammendment as to wether their speech is fair or just or legal.

when real journalists get insider information about huge developments in murders etc and they post them in the papers they are protected by the first ammendment rights only to a certain degree...if push comes to shove and the government (either the people or the defendant) need them to reveal their source and they do not they have two choices. a) give up their source or, b) go to jail for contempt of court and (something else)

also why isnt he pissing and moaning about the patriot act?? the act that would not be passed (and didnt pass a few times) until it was given a pretty name. the same act that limits our first ammendment and other constitutional rights. at this rate he might as well pin his current situation on the prior lack of ability for the CIA and FBI to communicate with eachother which let the 9/11 attack happen. i think this guy should sue the fbi for getting sued by apple. i think this guy is an idiot

-chris

ps. i think i watch too much lawandorder.
and also this is all my interpretation and not necessarily 100% correct information, just what i know and believe
 
OP
techster82
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
586
Reaction score
17
Points
18
Location
Lexington, KY
Your Mac's Specs
Unibody Macbook 2.0, Blackberry Bold (Good Riddance iPhone)
Well, there is a difference between what you "think" you know and what you believe. From other things I have read, I believe this guy is an online journalist, not just a blogger. His argument is that any type of journalist, whether a whack job from the Washington Post, or an everyday guy who started his own site, you deserve the same type of protection. You bringing up the Patriot Act and trying to compare it to this is really reaching. The Patriot Act was instituted with the end result being lives saved. Withholding who told you about a firewire music box pales when compared to information on terrorist activities.
 
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
539
Reaction score
17
Points
18
Location
Washington
Your Mac's Specs
Macbook Pro 2.6 GHz, 4 GB, 200 GB, 256MB Vid
apple is making a big mistake here.................................. :eek:neye:
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
10,345
Reaction score
597
Points
113
Location
Margaritaville
Your Mac's Specs
3.4 Ghz i7 MacBook Pro (2015), iPad Pro (2014), iPhone Xs Max. Apple TV 4K
This guy a moron who is simply upset that he got caught. He's no journalist, he's a guy who illegally obtained corporate information that did not belong to him and blabbed about. Serves him right. I hope he loses.

BTW, HERE is another point of view on his situation.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2004
Messages
277
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
Texas
Your Mac's Specs
Mid-2011 MBP 13" i5
Dont get me started on what Microsoft does in their business dealings...Makes this little Apple tiff look like two kids on a playground fighting over a candy bar.
 
OP
techster82
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
586
Reaction score
17
Points
18
Location
Lexington, KY
Your Mac's Specs
Unibody Macbook 2.0, Blackberry Bold (Good Riddance iPhone)
Yeah, I agree that Microsoft has more than its fair share of bullying the little guy, but it seems that now Apple is reading the Microsoft Employee Manual on how to conduct business. For a company that prides itself on its customer base and being the little guy, this sure doesn't look good for them. I mean its over garageband. I opened that program one time because I was curious what an African Congo Drum sounded like.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
1,416
Reaction score
57
Points
48
Location
Michigan, USA
Your Mac's Specs
1.67 Ghz 17" PB w/1 GB Ram; 400 MHz PM G4, 366Mhz iBook Firewire, Nano 4GB Black
This isn't a "major mistake" by Apple, in my opinion it is a dumb thing to go after, but there is nothing big about it. This isn't some attack on the first amendment either (and so far, the courts understand that). I doubt that Steve Jobs is aware of this, and it wouldn't matter if he was. Trade secrets are important in any industry, be it plumbing, papermaking, or electronics.
 
K

Kokopelli

Guest
Hmm... Well first of all Apple is not treading upon the first amendment. the shield laws perhaps, due process as well, but not the first amendment. The first amendment prohibits the government from interfering with your right to publish what you want. It does not however prohibit pursuit of the publisher where laws have been broken.

shield laws generally protect a journalist from revealing his sources unless:
1) protecting the source is detrimental to the Plaintiffs claim.
2) the plaintiff has exhausted all other avenues of getting the infromation
3) It is in the public's best interest to keep the source confidential.
4) the case upon whcih the source is needed has been shown to have merit.

In this case the defendant recieved one or more slides from a presentation marked "Apple need-to-know confidential". Now there is enough evidence to argue that a violation of law has occured in the transfer of these items to the journalists. (that covers 4) This has not yet been confirmed in a court of law, but in order to do that you need a defendant... (point 1) Shield laws protect journalists and their sources where the information is in the public's best interest (cigarettes cause cancer as an example). A firewire musical device does not fall under this though. (point 3)

Where Apples case is a bit weak is that they have failed to show that they have exhausted all other avenues of getting the information before attempting to get it from the journalists. So point 2 may not be covered and it sort of surprises me that this point was not addressed in the ruling as far as I can tell.

Keep in mind they are subpoenaing these people for the sources of the information, they are not "suing" them in the conventional use of the term. They want to know who gave them the info, not money.

So while Apple is not pure as snow in this in my opinion, this guy is a frickin blowhard. Given the amount and nature of the information and the fact that the slides were marked confidential there is significant evidence to show that he was aware that his source was violating the law in providing this information. This was not a rumour/leak we are talking about, these were actual slides from a presentation marked confidential, including exact specs.
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28
Your Mac's Specs
Mini 09, MBP 12, MBA 15
techster82 said:
You bringing up the Patriot Act and trying to compare it to this is really reaching. The Patriot Act was instituted with the end result being lives saved. Withholding who told you about a firewire music box pales when compared to information on terrorist activities.

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security. - Ben Franklin
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
10,345
Reaction score
597
Points
113
Location
Margaritaville
Your Mac's Specs
3.4 Ghz i7 MacBook Pro (2015), iPad Pro (2014), iPhone Xs Max. Apple TV 4K
That's an original quote and certainly adds weight to your argument.......[/sarcasm]
 
M

MJGUK

Guest
Kokopelli is entirely correct.

The first Amendment essentially grants the right to freedom of speach and in this context freedom of the press, it does not however, provide immunity against libel, slander or any other defamation related torts of which you can be sued for.

When considering the case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), it is important to remember that 'actual malace' must be shown in order for libel cases to now be successful and Apple will have to prove this.

Of course, critically they also have to prove that the defamation is untruthful, in order to protect that Amendment.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
175
Reaction score
4
Points
18
Your Mac's Specs
17" 2.8ghz Macbook Pro, 32GB iPhone 4
One person who commented on his blog said it best.

(taken from the COMMENT list)

*yawn*

Oh god, not the old >"We bloggers are journalists too, so we
can post whatever rumor we hear without fact-checking and are
still protected by the constitution"-tirade again ...

Okay, by the numbers:

1. Apple announces a product. That's news. You publish it.
That's reporting. You review the product, expose its possible
flaws, research how the product came about, who was involved
in its conception, how it might affect the competition or the
marketplace, etc. That's investigative reporting.

2. Apple doesn't announce anything. You post a story about
what Aplle might announce. That's gossip.

3. Apple doesn't announce anything. You get inside information
about a new product that is obviously not for public
consumption (because if it were, Apple would have puiblished
it). You publish it anyway. That's revealing trade secrets. You get
subpoenaed to reveal your "source" and start whining about the
First Amendment. That's lame.

Really, I don't understand how you people can invoke the term
"journalism" and keep a straight face every time when all you do
is chewing the fat.
Posted by: Jens T. Posted on: 04/06/06
 
B

Berman

Guest
the guy is an idiot who doesn't understand the law. i am a lawyer, i should mention.

A Santa Clara County judge decided that journalists and their sources lose constitutional protection when they publish information that a business classifies as a "trade secret." The irony here is that a large corporation can claim that their cafeteria menu is a "trade secret" then sue your *** off if you post it on your blog. The EFF filed a petition to have that decision overturned.

a cafeteria menu cannot be a trade secret. there are specific requirements in order for something to qualify, and a cafeteria menu does not count.

he re-posted inside information from a product not yet released, which can easily pass the test to become a trade secret. this isn't about the 1st amendment, its about an idiot who violated the current ip laws.
 
OP
techster82
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
586
Reaction score
17
Points
18
Location
Lexington, KY
Your Mac's Specs
Unibody Macbook 2.0, Blackberry Bold (Good Riddance iPhone)
For anyone interested, Apple lost this case today. Congrats to the little guy.
 
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
539
Reaction score
17
Points
18
Location
Washington
Your Mac's Specs
Macbook Pro 2.6 GHz, 4 GB, 200 GB, 256MB Vid
techster82 said:
For anyone interested, Apple lost this case today. Congrats to the little guy.

lol. thought so.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Arizona, USA
Your Mac's Specs
iMac 4GB RAM 250 GBHD, MacBook Black. 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. 1GB memory. 120GB hard drive.
i am with Kokopelli and MJGUK!

Lets talk for a minute about how MS is strong arming Yahoo! Talk amongst yourselves haha.
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top