Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Sues Think Secret
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ericmooreart said:
Maybe...maybe not. I'm not so sure. It seems to me that this makes more sense to sue someone if its NOT true.
Just a theory of course, but others seems to agree with me.
Hell Yeah Bitch! .com | Apple Lays the smackdown on ThinkSecret
solvs said:
My guess is this is exactly the kind of things they want to prevent... Remember how silent the whole room was when Steve said "only 249$US" for the iPod mini? All the rumors were "99$ to 149$US", so everyone was surprised by the "higher price tag than expected".
Maybe the rumors are spot-on for the specs of the miniMac, but are way too low on price (so we'll all be dissapointed again because of rumors).
rdowns said:
Additionally, it seems that financial analysts are starting watch the Apple rumor sites more seriously. It's not like financial results are getting out early, but having large product launches slip out a couple weeks in advance of a public announcement is not healthy for a company. Although it is unlikely, it could even lead to possible SEC issues, such as insider trading, etc.
Sure Apple is secretive and never really provides a roadmap for anything, but that is their prerogative and major leaks like this screw up their planning. Having your core-fans learning about new products a couple of days early is one thing, but having financial analysts learn about your product strategies from a fan site a few weeks in advance is a bit irritating for Apple I'm sure... hence the lawsuits.
longofest said:
Your Friendly Constitutional Scholar® here to help:
Think Secret will not get 1st Amendment protection here. They do not exist to report the news or provide social commentary. From a court perspective, they do not serve a public interest, even if we all love reading their rumors.
Think Secret is a for-profit business which makes money by soliciting Apple property and knowingly publishing this information without permission from Apple. And the key thing here is for-profit. This is not some charity.
They will not get any freedom of the press protection. They are breaking the law and damaging Apple, so at best, they will be shut down. At worst, the owner of the company is going to get cleaned out.
Either way, if Apple wants to push this, TS and it's owners are done.
Ah, the discussions board haven't let me down yet. Once again, the Apple bashers are showing they have absolutely NO idea on how to run a business and the extent of protection a business has for its trade secrets (For example, you can look on several legal web sites and find that a trade secret owner can prevent various groups from copying their trade secrets--that includes people who knowingly obtain trade screts from people who have no right to disclose them)(Hm. Sounds like THINK SECRET would fall squarely into this category...).
piracy said:
No kidding, you mean like this News Alert I just received from my brokerage company?
Apple Computer Inc (AAPL:NASDAQ)
CORRECTED - New Apple products seen broadening reach
Reuters 5:00 pm January 5, 2005
In Jan. 4 story headlined "New Apple products seen broadening reach," please read in 15th paragraph "... which transmits songs from a computer using Apple's iTunes software to a home stereo system ..." instead of "... which transmits songs from an iPod to a home stereo system ..." (Correcting transmitting device)
A corrected version follows:
By Duncan Martell
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 4 (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc. is widely expected to unveil cheaper portable music players and Macintosh computers next week at its annual trade show as it seeks to change from a niche technology player to the mainstream champion of the "digital life."
Apple rumor Web sites and analysts have been buzzing in recent weeks about an iPod digital music player that uses a relatively inexpensive flash memory microchip to store songs, rather than the more commodious and expensive hard disk drives currently used in the devices, which cost $250 to $600.
Opinions are divided on whether Chief Executive Steve Jobs will also unveil a Macintosh computer for less than $500, excluding a monitor.
An Apple spokesman declined to comment.
Apple now sells more iPods than Macs, with analysts forecasting 4 million or more iPods to be sold in the December quarter, double the number in the prior period for the device, which debuted in 2001.
"A flash-based iPod would be going after what we'd call the low end of the market and could certainly bring more people into the Apple experience," said analyst Tim Bajarin of market research firm Creative Strategies.
That is something that Apple has largely failed to do for years, as its high-design computers have garnered less than 5 percent of global PC sales.
Extremely strong sales of the iPod as well as strong demand for its highly profitable PowerBook notebook PCs have not only been a boon for Apple, but also for its shareholders. Apple stock more than tripled last year from $21.37 on Dec. 31, 2003, and ended 2004 at $64.40.
JPMorgan analyst Bill Shope estimates that Apple could double its market with the introduction of an iPod device costing about $150 or less. He cited research firm IDC's forecast that flash-based digital music players will account for nearly 51 percent of the worldwide market in 2008.
Jobs often uses the annual gathering of the Mac faithful for its biggest product introductions and advances to its iLife suite of photo, music and video software and the Macintosh.
Rumor sites dedicated to all things Apple such as Think Secret and Apple Insider have recently said Apple would introduce a "headless" iMac computer -- without a display -- at Macworld, costing $499, citing sources. Analysts are divided about whether the rumor will pan out.
Bajarin said he was somewhat dubious about the introduction of an iMac costing $500, unless it was designed for uses other than just a traditional PC.
"They could have done that at almost any point in their history," he said.
But in a note to clients, Merrill Lynch analyst Steve Milunovich said such a lower-cost PC, a market that Apple has until now conspicuously avoided, would make sense and could encourage more consumers to switch from Windows-based PCs to the Macintosh.
"Selling just the system unit would cut significantly the cost to switch," Milunovich wrote, adding that such a device would expand Apple's "digital living room" strategy, which it kicked off with its AirPort Express gizmo, which transmits songs from a computer using Apple's iTunes software to a home stereo system.
"Apple needs to build a strong digital consumer franchise based on more than iPod but using iPod as the lever," Milunovich wrote.
I think it's the "Apple=Good Microsoft=Evil" thing.
The people are bashing Apple because, "Hey, Apple are the good guys, they're not supposed to sue people damaging them!"
lol. Remember, people, Apple is a BUSINESS. If TS is illegally leaking information that is hurting apple, they go down. That's all. Apple isn't doing anything wrong.
The people are bashing Apple because, "Hey, Apple are the good guys, they're not supposed to sue people damaging them!"
lol. Remember, people, Apple is a BUSINESS. If TS is illegally leaking information that is hurting apple, they go down. That's all. Apple isn't doing anything wrong.
Apple going after people for this kind of stuff it not new. I remember way back when Apple was coming out with the Mac IICi, the logic board showed up on the front page of Mac World 3 months before its introduction. Well Apple when into a frenzy trying to figure how Mac World got a picture and who internally let it out. Well as it turned out, upon closer look at the picture the serial number could still be seen in the picture.
Well Apple keeps good records of whom gets what when they seed product. Lucky for the employes it was non of their test systems, it turned out to be a unit seeded to a developer. That developer hired some contractors and one of their contractors showed the unit to a MacWorld Editors. Needless to say the developer got in big trouble and so did the contractor, the contractor was black balled in the valley and the developer was cut off future seeds.
MacWorld and Apple settle out of court on the matter since they knowingly published company secrets, plus they had there Own NDA's with Apple since Apple shared pre-leased information with them from time to time.
You asked yourself what they hope to gain by going after thinksecret and others as they have recently. One reason is to make everyone think twice about sharing information they deem confidential. I know a number of people and sites right now who are thinking twice about sharing apple information and software.
The next reason is when product information gets out too soon, prior to a new release it hurt current sales of products. You know this is true we all have done it. We are in the market for a new computer and you hear Apple is coming out with something thats beats the pants off the current product line, what do we do, we wait. If too many people do this Apple gets stuck with product no one wants and has to fire sale it and lose money.
The last reason and most important reason in this day and age is if a company is not diligent about protecting their trade secrets and confidential information they will have trouble going after someone who truly steals and uses the information. What this means, if you go and sue someone who you think took information from you and uses it for their benefit and you can not show the courts you treat all your information confidentially and you actively protect it the courts will not grant you damages.
Case and point, Apple took the Mac GUI from Xerox back in the late 70's and used it for years before Xerox decide to go after Apple. As we all know the case was thrown out, since the judge said that Xerox made no effort to protect their trade secrets for almost 10 yrs. If Xerox went after Apple right away Apple would be paying licensing fees to Xerox right now.
I know some of you do not care since you never made a product and earned your lively hood from the success or failure of that product. If your whole existence relied on something that you developed, marketed and sold you would think twice about saying Apple is bad for going after people who knowingly take and use their information.
Just some food for thought.
Well Apple keeps good records of whom gets what when they seed product. Lucky for the employes it was non of their test systems, it turned out to be a unit seeded to a developer. That developer hired some contractors and one of their contractors showed the unit to a MacWorld Editors. Needless to say the developer got in big trouble and so did the contractor, the contractor was black balled in the valley and the developer was cut off future seeds.
MacWorld and Apple settle out of court on the matter since they knowingly published company secrets, plus they had there Own NDA's with Apple since Apple shared pre-leased information with them from time to time.
You asked yourself what they hope to gain by going after thinksecret and others as they have recently. One reason is to make everyone think twice about sharing information they deem confidential. I know a number of people and sites right now who are thinking twice about sharing apple information and software.
The next reason is when product information gets out too soon, prior to a new release it hurt current sales of products. You know this is true we all have done it. We are in the market for a new computer and you hear Apple is coming out with something thats beats the pants off the current product line, what do we do, we wait. If too many people do this Apple gets stuck with product no one wants and has to fire sale it and lose money.
The last reason and most important reason in this day and age is if a company is not diligent about protecting their trade secrets and confidential information they will have trouble going after someone who truly steals and uses the information. What this means, if you go and sue someone who you think took information from you and uses it for their benefit and you can not show the courts you treat all your information confidentially and you actively protect it the courts will not grant you damages.
Case and point, Apple took the Mac GUI from Xerox back in the late 70's and used it for years before Xerox decide to go after Apple. As we all know the case was thrown out, since the judge said that Xerox made no effort to protect their trade secrets for almost 10 yrs. If Xerox went after Apple right away Apple would be paying licensing fees to Xerox right now.
I know some of you do not care since you never made a product and earned your lively hood from the success or failure of that product. If your whole existence relied on something that you developed, marketed and sold you would think twice about saying Apple is bad for going after people who knowingly take and use their information.
Just some food for thought.
longofest said:
I don't think this is the case.
If you check the various legal websites or textbooks on media law, the First Amendment doesn't extend to publishing trade secrets. One of the groups that are explicitly banned from disseminating trade secrets are people who obtain them through improper means or should have known they were gotten through improper means.
iJWC said:
Look at it this way. Say Dell learns of the $499 iMac and decides to blanket TV with ads for a $449 or $399 complete system that works just great with your iPod all around the days of MWSF. Kids tell their parents of an affordable Mac and the aprents say, Dell is still better (read cheaper).
Or Microsoft learns of iWork and decides to launch a Mac Office rebate program or discount offer to steal their thunder.
quagmire said:
I disagree that a PowerBook G5 announcement would be bigger than the low-cost, headless G4 system. Sure, having the G5 in a portable computer would be nice.
But keep in mind only pro users would buy it. That's a very small share compared to the potential market for the "miniMac".
You really have no idea how people are fed up with Windows/Microsoft problems if you think a PowerBook G5 could even sell at 10% the rate of that miniMac.
Keep CRT monitor, keep USB keyboard, keep USB mouse, keep USB printer, keep high-speed internet connection, drop virus/trojans/spyware-ridden windows box, add miniMac, enjoy a much better computing experience.
The only thing bugging me is that I can't wait for next week, I'm eager to see if those are the real specs, the real price, and what it looks like. Also I'm tired of trying to guess the name of that thing.
Apple has to protect their trade secrets from competitors. If letting a secret out is worth the publicity, then THEY can leak it on purpose. Of COURSE they want to have that control--and have the legal right to enforce NDAs people have agreed to. They've been cracking down on rumors for some time--this latest batch of concrete info was pretty unusual these days.
Now, going after TS is a different question from going after people who signed NDAs. Is TS paying people to break NDAs? Or refusing to take down intellectual property once warned? That would be pretty clear cut. Otherwise, I'd have to see the facts--and if the law is NOT on TS's side, then I'm not surprised at Apple doing what they can. We'll know in time.
I'd hate to see TS go--I've enjoyed the site and the rumors! But even I must admit that some of what goes on with rumor sites is at least questionable. The lawyers were bound to get involved.
And Apple's legal defense of their secrets is not against Apple "fans," it's against Apple competitors. What if Dell has a new low-end ultra-compact Linux desktop getting ready for summer? Now maybe they'll work on changing the style to white and then have a big pre-rollout the day before MacWorld, complete with a new ad campaign about how Macs make no sense when you can have Linux and add Windows any time. The headlines about "Cheapest Mac Ever" never appear, and instead you have "Dell, Apple Prepare Low-End Non-Windows Desktops."
Just an example. EDIT: great minds think alike!
Or it could be about demand for current products in the meantime--or about pricing decisions that haven't been made. Maybe this headless was going to be $599 and then drop during the summer (which would be in line with what I see at Dell.com, and what AI reported). But TS gets inside info of it being $499--which may have been truly planned at one point. Now CNET etc. pick up the $499 story, and Apple has less freedom to go with their final choice of $599. That's $100 times a lot of sales of lost profit... or if they stick with $599, it could mean some lost sales because people felt like they were "promised" $499 by TS. (Some people actually though Apple promised that the original iPod Mini would be $199... or $99!)
But I'm also selfish and have fun with rumors... so I hope TS--and some leaks--do survive
Now, going after TS is a different question from going after people who signed NDAs. Is TS paying people to break NDAs? Or refusing to take down intellectual property once warned? That would be pretty clear cut. Otherwise, I'd have to see the facts--and if the law is NOT on TS's side, then I'm not surprised at Apple doing what they can. We'll know in time.
I'd hate to see TS go--I've enjoyed the site and the rumors! But even I must admit that some of what goes on with rumor sites is at least questionable. The lawyers were bound to get involved.
And Apple's legal defense of their secrets is not against Apple "fans," it's against Apple competitors. What if Dell has a new low-end ultra-compact Linux desktop getting ready for summer? Now maybe they'll work on changing the style to white and then have a big pre-rollout the day before MacWorld, complete with a new ad campaign about how Macs make no sense when you can have Linux and add Windows any time. The headlines about "Cheapest Mac Ever" never appear, and instead you have "Dell, Apple Prepare Low-End Non-Windows Desktops."
Just an example. EDIT: great minds think alike!
Or it could be about demand for current products in the meantime--or about pricing decisions that haven't been made. Maybe this headless was going to be $599 and then drop during the summer (which would be in line with what I see at Dell.com, and what AI reported). But TS gets inside info of it being $499--which may have been truly planned at one point. Now CNET etc. pick up the $499 story, and Apple has less freedom to go with their final choice of $599. That's $100 times a lot of sales of lost profit... or if they stick with $599, it could mean some lost sales because people felt like they were "promised" $499 by TS. (Some people actually though Apple promised that the original iPod Mini would be $199... or $99!)
But I'm also selfish and have fun with rumors... so I hope TS--and some leaks--do survive
apple needs secrets, not necessarily thinksecret
I think that rumors are great and very exciting but, secrecy is what drives apple and all of its new technology and software, if we all knew what was coming up in a few weeks we would never buy from apple because we would wait and wait for the new stuff. i think there is a line that has to be drawn and apple is slowly drawing that line with all of these lawsuits it is filing. they know what they are doing, i mean, its apple. they know that thier revolution is coming and they want it to totally blindside the windoze world, i hope the format c: virus is dropped on the same day as MW that would def be huge. lol.
I think that rumors are great and very exciting but, secrecy is what drives apple and all of its new technology and software, if we all knew what was coming up in a few weeks we would never buy from apple because we would wait and wait for the new stuff. i think there is a line that has to be drawn and apple is slowly drawing that line with all of these lawsuits it is filing. they know what they are doing, i mean, its apple. they know that thier revolution is coming and they want it to totally blindside the windoze world, i hope the format c: virus is dropped on the same day as MW that would def be huge. lol.
Photorun said:
Sorry, but let's face it: if Apple really has a "headless G4 system" coming up, but the price is NOT 500-600$US, how do you think the public and the press will react after the announcement? This is the same scenario as the iPod mini all over again. People get hyped over something, they believe in the rumored specs/price, Apple comes out with the product, but people say "bah, I wanted more/didn't want to pay that price" because the specs/price were already on their mind because of said rumors.
Also, Apple isn't suing people for rumors, they're suing because someone leaked facts (facts that those people only knew because they probably signed NDA or something, which they broke by telling someone at TS).
Who wants to start an over / under on when Think Secret's site will crash with all the increased traffic streaming to it?
I just had the funniest thought after reading that post.
What if Dell DID come out with a $399 Linux PC's, so all the kiddies and their mommies ran out and bought the cheap PC instead of the Mac, set it up, and say, "Now how the heck do you work that thar Terminal thing?" Buy the time people who can't figure out what they're doing spend $200 on Windows XP, they'll be cursing Dell for ripping them off.
What if Dell DID come out with a $399 Linux PC's, so all the kiddies and their mommies ran out and bought the cheap PC instead of the Mac, set it up, and say, "Now how the heck do you work that thar Terminal thing?"
Buy the time people who can't figure out what they're doing spend $200 on Windows XP, they'll be cursing Dell for ripping them off.Dont Hurt Me said:Apple has gone to far, they remind me of a mini-monopoly trying to control everyone and everything around them because the world revolves around Apple
Market share is not in direct relation to your number of users, i.e. you can have a lower market share but more users.
Fictionnal exemple:
- 1990: Microsoft has 9 users, Apple has 1. Apple has 10% marketshare. Great!
- 1995: Microsoft has 95 users, Apple has 5. Apple has dropped to 5% marketshare (even though they have 5 times more users than before).
- 2000: Microsoft has 9900 users, Apple has 100. Apple is now "down to only 1% marketshare, man we're losing everyone and they're switching to MS" but still have 20 times more users than before.
Marketshare != Users base.