Rumors Removed At Apple's Request
(Full disclosure: I own some Apple stock and have been a fan of the company since my Apple][+; also, MOSR's parent company did ads for Slashdot several years ago.)
Apple apparently claimed to MOSR that - among other things - they had "proprietary and statutory rights" that were violated by the stories that ran on the site. Sounds fishy to me. Unless they can prove an NDA was violated (and Meader says none was), I can't see how they have a case. You can't copyright a fact.
But I'm not a lawyer. If any lawyers would like to comment on this, feel free.
Effectively what this means is that large legal fees would have to be paid unless the rumor site removed the rumors. Win or lose, nobody likes to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit. It just costs too much to defend so the rumors get pulled. Just a fact of life on today's web.
To be sure, another large factor in MOSR's decision is that they are supporters of Apple and of the Macintosh community. Meader says their website "was originally created to help Apple through the rough times of '95-'97 ... because the Mac community is so protective of its center, we don't feel that it's wise nor beneficial to fight Apple on this."
But, as Meader goes on to say, "The real matter at issue here is that Apple wants to be able to do what they want without taking responsibility for failures, schedule slides, or unpopular plans, until they're already carried through. ...Apple figures that rumor sites are inevitable, so individually they have no value. They can be tossed away when they become an inconvenience, and others will spring up to continue giving them free, no-strings hype."
The end result is that rumor sites are allowed to exist ... as long as they don't get too uppity and cause too much trouble for the bottom line.
But here's an interesting angle. MOSR publishes its stories under the OpenContent License (which goes by the odd acronym "OPL"). If anyone happened to snag a copy of the offending rumors before they were removed, then according to the terms of this license,
"You may copy and distribute exact replicas of the OpenContent (OC) as you receive it, in any medium,"
as long as you reproduce the copyright and warranty-disclaimer, and a few other usual things. Oh, and as long as you're willing to get sued by Apple, whose lawyers presumably will welcome the chance to make themselves, once again, useful.
I really don't understand why many people love Apple. ... But the list of negatives is very, very long: inability to update their software with modern necessities (PMT, VM that's not broken, etc). Backstabbing the developers. Backstabbing the clone manufacturers. Incredible arrogance. Price gouging ... Look-and-feel lawsuits. Closed hardware. Closed software. Closed minds.
Clue me in. Why does Apple get all this loyalty? The products are good in a lot of ways, but they're not that good (be honest!). Is it the home of people who just like to be different from the mainstream, and that's the attraction?
I understand your concerns, but I think the confusion lies in the fact that you seem to be forming most of your opinion of Apple based on political/industry actions rather than what the end result is for the person who uses the products.
The basic issue is that Windows and Linux are basically computer-centric operating systems. You are forced to adapt to the computer. The reason Apple has built such loyalty over the years is that it realizes that most computer users are human beings. They like to accomplish tasks quickly, and then move on. 85% of the world's population doesn't care what a kernel is or why one might want to upgrade it. This is particularly true for artists, who want to focus on the art, not the technology. So many people have told me that they like the Mac because it doesn't get in the way of the creative process. This is absolutely crucial to the concept of why Apple is popular with normal people, and creative types. And then there are those that are technically brilliant, but still think computers should be easy and fun to use. These people often become Mac developers.
Additionally, being primarily visual creatures, humans appreciate asethically pleasing elements, such as a well-polished, attractive user interface, and creative approaches to industrial design. This is, of course, more attractive to designers and such. These people don't want to become the next ESR. They just want to accomplish tasks, and possibly play some games. The vast majority of computer owners' lives do not revolve around their computers. There's only a very small segment of the world that cares what database a site is running.
And I know the slashdot masses reject such ideas as blasphemy or just flat out "wrong," which is extremely frustrating. Slashdot was, at some point, a forum for alternative points of ideas to be appreciated. Yet there are still people roaming these forums that truely believe that a person doesn't "deserve" a computer unless they can use text configuration files or write their own code.
Also, as one last note -- the only PowerBook line that ever had signficant problems was the 5300, and that was more than 3 years ago. Aside from that, Apple customers have experienced considerably less hardware issues than the average person with a wintel laptop.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
RM 101, I enjoyed your comments very much. Here's my take on the issue.
I try to practice what I preach. I work in the hi-tech industry and admire innovative companies. When I buy products, I try to pick the ones which demonstrate forward progress. I believe that Apple has helped push the industry forward, unlike another company (which shall remain nameless) which has proved more of an anchor.
Apple managed to migrate all their users from the Motorola 68000 to PowerPC architecture with minimal pain. That took balls. Apple is planning to migrate their OS from a custom kernal to a BSD based product. For a consumer oriented company, that definitely takes balls. Apple has firmly embraced SCSI, USB, FireWire, etc. Apple made ethernet standard equipment and is doing the same with wireless connectivity. Apple is shipping video editing software with some iMacs. Apple believes in leading edge industrial design. On both the hardware and software side, Apple has a consistent history of innovation which has helped stimulate the industry.
Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
Aha! So Apple is trying to pull an Adobe Systems-style censor threat. The first line of defense for one of these is to reply to the email saying you refuse the validy of the email and and demand a certified letter of Apple's demand. By the time you get the paper either by messenger or fedex, the story has spread as much as possible. Anybody could compose an email posing as a lawyer, demanding article removal and threating legal action.
blessings,
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
Apple has argued that the information published on the website was only available to people who had signed an NDA, and that therefore regardless of how MOSR got the rumor, it must have been in violation of an NDA. Apple isn't pursuing an action against MOSR per se, but against whichever person leaked the info to MOSR.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
I'm a little unclear on why some people seem to think that if information exists anywhere in the world, it should immediately and infinitely be the property of all citizens of the internet. Apple is working on various prototypes for next generation case designs. Where is it written that everybody who has a web browser has the right to get information on these prototypes?
Specifically, why is it that we are so concerned about individual privacy concerns, but nobody cares about the privacy concerns of organizations? Why is it that Slashdot policitcal correctness sates that Bob has a right to privacy, but not Bob's company?
I can see how the people have a right information about, say, their government, as it does ultimately belong to them. But Apple's not a government. Sure, there are plenty of people with Apple stock, and those people do deserve to know what's going on, and vote on various directions of the company, but you can't give secret information to that group of people without giving it to everyone.
Additionally, let us not forget that these rumor sites sell banner ads. That is, in some cases (probably not all), rumors are posted at least in part for personal gain, at Apple's expense. Think what you will of highly-valued companies (such as the one that owns Slashdot), but the individuals that work at Apple, such as the industrial designers, are passionate, driven people. They deserve some credit. There are few things more frustrating for an artist than a work being shown before it is finished.
I would also point out that Apple frequently gets more attention for their products if they are unexpected. There's nothing unusual or devious about this. There's a natural human appreciation for the elements of surprise.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
"Rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated . . . And will be prosecuted with a lead foot and a gleeful smile."
---
seumas.com
Then the next Mac expo came and went, and it turned out that the rumor was all BS.
This is probably the same thing happening here. Apple has proven to be a master of misinformation and misdirection in order to make sure that their product announcements will be more suspense filled. It's all Barnum-like showmanship on the part of Steve Jobs. After the expo, the lawyer letters will be forgotten about again.
Of course, the fact that there is no real story here will not prevent Mac OS Rumors from playing themselves up as martyrs of the free press cause... anything to get a few more web hits.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I work for a large networking/communications companies (one of the big three in the US) and we are pretty strict about this stuff too. You leave and aren't careful, and they pad lock your door, investigate, and call lawyers.
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
After months of obscure reports and unreliable sources, two contacts with extremely solid track records have reported sightings of one of Apple's best-kept secrets -- its next-generation Desktop enclosure and the changes to its product line that will come with it.
While one of these new reports claims intently that the machine -- a near-perfect cube about 2/3 the size of a modern-day iMac -- will be a complete replacement for today's iMac line-up, the other is not so sure....and the remaining body of evidence is none too clear on whether this enclosure will be applied to the PowerMac or iMac spaces exclusively, or in both.
Setting that important detail aside for the moment, there is much exciting news about this new Cube that is of much greater reliability:
There are significant signs that this may be the long-rumored monitorless iMac; for example, the prototype sources have reported on does not appear to have external ports to accept PCI expansion cards. However, there does appear to be enough internal room for them if the external ports were added.
A related but as yet unconfirmed rumor states that Apple is moving away from including PCI slots by default in PowerMacs, instead wiring the Universal Motherboard Architecture's PCI controller to a small connector which would support an external PCI enclosure with any number of slots. Note that this would be much less expensive than a full-blown PCI Expansion Chassis, which connects a single internal PCI slot to any number of add-on slots via a costly PCI bridge chip and associated hardware. This scheme would merely move PCI expansion outside the default PowerMac enclosure to allow for more innovative small-footprint designs as well as support more than three PCI slots for those who need them.
For now, all but the details of the Cube enclosure itself are to be considered highly speculative. We will be watching developments in this story very closely -- if you believe you may be able to clarify matters, drop us a line!
It's the new trend in business (especially high tech business), your customer is your enemy. Movie studios attacking customers for wanting to watch their movies, record labels attacking music fans, software companies attempting to gather as much info from their suckers...errr...customers as possible to make even more money from them, and nearly everyone attacking fan sites.
They finally figured out we are so sheepish that we will continue to pump money into them even if they mount a full offensive against us. Welcome to 00's consumerism, like it or get sued.
Finkployd
I have obtained the actual message. This is not a joke, this is what Apple mailed to Ryan.
From cpyrt@apple.com Fri Jul 7 20:56:43 2000
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:28:28 -0700
From: Copyright Admin. <cpyrt@apple.com>
To: Ryan Meader <ryan@macosrumors.com>
Subject: NOTICE OF INFRINGEMENT
*Apple Confidential*
-NOT FOR POSTING OR REDISTRIBUTION-
Dear Ryan,
Re: www.macosrumors.com
It has been brought to our attention that you have posted an article on
the above web site titled, 'Apple's "Cube" desktop Mac confirmed'
(hereafter referred to as "the Article").
By posting the Article, you are improperly disclosing Apple's trade
secrets. Apple believes that the person(s) who disclosed the information
in the Article to you violated their non-disclosure agreement with Apple.
Consequently, Apple has never authorized the information to be disclosed
or published and your continued display of the Article could result in
your company being held for violating Apple's proprietary rights. Your
continued dissemination and use of this information is in violation of
Apple's statutory and other rights.
We believe, in good faith, that the information posted is being used in a
manner that is not authorized by Apple and that the information contained
in this email is accurate. Therefore, Apple demands that you cease and
desist from disseminating the Article posted at the referenced URL
immediately, including any hyperlinks to other locations where the
information or Article may be available from all web sites and servers
under your control.
Please immediately remove the Article and confirm in writing by Monday,
July 10, 2000 that you have removed the Article from your web site.
Apple reserves its right to seek immediate equitable and other relief,
including damages claims, should you fail to remove this material.
Thank your for your courtesy and immediate cooperation. I can be reached
at (408) 974-9994 should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Sue Runfola
Apple Computer, Inc.
Legal
Sue Runfola
Apple Legal
Copyright Administration
1 Infinite Loop, MS: 38-I
Cupertino, CA 95014
Phone: (408) 974-9994
Email: copyright@apple.com
Fax: (408) 974-5436
THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE PRIVILEGED AND MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSON(S) NAMED ABOVE. ANY OTHER
DISTRIBUTION, RE-TRANSMISSION, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE IS STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMISSION IN ERROR, PLEASE
NOTIFY ME IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE OR RETURN E-MAIL, AND DELETE THIS
FILE/MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM.
http://www.cgchannel.com/cgelite/dimitrisladopoulo s/G5%20Server.jpg
-Davidu
# Hack the planet, it's important.
Who says Apple Legal actually did anything. Ryan has pulled publicity stunts like this in the past where Apple supposedly requested information about future products be pulled down and no such product actually ever materializes. I think this is just another MOSR publicity stunt to attempt to give them veracity.
I used to read MOSR all the time, but I loose more and more respect for them everytime I hear about another one of Ryan's stunts. Mac rumors sites haven't had anything substantial since Jobs took the helm and clamped down on security. Since then, they've either shut down or started spewing nonsense. There are whole websites dedicated to debunking MOSR crap. They seem to have become inactive as the owners have gotten tired of pointing out the nonsense.
My favorite is still the live, secret streaming video feed they supposedly got from deep inside Apple's R&D labs. Riiiight.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Clue me in. Why does Apple get all this loyalty? The products are good in a lot of ways, but they're not that good (be honest!). Is it the home of people who just like to be different from the mainstream, and that's the attraction?
I'll tell you why I'm a Machead.
My first computer was a TeleVideo TS803 which ran CP/M 2.2. I tinkered and toyed with that thing to no end, but the only thing I ever really got done was typing up papers in WordStar. I reassembled the OS, made patches, got dangerously close to learning Z80 assembly language and anguished over my inability to get software in my disk format (one of about 75 at the time). I finally got it working as a smart terminal, dialing into Clemson University's VAX Ultrix machine to use email and Usenet. Never did get it to function as a BBS...
When it came time to buy a new machine, I made the decision to go with the star-crossed Mac IIvx for one simple reason: It just worked. I was planning on going into a graphics/design/publishing-oriented field, and I had had experience with Macs doing the literary magazine at school. The user experience with the Mac was so superior to anything available from the Windoze side (3.1?), it was only natural. I had had plenty of experience with Ultrix, emacs and all that, and I still appreciate its power; but in reality, the software to do what I want to do is simply not there (still).
So maybe I'm a contrarian at heart, but there remain practical reasons why I've recently purchased my fifth Mac (an iMac DV SE). Obviously it isn't the ease of upgrading, the stability of the OS or anything of that nature. It's the fact that my Macs have become extensions of my thought processes. The software system feels natural. It stays out of my way and helps me at the same time instead of asking me one too many times if I'm sure that's what I want to do, or allowing me to hose my system when I've been awake too long trying to hold my eyes open long enough to finish a project.
Apple has long been a pioneer perfecting this systematic user experience. I don't begrudge them their protection of their intellectual property because I watched Microsoft build a world-dominating monster largely on the ideas which emerged from Apple R&D. It's as someone else said...suppose eMachines had announced their product ahead of the introduction of the iMac...the source of the innovative industrial design would have been in question. Apple, like NeXT had, has industrial design as a top priority, and any leaks that threaten their edge in this area of emerging importance should be plugged and fast.
No, Apple hasn't always been run well. Neither has it always been run by the same people. Under a more mature Jobs, Apple has fought back from the edge of oblivion with a focus on bringing computing out of the server closet, so to speak, and putting it in the hands of "the rest of us." The rest of us no longer want to tinker with hardware or recompile our OS (even if some of us know how)...we just want to put the system to work as a tool in the construction of our cultural future.
As for loyalty, few machines are apt to be described in such anthropomorphic terms. My Macs always have been loyal, so to speak. They're something other than computers, as I said...they're extensions of my thought processes. I value that, in spite of their limitations...my own limitations are more troubling.
P.
On top of that, when I use any Mac app, I can intuitively go to "Edit->Preferences" to change the behavior of the program. On my PCs, sometimes it's in "Tools->Options", sometimes "Edit->Whatever", sometimes the File menu, and so on and so forth. I really do find the interface much more consistent and smooth when using my Mac. Insert Aqua ranting here
Plus at work, I have two scanners plugged into my machine. One works with Win2K, one will not because HP hasn't updated the drivers yet - this being the third driver codebase they'll have to maintain for Microsoft OS's (the alternative being to maintain only two and abandon NT4). Out of all the cards and peripherals I've added to my aging machine over the years, I think I've had to install drivers like once. And that was only for added functionality. One thing that bugs me about PC folk in general is their automatic reaction - "Apple MUST open their hardware!" Shouldn't "freedom of choice" include "the freedom to choose a closed hardware/software architecture"? Even if you think it's stupid, at least try to understand there are some of us that like this relationship, propietary ROMs and all (Of course, those only live on in spirit, but still :).
The only thing that's tempted me to switch primary platforms recently is the constant wear of going to PC-dominated offices every day, or checking Slashdot every day to see the same constant knee-jerk "MAC USERZ ARE ALL |D|0+5!" postings plastered all over any Apple-centric article. You wouldn't believe how much crap people give you when you work at an ISP or - god help you - an MIS department. Someday they'll tell my harrowing story. :) Oh well, could be worse - I could be an Amiga user! Now they're really crazy! *duck*