Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

theJoKell · Jan 5, 2005, 01:54 PM

It appears their rumors may have been correct after all.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=812

New Apple suit may confirm forthcoming products
By AppleInsider Staff
Published: 02:00 PM EST

In its latest lawsuit seeking to clamp down on leaks, Apple Computer has added credibility to several hot rumors, including plans to offer a cheaper Macintosh and its own line of office software, reports CNet News.com.

The computer company 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, according to court documents seen by CNET News.com.

"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."

"Apple has filed a civil complaint against the owner of ThinkSecret.com and unnamed individuals who we believe stole Apple's trade secrets," Apple said in its statement. "We believe that Think Secret solicited information about unreleased Apple products from these individuals, who violated their confidentiality agreements with Apple by providing details that were later posted on the Internet."

This latest suit is believed to be in response to recently published reports disclosing information on a forthcoming headless iMac, as well as the purported Apple-branded "iWork" productivity suite.

Breaking...

Eug Wanker · Jan 5, 2005, 01:56 PM

Repost: http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...00#post2351000

oic · Jan 5, 2005, 01:56 PM

How is this in any way sane?

When did it become ok to sue the newsman?

Shouldn't they be allowed by law to 'report' anything they hear?

Shouldn't it be up to apple to try to weed out where the information is coming from on their own?

Isn't there some sort of protection that prevents 'news' people from having to divulge their sources?

What a heapacrap.

Apple Pro Underwear · Jan 5, 2005, 02:02 PM

doesn't mean correct

it may mean they are expanding on what they are really offering and getting hope up and etc...

theJoKell · Jan 5, 2005, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by oic:
How is this in any way sane?

When did it become ok to sue the newsman?

Shouldn't they be allowed by law to 'report' anything they hear?

Shouldn't it be up to apple to try to weed out where the information is coming from on their own?

Isn't there some sort of protection that prevents 'news' people from having to divulge their sources?

What a heapacrap.

Yeah but if Think Secret did solicit the information and the act of giving the information was illegal, I think they can be forced to turn over their source. I'm not sure if that's exactly what happened, though. The big news is that it confirms their rumors, though.

mitchell_pgh · Jan 5, 2005, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by oic:
How is this in any way sane?

When did it become ok to sue the newsman?

Shouldn't they be allowed by law to 'report' anything they hear?

Shouldn't it be up to apple to try to weed out where the information is coming from on their own?

Isn't there some sort of protection that prevents 'news' people from having to divulge their sources?

What a heapacrap.

1) Technically speaking, you can sue people whenever you want for whatever reason. I think Apple really isn't concerned about ThinkSecret... but more to the point, they are trying to plug holes in people breaking their DNAs.

2) No, you shouldn't be allowed to 'report' on anything you hear. It's slander, liable, etc. if not true. (Edit, I apologize it that came off "jerkey" sounding)

3) Apple is trying to weed out where the information is coming from... by suing

I think it's a power move by Apple to get press while plugging holes.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 5, 2005, 02:10 PM

Apple has been threatening them for years along with other sites so they can't look surprised. They should be allowed to sue them for posting screengrabs of unreleased software but not just for reporting rumors.

Superchicken · Jan 5, 2005, 02:13 PM

This is gona be the biggest Macworld in a while.

Apple Pro Underwear · Jan 5, 2005, 02:23 PM

APU REPORT:

BREAKING NEWS � OIC smells like ass*

*Confirmed by an anoymous source close to oic.

____________

Still believe in what you just said?

goMac · Jan 5, 2005, 02:40 PM

I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue. My Apple source which isn't anywhere close to software or hardware development told me the Appleworks successor was coming at MacWorld a few days before ThinkSecret posted it.

kmkkid · Jan 5, 2005, 02:50 PM

Freedom of the press down the drain

Chris

JHromadka · Jan 5, 2005, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
2) No, you shouldn't be allowed to 'report' on anything you hear. It's slander, liable, etc. if not true. (Edit, I apologize it that came off "jerkey" sounding)

No, that's not slander or libel. TS et al are rumor sites. Soliciting info is not illegal. If you have the recipe for Coke, email it to me.

Apple trying to find out the insider is one thing, but suing a site for posting rumors is rediculous.

alphasubzero949 · Jan 5, 2005, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
they are trying to plug holes in people breaking their DNAs.

Shouldn't natural selection be taking care of that?

AppleCello · Jan 5, 2005, 03:38 PM

"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."

"Apple has filed a civil complaint against the owner of ThinkSecret.com and unnamed individuals who we believe stole Apple's trade secrets," Apple said in its statement. "We believe that Think Secret solicited information about unreleased Apple products from these individuals, who violated their confidentiality agreements with Apple by providing details that were later posted on the Internet."[/B]

No one is saying anything about ThinkSecret having done something illegal. Read the text, see how TS is mentioned only as a publisher, and that the aim of the suit is to identify the individuals under NDA. Apple just wants TS to dish out any information that might lead to an ID on the leaks.

Could Apple go after TS for damages due to the publishing of this information?? i dont know...

turtle777 · Jan 5, 2005, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by AppleCello:
Could Apple go after TS for damages due to the publishing of this information?? i dont know...

What damages would that be ?
People being anxious to buy a new headless Mac ?

-t

AppleCello · Jan 5, 2005, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by turtle777:
What damages would that be ?
People being anxious to buy a new headless Mac ?

-t

"lost sales due to competitors quickly bringing to market competing products based on this leaked information"

just a guess.

kmkkid · Jan 5, 2005, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by AppleCello:
"lost sales due to competitors quickly bringing to market competing products based on this leaked information"

just a guess.

competitors... lowend headless Mac...

Oh, you mean like every PC maker in history EXCEPT Apple has been doing for years?

Chris

turtle777 · Jan 5, 2005, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by AppleCello:
"lost sales due to competitors quickly bringing to market competing products based on this leaked information"

just a guess.

Mwahahahaha.

Whoever seriously argues like that deserves to be relocated to Redmond.

-t

rozwado1 · Jan 5, 2005, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by AppleCello:
...see how TS is mentioned only as a publisher...
...to identify the individuals under NDA...
...Apple just wants TS to dish out any information that might lead to an ID...

...AAPL wants TS to ID the members under NDA so they get F'd in the A.

Apple Pro Underwear · Jan 5, 2005, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by turtle777:
What damages would that be ?
People being anxious to buy a new headless Mac ?

-t

how about if it hurts stock because it was proclaimed Apple was going to come out with iTsunami for identifying lost loved ones while listening to U2 for only $899!

in the business world, answers are not so simple.

turtle777 · Jan 5, 2005, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
Apple was going to come out with iTsunami

TEH FUNNY ?

-t

Kenneth · Jan 5, 2005, 04:21 PM

Well the Think Secret voicemail number has the same area code where I'm living... hmm.. so TS is located in WA?!

JHromadka · Jan 5, 2005, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by AppleCello:
No one is saying anything about ThinkSecret having done something illegal. Read the text, see how TS is mentioned only as a publisher, and that the aim of the suit is to identify the individuals under NDA. Apple just wants TS to dish out any information that might lead to an ID on the leaks.

Read the 2nd paragraph that you quoted:

"Apple has filed a civil complaint against the owner of ThinkSecret.com and unnamed individuals who we believe stole Apple's trade secrets," Apple said in its statement. "We believe that Think Secret solicited information about unreleased Apple products from these individuals, who violated their confidentiality agreements with Apple by providing details that were later posted on the Internet."

Suing for that is ******** plain and simple.

Spheric Harlot · Jan 5, 2005, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by turtle777:
What damages would that be ?
People being anxious to buy a new headless Mac ?

People being anxious to buy a new Mac for the cheapest possible price, which up until the information broke was available for $1000 (the iBook).

We have loads of people in the store who are fed up and have decided they finally want a Mac, and walk out with a 12" iBook.

Hearing about iWork might prompt customers to wait until it's pre-installed, at which point new models might be available, while Apple sits on remaining inventory (which it then needs to sell at cost or a loss - either way, financial damage, especially since Apple reimburses large resellers for price cuts on last-generation products).

And most of all, it's a matter of principle. They have to go after this, because when something breaks that might *really* be of consequence, such as information regarding new models of such-and-such being held back until inventory is cleared (which has happened oft enough in Apple's recent product history): that could cause Apple a considerable amount in quarterly earnings. Not good for stock, publicity, etc.
They need to have set the precedent, if mostly to discourage that from happening.

-s*

Busemann · Jan 5, 2005, 05:12 PM

If they honestly are concerned about pre-mwsf sales, why sue several weeks before?
There's no way they'll ever find out who leaked this info, and certainly not who put out the Tiger builds anyway..

This is probably not much more than another publicity stunt by apple.

Spheric Harlot · Jan 5, 2005, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by Busemann:
This is probably not much more than another publicity stunt by apple.

who, apart from a couple of geeks, is going to hear about this lawsuit?

The new equipment rumors were all over mainstream press, dude.

Even Spiegel online ran an article about the upcoming hardware.

spatterson · Jan 5, 2005, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by kmkkid:
competitors... lowend headless Mac...

Oh, you mean like every PC maker in history EXCEPT Apple has been doing for years?

Chris

LOL So true

Link · Jan 5, 2005, 05:34 PM

So apple doesn't believe in freedom of press.

heads

spatterson · Jan 5, 2005, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by Link:
So apple doesn't believe in freedom of press.

heads

Basically no... furthermore in the past they only sent cease or desist letters. This time they are taking them to court.

itai195 · 06:31 PM

Originally posted by JHromadka:
Suing for that is ******** plain and simple.

Are you a lawyer? Seems to me companies should be able to protect their trade secrets. Freedom of the press doesn't give them an absolute right to publish anything, and certainly trade secrets do not fall within the same realm as criminal activity. Not that I necessarily think this is a great tactic...

BuonRotto · Jan 5, 2005, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by Link:
So apple doesn't believe in freedom of press.

heads

Has nothing to do with it. They are looking out for themselves. Quite a non sequitur.

Wiskedjak · Jan 5, 2005, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by turtle777:
Mwahahahaha.

Whoever seriously argues like that deserves to be relocated to Redmond.

-t

In other news; Steve Jobs relocates to Redmond.

Wiskedjak · Jan 5, 2005, 06:31 PM

Can Apple force TS to reveal their sources?

iCol · Jan 5, 2005, 07:10 PM

I think Apple has every right to sue, stuff like this can really damage a companies share price.

Rumours circulate that Apple will indtroduce a new revolutionary product (!) which could possibly drive their share price up, if Apple does not deliver this rumoured product then this can make share prices fall off the edge of a cliff after the customer base become dissapointed.

If people are breaking their NDA's then Apple really needs to try to stop this, for their own sake. One of the best ways to stop people breaking these agreements is to stop the websites that use the information to their advantage.

And yes, a rumour like this can make other companise rush a product they had in the works to release early, which can cannibalise sales of the yet unnanounced Apple offering.

IMO

sideus · Jan 5, 2005, 07:19 PM

'bout time TS gets sued.

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Jan 5, 2005, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Can Apple force TS to reveal their sources?

The court can force them yes.

Wiskedjak · Jan 5, 2005, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
The court can force them yes.

I can see how Apple can sue the sources, but I don't understand under what grounds they can sue TS.

theJoKell · Jan 5, 2005, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by Busemann:
If they honestly are concerned about pre-mwsf sales, why sue several weeks before?
There's no way they'll ever find out who leaked this info, and certainly not who put out the Tiger builds anyway..

This is probably not much more than another publicity stunt by apple.

Actually they did find out who leaked the Tiger builds. They're in the process of suing three ADC members right now.

King Bob On The Cob · Jan 5, 2005, 07:47 PM

Now the real question is, does TS know who their sources are really? Maybe thier "source" are making anonymous phone calls from pay phones, or using the anonymous email form.

AppleCello · Jan 5, 2005, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
I can see how Apple can sue the sources, but I don't understand under what grounds they can sue TS.

THis is whats important in this story: sue them for what?

Just sue them for the information that will lead back to the leak or something more (some sort of damages). I have no clue about what to think on this one...

Patrick

hayesk · Jan 5, 2005, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by kmkkid:
competitors... lowend headless Mac...

Oh, you mean like every PC maker in history EXCEPT Apple has been doing for years?

That's only one specific case. What if it was the iPod?

MacMan4000 · Jan 5, 2005, 09:10 PM

<drunken ramble>
I bet steve jobs is the leader of the Terror Squad and hes just pissed that think secret stole his acromyn, "TS". so hes gonna sue the bejesus outta em... then fire the dude who told em about the decapitated mac... and have him drawn and quartered... after first tar and feathering him... twice.
</drunken ramble>

goMac · Jan 5, 2005, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by Kenneth:
Well the Think Secret voicemail number has the same area code where I'm living... hmm.. so TS is located in WA?!

Of course they could be in Snohomish too.

sideus · Jan 5, 2005, 10:01 PM

Apple could have leaked bad info (in this case the $499 Mac) to find out who in the company or outside the company is leaking this stuff to the rumor websites. That would be funny.

lngtones · Jan 5, 2005, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by hayesk:
That's only one specific case. What if it was the iPod?

Apple made the iPod to cannibalize iMac mini sales!@?!?!? Jesus the world has gone mad!

lngtones · Jan 5, 2005, 10:51 PM

I love the rumors that this is actually to divert attention from the REAL offering at MWSF iNuclearReactor Extreme.

Superchicken · Jan 5, 2005, 11:00 PM

No no no, Apple's all about the iPod. iPod extreme... hot lesbian action! Now playing porn though quicktime, but only softcore lesbian stuff, none of this male involved stuff, Apple's a family company after all.

Spheric Harlot · Jan 5, 2005, 11:41 PM

Originally posted by Superchicken:
No no no, Apple's all about the iPod. iPod extreme... hot lesbian action! Now playing porn though quicktime, but only softcore lesbian stuff, none of this male involved stuff, Apple's a family company after all.

I like the way you're coming along.

college life is good for your imagination.

Spheric Harlot · Jan 5, 2005, 11:43 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
I can see how Apple can sue the sources, but I don't understand under what grounds they can sue TS.

If ThinkSecret encourages criminal activity (leaking or theft of trade secrets), then they are complicit. If they are, by soliciting, party to potentially damaging activities, they are liable for damages.

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Jan 5, 2005, 11:46 PM

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
If ThinkSecret encourages criminal activity (leaking or theft of trade secrets), then they are complicit. If they are, by soliciting, party to potentially damaging activities, they are liable for damages.

What is the differnce between wanting to know a secret and criminal activity of posting that information?

If I ask someone at Apple what was going on and they told me what the dirt and was would I be a criminal if I posted what they said on my website?