Adobe Sues MacNN Over Photoshop Article

petard writes: "Law.com ran this article on how Adobe is suing MacNN over an article which appeared on AppleInsider with detailed information on and screenshots of Photoshop 6, currently in (non-public) beta. Could this be bad news for other rumor sites, and possibly even sites like Slashdot? Hope MacNN wins ..."

Comments

Launch on Warning.

[Wintermancer]

Wow.

There must be a medical boneheaded-knee-jerk response test that is a mandatory job requirement in some of the corporate legal departments.

Instead of viewing it correctly as free publicity, it's automatically classified as a threat.

Beta-screen leaks to be accepted. It's all calculated into the marketing scheme to grab attention and future {mind, market} share. Suing the companies that publish (as in, freedom of the press, a "Constitutionally-but-still-subject-to-corporate-l egal-nonsense" guaranteed right ), is only biting the hand that feeds you. Cover your the new version release of your primary revenue stream software? I'll have to consult our legal department first....

Maybe what they should do is what the automotive industry does: disguise the object in question. That's right. Photographs of prototype cars, pre-production models, proof-of-concept cars, etc. are a mainstay of the automotive magazine. The manufacturer's counter to the various "spy" photographs: disguise the vehicles in question.

I can just see the user interface now:

Beta Tester: "Where's the zoom button?"

Quality Assurance Tester: "It's that black button right there."

BT: "You mean this black button?"

QAT "No, no, the other black button."

BT: "Oh, you mean this black button."

QAT (frustrated tone): "No, that black button."

BT: "Screw this, the entire user interface is black buttons. Even the workspace is blacked out. Why don't I just turn off the monitor and move my mouse around and make 'ooh, ahh, pretty' sounds?"

QAT: (under their breath) "I hate this fucking job...."

One's word.

[www.sorehands.com]

Most (non-public) beta agreements include prohibitions against disclosure.

If they violated it, it is actionable.

The idea behind non-public betas are to allow a company to test the product (w/o getting slammed). It also allows them to get feedback on features, that might or might not be included in the final product. Though as of the last couple of years, the original ideas behind beta have been diluted.

This only means one thing...

[MicroBerto]

I actually read that article when I was extremely bored, and let me tell you why Adobe would sue over this -- because Photoshop 6 is going to be nothing special, and the screenshots basically sucked. Photoshop has reached the end of its innovative time, and that could be seen after Photoshop 4. Photoshop 5 had some great new stuff like the history, but Photoshop 6 does not contain any drastic improvements.

Adobe would LOVE it if they ran an article on Photoshop 6 if it was very good, but they obviously have as little enthusiasm and confidence in it as I do.

Although Adobe does have a right to sue - they now MAY lose product sales because of this (no one cares about Photoshop 6 because its nothing new), I think that they should get tossed out because the people have the right to know how a preview release operated.

Besides, what's the difference between a pre-release review that loses sales and a post-release review that loses sales? Not much. It would happen either time, and the only people that would buy the program on the day of its opening (before the poor reviews would come out) are the ones that would buy it anyway, even after the poor reviews come out.

On a sidenote - go gimp!

And another sidenote - this is the most pirated program in the world, EVER. Adobe should be doing other things in the legalroom.
Thanks if you're still reading :)

Mike Roberto (roberto@soul.apk.net) -GAIM: MicroBerto

Ford vs. Blue Oval Set Precedence

[Carnage4Life]

I really doubt Adobe will win because this is extremely similar to when Ford Motors sued Blue Oval News for printing secret car designs on their website. Even though the car designs were secret and probably stolen by an employee who had signed an NDA, the website won.

WTF???

[Shoeboy]

Adobe says both the existence of the new versions of its products -- Adobe Photoshop 6.0 and Adobe ImageReady 3.0 -- and their features are trade secrets.

Really good trade secrets too. Let's see, Adobe has released Photoshops 1-5. They also employ a bunch of programmers. There are two possibilities:
1) they are working on Photoshop 6.
2) oh wait, there's only one possibility.
Real nice secret guys.

I hear MS is working on a new version of office - oops, now /. is going to be hit with another cease and desist order.

Adobe requests the court to enjoin Macintosh News Network from soliciting or disclosing Adobe's trade secrets and for recovery of damages which it says "could conservatively amount to tens of millions of dollars."

I say that's a conservative estimate, nothing pisses of Wall Street more than shipping a new version of a flagship product. I bet their stock tanked after this leak.

The complaint says, "Adobe will suffer lost sales of products currently on the market.

Totally believable -- I only buy software if I'm sure that the company has cancelled all future development efforts.

Hear that? That's the last few shreds of my faith in human intelligence being stripped from me.

--Shoeboy
(former microserf)