The Electronic Frontier Foundation last week won the right to unseal court documents related to Apple's efforts to subpoena the sources of online journalists. The documents, previously sealed by the Court and unavailable to the journalists and their attorneys, show that Apple moved to subpoena the reporters' sources before conducting a thorough investigation within the company.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
>"Apple's actions are clearly violations of First Amendment protections of free press"
First ammendment is freedom of speech, not freedom of the press. Regardless, free speech issues and freedom of the press doesn't apply in this instance because the information being discloosed was distributed illegally. Again, Think Secret isn't being sued, but they should be required to divulge their sources because the information was provided to them under false pretences.
The only thing Apple did wrong here is not follow proceedure. It's possible (though unlikely) that it will change the course of action with regard to Think Secret having to divulge their sources.
"Think Secret having to face either jail time or revealing sources when they did nothing illegal is condoning Apple's (and activist corporate judges) attempt to silence other journalists."
Huh? How is Apple trying to silence journalists? They simply want to stop people from breaking their non disclosure contracts and thus reveal their trade secrets.
Member since:From http://www.billofrights.org/
Amendment I
"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."
If people know that any journalist they speak to can be compelled to reveal their sources, people will stop talking to journalists. If journalists know that they can be jailed for legal activities, they will stop printing.
The particular case was never about protecting trade secrets (which do _not_ supercede Constitutional rights); it was all about controlling media reports and intimidation. Additionally, NDAs are civil matters, not criminal, and have even less standing. No criminal activity occured by the source speaking with Think Secret. That the court sided with Apple is appalling and a true case of an "activist judge" wanting to eliminate the Constitutional protections of citizens.
Member since:2005-06-29
As far as I'm concerned, no company can force me to disclose *any* information, names or other things.
Huh? How is Apple trying to silence journalists? They simply want to stop people from breaking their non disclosure contracts and thus reveal their trade secrets.
Yes, but what does ThinkSecret have to do with this? In case you don't know, everyone has the right to remain silent. So, ThinkSecret doesn't have to disclose anything. What law states that ThinkSecret should?
Apple should go after the people it has signed NDAs with; they are the ones at fault. ThinkSecret did nothing more than publish that information, as did many other websites. The fact that ThinkSecret knows the names changes nothing.
I know quite some interesting information too about various matters, being the managing editor and all. Yet, no one can force me to disclose anything. There is no law that I know of that can force me, or any other site, to disclose information. The leaking devs signed an NDA; *not* ThinkSecret.
And *of course* Apple is trying to silence journalists here-- what else is the purpose of this? If Apple wins all this, than ThinkSecret will be unable to publish the news it hears from people without mentioning their names. Obviously, then people will top submitting news to ThinkSecret.
This is a bad move by Apple. I hope I one of these days get a letter from them too. Until they realize I do not fall under US law.
Member since:
Pretty bizarre world you live in, where not going to jail is considered an "opportunity." Apple's actions are clearly violations of First Amendment protections of free press, and Think Secret having to face either jail time or revealing sources when they did nothing illegal is condoning Apple's (and activist corporate judges) attempt to silence other journalists.