I'm from the Netherlands. That may sound like a weird statement to start a column with-- don't worry, at the end of this week's Sunday Eve Column you'll understand why I put my nationality so bluntly up front.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2005-09-03
Member since:2005-06-29
You not liking NDAs is not a reason for complaining a company in-forces them
It's not about me not liking NDAs. Not at all. It's about me not liking how Apple is trying to stymie free speech by forcing journalists to disclose sources. That is very dangerous, for the reasons explained in my above post.
If Apple can force journalists to disclose their sources, what is stopping Nixon II from forcing the Washington Post to disclose who Deep Throat II is? You see how dangerous thi s is?
Furthermore, sites like apple insiders and other rumor sites, aren't news sites.
Decides who? Why is AppleInsider not a newssite, but CNet is? On what grounds do you make the difference?
They have no right to publish stuff that was obtained through improper channels.
So, Washington Post should have ignored Deep Throat?
Member since:2005-11-06
Furthermore, sites like apple insiders and other rumor sites, aren't news sites.
Decides who? Why is AppleInsider not a newssite, but CNet is? On what grounds do you make the difference?
Decide for yourself:
http://daringfireball.net/2006/03/annals_of_journalism
Member since:2005-07-06
They have no right to publish stuff that was obtained through improper channels.
Just like how news sites have no right to publish information about NSA wiretapping in the United States, which was leaked improperly?
If you are going to post something about a forth coming product to the level of a rumor, it better becoming from a press release or approved interview.
Yes, I'd like to get all my news from press releases and approved interviews.
Yes, we all like to read a rumor, but we have no right to know that info. But a company like apple definitely has a right to find out where it came from so they can take action.
Apple's rights end at the journalist's nose. They have all the rights in the world to pursue people who break their NDAs, but not up to the point on when they are infringing on someone else's right to free speech.
If a site was called "defenseinsider" and got leaked rumors on military hardware from people who broke NDAs, do you think the Government and contractors have no right to track down that person?
People leak info on military hardware all the time. The Pentagon generally doesn't go and sue media establishments because of it.
Member since:2006-04-05
Apple's rights end at the journalist's nose. They have all the rights in the world to pursue people who break their NDAs, but not up to the point on when they are infringing on someone else's right to free speech.
This is up to the courts to decide whether it's a case of freedom of speech or intermediating/facilitating the leakage of trade secrets.
The fact that you are a journalist doesn't make you immune to the laws. You can't publish trade secrets, weapon schematics or drug recipes and expect not to be prosecuted.
Member since:2006-02-27
First, the part of the Netherlands constitution is no different then what the constitutions of most democratic countries have.
Except it's the law in Netherlands and not in other countries. And that it's an expression of the beliefs of the people of that nation. And that that nations beliefs hold that level of equality and democracy as a given. So other than being different in most real ways it is exactly the same. Like orange juice is the same as water, only different.
Secondly, and this is in no way a dis on the Netherlands, just wanting to explain something. What may sound like big news or well known in the Netherlands, will probably be a completely unknown thing to much of the world.
Except I knew what he was talking about. I do not live in Netherlands. I have never been to Netherlands. I live in the US. I simply pay attention to the news.
Furthermore, if you had a company, would you want your employees leaking info, especially if it could cause the competition to react early and thus torpedo your product before launch and maybe destroy your company?
He has a company. You are visiting it right now.
If a site was called "defenseinsider" and got leaked rumors on military hardware from people who broke NDAs, do you think the Government and contractors have no right to track down that person?
They have the right to track that person down. That they have that right is not in question. The question is do they have the right to compel a reporter to provide them that information? Having an NDA does not confer special rights beyond the two people who enter into that contract.
Would you want to live in a country where every company that has the money to pay lots of lawyers can be sure they can silence their detractors? Do I have the right to expect newspapers to be able to publish information that is not contained in carefully worded press releases? Should all information only come from the official sources? Do you trust the official sources to always tell you everything you need to know?
Member since:2005-06-29
Except it's the law in Netherlands and not in other countries.
Exactly, it might be the same as the similar paragraph in the US constitution, but it is completely different at the same time. The US constitution says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The American paragraph speaks for the government; while the Dutch variant speaks of the whole society; not only the government, but also individuals.
They seem the same, but are completely different at the same time.
Member since:2005-08-18
"Secondly, and this is in no way a dis on the Netherlands, just wanting to explain something. What may sound like big news or well known in the Netherlands, will probably be a completely unknown thing to much of the world."
It's a quite well-known event actually, at least in Europe.
Edited 2006-04-10 10:14
Member since:2006-04-13
He may have lost it, but you never had it.
1. That part of their constitution IS unique. There is no such antidiscrimination language in the US Constitution. Attempts at getting such language passed (such as the Equal Rights Amendment) have failed. If it were spelled out that clearly in the US Constitution, women and blacks wouldn't have had to fight for voting rights nearly as hard, and the whole debate over gay marriage would be over.
2. Just because you're a sheltered American who's never heard of the assassinations in the Netherlands, don't assume it's not world news. I'm an American, and I saw reports of these on CNN and heard updates on NPR and the BBC.
3. I don't think the guy said he doesn't like NDAs. The issue is that journalists haven't signed one. Apple needs to enforce its own NDAs and not persecute those who are just reporting information.
Apple has the right to track down the people who leaked the info, but journalists have the ethical right to protect their sources.
Member since:
2005-07-06
First, the part of the Netherlands constitution is no different then what the constitutions of most democratic countries have. I don't know when yours was put in place though, I'm guessing its a newer one, unlike the US constitution which took a few upgrades to get it there. I don't see the need for calling it out like it is somehow different then many other countries. I'm also sure like any other countries, its implementation doesn't always work as well as what is stated.
Secondly, and this is in no way a dis on the Netherlands, just wanting to explain something. What may sound like big news or well known in the Netherlands, will probably be a completely unknown thing to much of the world. Your country is very small and no news within it travels very far. So its very hard for people to follow your story since they have zero idea of what you are talking about. I would guess only those from the Netherlands and those regions right around it have any idea what you were talking about. It has to be a really really big event with some global consequences to go far. I have zero idea of what you were talking about for events in the Netherlands. I would guess the bulk of people here are in the same boat.
Anyways. To the later part. Yes, people do give apple to much slack on stuff. When they do something its fine, but if MS was to do it, MS is evil. That does bother me and needs to stop. And as a mac user it bothers me more to see the insane mac users go off like that how Apple is so great.
But on the subject of NDAs, its simple. Companies have them, probably most all tech companies do, I don't want to think about how many I have to obey. If you don't want to sign one, you just don't work for that company. Very simple. If someone does break one, a company has every right to take action. What you see as minor may have huge implications for the company. Also all their suppliers and so forth that are involved. It does effect stock prices and so forth. Also there is zero reason for this to be leaked.
The whole reason apple has succeeded so much in the last few years is they run a tight ship. They don't produce vapor ware, or leave people hanging. Thats how it should be, say nothing till your shipping. Also means you don't let people down. (as in people rumor that such and such device is coming, interest gets driven up, then it doesn't happen and people are for some reason mad at apple).
You not liking NDAs is not a reason for complaining a company in-forces them. Without them and the trust between people and companies created by them, industries such as the tech industry would move very slow.
Furthermore, sites like apple insiders and other rumor sites, aren't news sites. They have no right to publish stuff that was obtained through improper channels. If you are going to post something about a forth coming product to the level of a rumor, it better becoming from a press release or approved interview. Yes, we all like to read a rumor, but we have no right to know that info. But a company like apple definitely has a right to find out where it came from so they can take action. If a site was called "defenseinsider" and got leaked rumors on military hardware from people who broke NDAs, do you think the Government and contractors have no right to track down that person?
Furthermore, if you had a company, would you want your employees leaking info, especially if it could cause the competition to react early and thus torpedo your product before launch and maybe destroy your company? That may sound extreme, but companies put a ton of money into some products, and if someone is able to react before it, they could loose everything.