Once again slightly behind the curve, I just found out Apple has sued three bloggers for divulging information about Apple products currently in development. From siliconvalley.com:
…Apple argued that neither the free speech protections of the United States Constitution nor the California Shield Law, which protects journalists from revealing their sources, applies to the Web sites. The company said such protections apply only to “legitimate members of the press.”
The California Shield Law, as it appears in the California Constitution, is here (see Article I, Section 2(b)).Court documents here.
I haven’t sifted though all the court docs yet, but a once-over of the Shield Law does state pretty clearly that freelance writers are not protected. All the protected classes of people are employed in a media occupation of one kind or another. The judge has tentatively granted Apple’s request that the bloggers surrender their sources, and I don’t disagree. There has yet to be a trial, so maybe he’ll change his mind, but based on a literal reading of the law, it doesn’t look good for the bloggers. Of course I think it should be irrelevant whether or not the authors are freelance or employed, but the law is what the law is. I think this where good lawyering comes into play.
Comments (4)
URL: http://
I'm really interested to see where this case leads. There are a lot of issues at stake - privacy, trade secrets, breach of contract, free speech on the internet, and probably more than i don't see.
Posted by p-man | February 10, 2007 8:15 PM
Posted on February 10, 2007 20:15
URL: http://www.whiterose.org/michael/blog
I don't know enough about IP and trade secrets laws to know where the line is between what they have to do to protect their ideas (important), what they have to do to protect their marketing and communications plans (not so important, but still...), and paranoid control-freakism (not desirable). Someone violated an agreement with Apple not to disclose information about an upcoming product. How serious this is depends on who and how. I'm not saying I love them for going after the little guys, but I don't want them being in a position of losing an industrial espionage complaint because MicroSoft said "everyone was spying on Apple and getting away with it, they never complained." I don't blame the web site guys and I'm not sure it's a good law, but if they can't publish the info they get, they can't publish it.
Posted by Michael | February 10, 2007 8:15 PM
Posted on February 10, 2007 20:15
URL: http://
that is interesting. this seems like a bad marketing move for apple - suing their fans doesn't strike me as wise.
Posted by p-man | February 10, 2007 8:15 PM
Posted on February 10, 2007 20:15
URL: http://www.whiterose.org/michael/blog
The sites they're suing predate blogging. I've been reading them for almost 10 years.
Posted by Michael | February 10, 2007 8:15 PM
Posted on February 10, 2007 20:15