Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 20th Dec 2007 10:22 UTC
Legal As we say in Dutch, de kogel is door de kerk: Think Secret will cease all activities after reaching a settlement with Apple in a lawsuit Apple had filed against the website. In exchange for closing down Think Secret, Nick DePlume, its owner, will not have to reveal its sources to Apple. The press release on the Think Secret website reads: "Apple and Think Secret have settled their lawsuit, reaching an agreement that results in a positive solution for both sides. As part of the confidential settlement, no sources were revealed and Think Secret will no longer be published." My take: I have respect for the way DePlume protected his sources; very commendable. I have, however, little respect for Apple in this case (I have written, rather controversially, about it before), and it just scares the living daylights out of me that a company can exert this much power over independent websites.
Thread beginning with comment 292492
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Timing...
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 20th Dec 2007 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Timing..."
Member since:

What's keeping the other ten articles on the submission queue?


In case you haven't noticed, contrary to you, possibly, I have a LIFE to run, a job to go to, a social life to manage, a university study to complete, parents to help, a home to maintain and keep clean, an ass and a couch to sit on, tea to drink, a cat to pet, a car to maintain, a party at my place saturday eve to organise, ..., ....

I don't sit behind my computer all day long just to please YOU, I do it to PLEASE MYSELF.

I'm sorry for the snappage, other people, but I can't help it. This morning, I emptied the submissions queue by removing those I don't want to publish, and by publishing the remainder (two in this case). After clearing the queue, I did a quick round along my favourite few websites, including the Dutch Mac website I visit daily, where I encountered this story. I posted it because not only is it a follow up to an earlier story I wrote, but also because people are clearly interested in this stuff.

There is no conspiracy here, you annoying little Apple fanboy, just what I always do: clear the queue, post whatever's worthy, and then do a round to see what other stuff you readers missed/did not submit. I've had it up to HERE with your nonsense, meianeriogn, just go get a goddamn life instead of annoying me with your pointless little "oh-my-god-Thom-is-anti-apple-and-eats-babies" nancying around. Conspiracy idiot. Go spot black helicopters or get abducted by aliens or something.

Glad I got that off my chest. Sorry to everybody else.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Timing...
by galvanash on Thu 20th Dec 2007 18:44 in reply to "RE[3]: Timing..."
galvanash Member since:

I don't always agree with your views on technology and such, but on this one I whole-heartedly commend you. Trying to placate net brats is an exercise in futility.

I REALLY hate the mentality that is developing on the net as of late (or maybe its always been this way - I might just be getting older and crankier)... People are so spoiled by the something-for-nothing state of things that they start demanding they get it THEIR way - and screw everyone else. I have had thoughts of starting websites in the past but have always decided not to for no other reason than I didn't want to deal with people like this. Its sad really.

To the previous poster - if you don't like the way this website is run find one more to your liking or better yet GO MAKE ONE! This is stating the obvious but this site exists for those who like it - if your not in that group why are you here?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Timing...
by MattPie on Thu 20th Dec 2007 19:35 in reply to "RE[4]: Timing..."
MattPie Member since:

I don't always agree with your views on technology and such, but on this one I whole-heartedly commend you. Trying to placate net brats is an exercise in futility.

Hear hear! To the original poster, your submitted Java 6 article may have been intensely interesting to you, but all Java 6 means to me is the IBM HMC management tools stop working when I use it. This article is much more interesting to me, and based on the comments, most other people.

As for Apple and this case, I see it as:
- Apple sues ThinkSecret to get the identities of people who have breached a contract (NDA) with Apple.
- Think Secret refuses to divulge those sources.
- Apple and ThinkSecret come to an mutually acceptable agreement.

There are no 'laws' involved per se, since this is all civil court stuff. It doesn't seem to qualify as whistle-blower status since there isn't a law being broken (or even something evil-but-legal going on). I have a tough time believing this stuff is in the public interest, since the public interest isn't necessarily something the public is interested in, but something that affects the *welfare* of the public.

Edited 2007-12-20 19:36

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Timing...
by rockwell on Thu 20th Dec 2007 19:40 in reply to "RE[3]: Timing..."
rockwell Member since:

Umm ... isn't Thom one of the editors of OSNews ... meaning ... he can pick and choose what gets published?

That's what editors do. If you don't like it, submit elsewhere. Sheesh.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Timing...
by galvanash on Thu 20th Dec 2007 19:54 in reply to "RE[4]: Timing..."
galvanash Member since:

I modded you back up 1 - but it will probably do no good. The brats don't like being reminded of reality...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Timing...
by JonathanBThompson on Fri 21st Dec 2007 02:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Timing..."
JonathanBThompson Member since:

How is it that I can't vote to mod down the parent post, because it very clearly is a personal attack with foul language?

Thom, you need to take a chill pill when it comes to debating things ;)

I'd suggest you take a vacation with no interaction at all with the computer: you'll be much happier if you do so, if you do so for a long enough period of time.

All work and no play makes Jack go postal ;)

(Oh, I could also easily state that the post in question was way off-topic as well ;) )

Sure, the parent to the parent post of this post was getting a bit snippy and stepping out of bounds, but, two Wongs don't make a Wright: genetics don't work that way ;)

That's also why the whole debate of why you maintain that what Apple did is wrong and Think Secret is right is wrong: you can't have it both ways, where a corporation that's otherwise obeying legal and moral guides as defined by the country they operate in isn't subject to the same rights as well as responsibilities of an individual, or more than one, in this case, when it comes to privacy issues. As soon as a corporation starts violating the privacy of individual citizens, there's a cry of how foul that is, and yet, when individual citizens violate the privacy of corporations, because there's clearly a body of people that desire that information, makes it valid morally and legally? Especially when the information is truly of a sensitive nature, that should others outside the corporation know it and have reasonable expectations that it's accurate (not merely a rumor that someone says "Hey, I'm betting Apple does this!") can't use it against the corporation towards their own ends?

There are laws regarding trade secrets, and those apply here, as well as other moral issues that you're conveniently glossing over, and also you're making the mistake of mixing up assertions about Dutch privacy laws, of which I'd be incredibly surprised if a Dutch court saw this situation in such a manner as to rule in favor of the individuals, because if they did, that'd rule the area under that manifestation of law enforcement as being untenable to most corporations/employers, because privacy is (at least!) a two-way street.

Reply Parent Score: 4