Apple Sues Over Leak

[Les Kern]

Of course, let me amend my earlier suit.

Too funny.

Not funny. They can and they should. It's one thing to have an obscure web site guess at new Apple releases, and quite another to divulge company plans while under contract. Getting inside information out has a direct result on earnings related to competition. If the iPod had truly leaked out a year before launch, do you think Apple would have had the same success? Nope. The bigger companies like Sony and HP would have beat them to the punch because they would have had more time to plan and more time to feed the media machine with hints of their new devices.
They should find out who did it and sue for damages that will make others think twice.

 

[AidenShaw]

'Tis The Season To Be Hypocritical

It's one thing to have an obscure web site guess at new Apple releases, and quite another...

Hmmmm... A frequent contributor to a rumors site argues that those who actually contribute true information should be punished. Now that's too funny. (Not that I don't agree with you about honoring an NDA, but why follow a rumors site unless you're looking for info that Apple doesn't want you to know?)

A lot of hypocrisy in the Real Harmony thread too - let Apple throw its weight around defending its position in music, yet punish Microsoft by claiming that each and every innovation from Redmond is somehow connected with bribing the Bush DOJ.

Oh, and don't forget to bash Motorola - even while IBM's ineptitude is causing Apple to delay new systems, and to trickle out systems with even minor speed bumps.

Ridicule Microsoft for quality problems, while praising Apple for 10.3.7 (even though it was obviously rushed out to undo some of the damage done by 10.3.6). Mock Microsoft for security bugs, while Apple opens up a security hole in Apache that's simply astounding.

And, of course, ignore real news like Apple's Xsan falls behind schedule....

What an entertaining forum !!

 

[Bandit]

What about iLife?

The same article from appleinsider that mentioned asteroid also said that it was to be released next to a new version of iLife. That is what I am more excited about.

 

[wdlove]

If Apple has a good case then by all means they should sue. The problem will be getting a judgement for damages that cause the other company to sit up and take notice. The amount has to hurt some to be effective.

 

[Gasu E.]

Asteroid-- why

In my opinion, Apple is trying to cool things up by giving such a name of a device. That Asteroid thing isnt exciting enough to silence by law.. There must be another thing..

The reason Apple is suing about Asteroid is precisely because this is a minor product. A lawsuit has the side effect of confirming the veracity of the rumor. They would not want to do this for a product for which they are expecting significant revenues, such as an iPod variant.

Apple is doing this to snuff out and/or intimidate insider rumor sources in general. This is not really about Asteroid.

 

[real_murray]

You can file suit without knowing who? Wow.

Sure you can. Just look at the RIAA. They've been filing "John Doe" lawsuites for a while now. Push the paperwork through now, get a supeona for the names later.

 

[hayesk]

A lot of hypocrisy in the Real Harmony thread too - let Apple throw its weight around defending its position in music, yet punish Microsoft by claiming that each and every innovation from Redmond is somehow connected with bribing the Bush DOJ.

Uhm... what MS Innovations are you talking about? And do you think Apple isn't allowed to fix a hole in their DRM code? They should bend over backwards and contribute money to allow a competitor to take away sales and leech of the iPod's popularity? Please.

Ridicule Microsoft for quality problems, while praising Apple for 10.3.7 (even though it was obviously rushed out to undo some of the damage done by 10.3.6). Mock Microsoft for security bugs, while Apple opens up a security hole in Apache that's simply astounding.

Uhm... you don't really understand the issue do you? Apple didn't open a security hole in Apache - they closed one in their default Apache config. There is no OS hole as the media reported - it was a hole in the config files in Apache - Apple's responsibility is to fix their own config, not anyone elses. Accessing named forks is a legitimate function of the File System and it's up to the server developers to ensure it doesn't get done by those who shouldn't.

And, of course, ignore real news like Apple's Xsan falls behind schedule....

What an entertaining forum !!

What is the point of your post?

If you have a rumour to contribute to the XSan delivery then start a thread, if not, why would we be discussing it? It seems to me that the purpose of this post was not to contribute any useful information, but just to troll and get a reaction. Well, I replied, so I guess it worked.

 

[iMan]

As much as I love OS X and my Power Mac G5, Apple's willingness to unleash their lawyers as much as they do remind me why I still prefer Linux. You must always be a little cautious of big corporations and Apple is just another big corporation that likes to hurt the little guy.

Once upon a time there was a little redheaded computer company that was almost bankrupt. Lucky for them they got comissioned to do some work for Granny developing apps for a completely new computer OS.
Problem was that inside that redhead was a hungry wolf lurking... and the wolf was pretty smart, it just ate the whole OS and before noone could react it spitted out it's own copy (albeit a bad one) even before Granny could get her own to market.

I think Apple has learned a lot about the effects of industrial espionage and how to control it - the hard way. You actually have to be a bit paranoid to be in the niche they are anyway - everyone knows that Apple - eventhough small - are one of the companies innovating the computer industry. That's why we also are so eager to hear rumors about what they are up to

 

[AidenShaw]

And do you think Apple isn't allowed to fix a hole in their DRM code?

What if Apple had figured out a way to play WMA protected content on the Ipod, and then Microsoft tweaked it a bit to disable Apple's "hack"? Would there be a chorus of "Good for Microsoft, it needs to protect its innovations in DRM"? Not likely

You're assuming that Apple's fixed a bug, just like I'm assuming that they deliberately blocked a competitor.

Someday the truth will come out.

Uhm... you don't really understand the issue do you? Apple didn't open a security hole in Apache - they closed one in their default Apache config.

What I don't understand is what difference the technical nature of the problem has on the effect.

As shipped, for quite some time Apple's Apache implementation had a huge security hole. Apple has fixed the problem, does the fact that it was a configuration change rather than a code change mean anything?

What is the point of your post?

It's just amusing how any story of "$COMPANY$ sues", or "$COMPANY$ issues security warning" or "$COMPANY$ blocks competitor" is interpreted differently depending on whether COMPANY is "Microsoft" or "Apple", "Motorola" or "IBM", "RIAA" or....

Just amusing to see the rationalizations, that's all.

 

[absolut_mac]

I agree with you 100%

Apple is doing this to snuff out and/or intimidate insider rumor sources in general. This is not really about Asteroid.

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Apple knew that by filing this lawsuit they would be confirming the introduction of a new product prior to its release. Something that they obvioulsy don't want to get into the habit of doing.

IMHO this whole episode is just an excuse for Apple to file a few subpoenas so that they can get the names of those Apple employees who are leaking inside info, and sue/fire them in order to intimidate future *leakers* into thinking twice before doing so.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, if rumors based on known outside info - eg flash based iPods - abound, I personally don't see anything wrong with it, and doubt that Apple can do anything about it either, other than file frivolous law suits.

On the other hand, leaking inside proprietary info falls into the category of industrial espionage and Apple has every right to defend itself against such. Especially in light of the confidentiality agreements signed by every single one of their employees.

 

[absolut_mac]

Re: Paul Thurrott

Good Lord!!! Has our friend Paul ever been right???!!!

Every circus has a lead clown, and Paul is MS's lead clown. His sole purpose is to entertain the masses until MS introduces Longwait, oops I mean Longhorn.

 

[swissmann]

I personally still hope that the iPod flash rumors are also true if it is indeed this Asteroid product that is the center of the law suit.

 

[TednDi]

I think iPoena sounds better

I think you are right!!

iPoena! new for the Holidays!

Now with larger capacity damages!

get one for the lawyer in your house!

 

[TednDi]

BAH iHumbug

I think that this holiday season the folks at Apple will be visited by the ghosts of apple's past (Lisa) the ghost of apples present (newton) and the ghost of apple's future (the ever dreaded MSAPPLE)


C'mon take the chains off guys.

 

[TranceClubMusic]

Apple NEVER reads Rumors Sites! HA HA HA HA

HA HA HA
Everyone on this Forum has ALWAYS said...............Apple never reads Rumor Sites! Well I beg to differ and I think Apple reads these sites a whole lot more then what most people think.

 

[sinisterdesign]

You can file suit without knowing who? Wow.

Then in that case I am suing an unknown party for an unknown reason for an unknown amount in damages. I will amend the complaint once I find out who did what and decide on the appropriate penalty.

WHAT??!? you're suing me?? how dare you! you have NO proof that i was even AT that unspecified place when i was supposedly doing the afforementioned unspecified crime. i'll see you in sn undetermined court...and bring your unknown lawyer....you'll need them.

 

[desdomg]

I think we should boycott the sites in question untill the hand over the names.

Interesting too that MacRumours is not listed. I guess it shows how low it has slipped .... no real sources anymore just news from outside.

 

[Doctor Q]

[Update 2] The Mac Observer reports that on December 14 Apple received court approval to serve subpoenas on AppleInsider.com, PowerPage.org, and ThinkSecret.com, requesting "documents, images and communications" that might identify the person or persons who leaked Asteroid details.

The article quotes from Apple's complaint:

To succeed, Apple must develop innovative products and bring those products to market in advance of its competitors. If Apple competitors were aware of Apple's future production information, those competitors could benefit economically from that knowledge by directing their product development or marketing to frustrate Apple's plans.

AppleInsider.com, PowerPage.org, and ThinkSecret.com themselves are not defendants in Apple's suit, but particular individuals at those sites are named as possible sources of information in finding the person(s) responsible for the leak. Apple has 60 days to identify each defendant in the lawsuit, which seeks "unspecified monetary damages in excess of US$25,000 as well as punitive damages".

 

[MattG]

[Update 2] The Mac Observer reports that on December 14 Apple received court approval to serve subpoenas on AppleInsider.com, PowerPage.org, and ThinkSecret.com, requesting "documents, images and communications" that might identify the person or persons who leaked Asteroid details.

The article quotes from Apple's complaint:AppleInsider.com, PowerPage.org, and ThinkSecret.com themselves are not defendants in Apple's suit, but particular individuals at those sites are named as possible sources of information in finding the person(s) responsible for the leak. Apple has 60 days to identify each defendant in the lawsuit, which seeks "unspecified monetary damages in excess of US$25,000 as well as punitive damages".

Wow. This could get messy.

 

[SiliconAddict]

IMHO this whole episode is just an excuse for Apple to file a few subpoenas so that they can get the names of those Apple employees who are leaking inside info, and sue/fire them in order to intimidate future *leakers* into thinking twice before doing so.

Naa the whole episode is Steve throwing a temper tantrum. Lets be frank for a second. Jobs has a history of going nuts about someone or some company *coughs*ati*coughs*Toshiba*coughs* upstaging him. You can bet cash this was going to debut in January. All of a sudden the cat is out of the bag and the shinyness on Steve's new toy isn't there anymore. Is this a way to put the fear of god into the people doing the leaking? Sure but don't think that Steve's ego didn't have something to do with it.
And then there is the whole going after the rumor site's sources which IMHO is a serious slap against freedom of the press. I hope someone takes on Apple. Is there not legal precedent on the right to protect one's sources?

 

[Omad0n]

And then there is the whole going after the rumor site's sources which IMHO is a serious slap against freedom of the press. I hope someone takes on Apple. Is there not legal precedent on the right to protect one's sources?

From the second update it would appear that Apple isn't going after the sources, just the people who actually leaked the info.

 

[Doctor Q]

Apple's court filings provide other interesting information, such as that there may be more than one person doing the leaking, that he/she/them may be Apple employee(s), and that the leaks may be continuing.

Or maybe they have to say those things just in case it turns out to be the case.

 

[Yvan256]

What if Apple had figured out a way to play WMA protected content on the Ipod, and then Microsoft tweaked it a bit to disable Apple's "hack"? Would there be a chorus of "Good for Microsoft, it needs to protect its innovations in DRM"? Not likely.

If Apple did reverse-engineering to play protected WMA files and then Microsoft changed something that broke Apple's hack, Apple would simply try to hack it again, but wouldn't complain to Microsoft about it. A hack is a hack, nothing's guaranteed.

What's happening between Apple and Real is that Real hacked his way, Apple changed it, and now Real is bitching about it instead of just shutting up and going back to try hacking it again. Apple refused to license their stuff to Real, Real acts like a garage hacker, and then acts all surprised that Apple reacts about what they're doing.

Well, though luck Real, you knew what you were getting into.

 

[Yvan256]

HA HA HA
Everyone on this Forum has ALWAYS said...............Apple never reads Rumor Sites! Well I beg to differ and I think Apple reads these sites a whole lot more then what most people think.

Really?

Ok then.

WHERE'S MY HEADLESS, LOW-COST G5 MAC COMPUTER? WHERE, WHERE, WHERE?

I'd settle for a nicely-equipped eMac G5 if the prices don't go up (the G5/1.6MHz and Radeon 9600/64MB would be ok for the eMac, but I do wish it was 128MB VRAM, at least as a BTO option). I only hope the superdrive model is LightScribe-capable (that thing looks too cool).

 

[bignumbers]

My theory is this isn't about the flash iPod, but the music interface thing that popped up a couple weeks back. The info and drawings were very detailed, and so consistent they seemed to have one source. The flash iPod stuff is bits and pieces from all over, not to mention a logical product addition that shouldn't surprise anyone. Same with the rumored 5GB iPod mini. But the music interface is somewhat out of left field, and as I said, specific.

Yahoo - I was right! Do I win a prize?

I'm torn about the story as it now stands. Apple can, and should, fight to keep their secrets. (And that's said by someone who reads the rumor sites daily.) It sounds like someone leaked something a little too significant for their own good.

But these rumor sites are (minor) legitimate news publications. I'm HUGE on freedom of the press. Publishing secret info isn't illegal - there's a long legal history to back that up. I suspect these sites are too small to have legal representation to fight the subpoenas, but if they could they should win. Freedom of the press is a Very Good Thing (TM) and even in the relatively little world of Mac news it shouldn't be ignored.

But again, I can't blame Apple at all for doing what they're doing. Maybe some good lawyer will take up the rumor sites case pro-bono.