PDA

View Full Version : Apple wins lawsuit - No more rumors?

Gizmo
03-11-2005, 03:38 PM
Check this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7160519/) out.

Here is a quote from the article:

“The rumor and opinion mills may continue to run at full speed,” Kleinberg wrote in the 13-page ruling. “What underlies this decision is the publishing of information that at this early stage of the litigation fits squarely within the definition of trade secret."

Strike a blow to Apple enthusiasts everywhere. :(
JackAxe
03-11-2005, 07:49 PM
WE'RE SCREWED!!! :eek:

When I get my Apple developer info, there's a legal warning always included. I was also required to agree to several terms before becoming a developer, so these monkeys must have been smoking something when they decided to leak trade secrets.

<]=)
Tam Hanna
03-12-2005, 06:19 AM
This looks like the end of the blogosphere. If the data would have been leaked to a newspaper, the source would not have been disclosed. Poor guy!
JackAxe
03-12-2005, 04:10 PM
I was wondering about that. Wasn't there a recent case where the White House was trying to force a couple of reporters to disclose their sources?

<]=)
zackepceo
03-13-2005, 06:12 PM
You guys will still have me. :p
SamuraiCatJB
03-13-2005, 06:22 PM
WE'RE SCREWED!!! :eek:

When I get my Apple developer info, there's a legal warning always included. I was also required to agree to several terms before becoming a developer, so these monkeys must have been smoking something when they decided to leak trade secrets.

<]=)

I get the same from nVidia... and still only talk about what is presented at another site (nvnews, inquirer, 3dguru, etc). I am very good about obeying legal warnings. I treat it the same way I do classified data. I can talk about what I see on CNN and Discovery channel (which is sometimes more than what I expect) and that is it. :)
winexprt
03-13-2005, 07:15 PM
I was wondering about that. Wasn't there a recent case where the White House was trying to force a couple of reporters to disclose their sources?

<]=)

Yes.
It had to do with the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's name into the public domain, this endangering her life. This was seen as payback for her husband Joseph C. Wilson's very public critisism of Bush's Niger Yellowcake claims in the now infamous State of The Union speech.

Most people in the know, including my media & journalism Professor who writes for the NYT, believes this leak eminated from the very top. Namely Dick Cheney.

More about this here: http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/09/02/the_valeri.php

LOL..this is getting dangerously close to a "Political" discussion. Most of us have moved here for that juicy stuff :p : http://www.starbuckk.net/phpBB2/index.php
SamuraiCatJB
03-13-2005, 07:32 PM
Yes.
It had to do with the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's name into the public domain, this endangering her life. This was seen as payback for her husband Joseph C. Wilson's very public critisism of Bush's Niger Yellowcake claims in the now infamous State of The Union speech.


not just endangered her life... broke the law. Please do not forget this because it is a core of any case. The release of a CIA NOC's name into the public domain is a federal crime of treason. It is only topped by attempted or successful assassination of an elected official.

However, back to the apple case. Again, breaking of a non-disclosure agreement is the breaking of a contract and can be punishable based on money endangered or lost. It is still very serious. It gives foreknowledge to competitors to direction of new concepts. This could seriously undermine a business if the competitor can match the release using the foreknowledge.