Slashdot Mirror
Apple Sues Employee Over Cube Leaks
Carnage4Life writes:"Apple has found out the employee who leaked pictures of the PowerMac G4 Cube. So Apple has modified its original lawsuit against "unknown individual" for leaking trade secrets
and changed the name to that of the employee in court filings. So as not to embarass any employees with the same name Apple has not revealed the employee's name as at now."
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/cn/20000829/tc/apple_ identifies_employee_as_a lleged_source_of_leaks_4.html
And how considerate to bring it out on a nationwide stage in the judicial system, instead of dealing with it internally. And to ground rumor-leaking as a penalty by death in the religious Apple cult.
Please. ;)
The above post was sarcastic. Macaddicts, please take your tongue and place it back in your cheek.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
I think the employee's name is pronounced screwed.
Macnn refers to this guy as Juan Gutierrez.
clif
C/Net chose not the identify the individual in the article. It wasn't Apple's decision.
The Onion saw this coming!
Apple Employee Fired for Thinking Different!
I've heard that's a great way to build confidence within the ranks, just sinlge out a few employees and rape them. Worked for Stalin!
--
What happens when you outlaw guns
I can now exclusively disclose some exciting features about apples forthcoming laptop:
:)
It will not be beige in colour
It will be smaller than a convential desktop
It will have a colour screen
It will run off exclusively designed lightweight batteries, and an optional powersupply
It will not come with Windows preinstalled
The device will have a non-typical texture
It will be easy to use
It will quite possibly be shiny
It will quite possibly have rubbery bits
sue me
--
--
MacSlash: Your Daily Dose of Mac News and Discussion.
I know that it's imparitive in marketing/corporate image to make sure that you have control over materials and products. I know that its imparative that a leak *could've* done harm (heh... like MS/Unix from another article today)... but geez... just pictures?
I believe that this is more a policy gone awry. I don't doubt to see some sort of mercy statement at a later date... probably from Jobs himself.
----
They don't want to embarass any employees with the same name, so they're not releasing it? Fat lot of good that does John Doe! His name has been dragged through the mud enough already! He's been sued several thousand times, got amnesia more times than he cna remember, but nobody ever keeps John's name out of the press to protect his feelings!
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
Read the article before trying to get your posts in guys, it won't slow you down too much on your quest to be the first one to bash whatever corporation is involved no matter what the story is.
sig:
sig:
See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.
Nice, brave new world ya got there Steve.
Instead of embrace, expand, extinguish we just have innovate, investigate, incarcerate.
He's my cube-mate, John Jacob Jingle-Heimer Schmitt. I tell ya, whenever he goes out there's confusion and shouting...
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
Just a question.
If it were just some kind of disguised advertising ?
People spoke more about the Cube because of this stupid story than if they have had to wait until some announcement, no ?
Ok, there's a suit but then ?
Put a camera on a guy's desk, then ask a journalist to harass him and you'll have all the leaks you officially didn't want.
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Lawyers no longer chase ambulances - it seems they now chase geeks.
---
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
Even the samurai
have teddy bears,
and even the teddy bears
Even the samurai
have teddy bears,
and even the teddy bears
get drunk
This must be hundreth time that somebody who posted leeks "anonymously" got caught because Yahoo turned over their personal identification. One would have had to live with one's head under a rock not to know that Yahoo can't be trusted for shit. So why do these idiots keep doing it so that they can get caught??
There are ways of staying more or less anonymous on the web, or at least making things dificult for would be censors. This ranges from submitting to a site that at least has a good track record (such as Slashdot) to going through a rewebber like Anonymizer, to using a true Anonymity service like ZKS Freedom or posting to the Usenet via a Mixmaster remailer.
It's hard to feel sorry for somebody so stupid that they thought not having their name on the post was enough to stay anonymous...
I have it on the best authority that the name of the previous "Unknown Individual" is **%%***}@#***%****}}****)***%*********ause Ellison thought the Apple | Microsoft connetion was too***%*%%***}}}}}****&**}}****}***@*ccording to KGB files, which were foun***}}}***%%#$$}}}@@*****!****.}***exican Mafia was paid off by someone in Arthur C. Cla****%%***ASA/FBI underco*}}}}}}***}}}******001 Space Odessy really! If you don't believe me, look at those picture of Europa ag*******}}}*****$****ven Jobs really is an ali*****%%}}}}******* Cubes will hatch****}}}}***%%%%****%*}}}******laving the entire human race.
There you have it. Now I gotta go get another modem this one's fu*%%}}
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
"Apple has not revealed the employee's name as at now."
I can agree with the majority of posts here, in that I don't see what Apple can possibly gain from this action. That aside, though, this employee DID sign a non-disclosure, and that IS a legally binding contract. It's not up to Joe Cubicle to decide what information is strategically important to the company, and even such a bizarre entity as Apple has to bring out the stick instead of the carrot if people are going to follow their rules.
But.. I know this is repetitive, but what can they possibly gain? Bad PR, and they can't sue for any significant amount of money (or they can sue, but if this is just a Joe Cubicle, they won't get it)...
seven two six five
seven four six one seven
two six four two e
According to go2mac, the guy is Juan Gutierrez. Somehow I doubt there's more than one at Apple. More likely they don't want anyone rallying support around a martyr, and that's harder to do if you don't know your martyr's name.
"Free Juan!"
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
The employee violated a NDA. The employee was a sneaky bastard while violating the NDA. He did it under an assumed username and made posts to several forums. The employee obviously knew that what he was doing was in violation of the NDA.
I suspect this employee has learned a valuable lesson.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
For all of you who are siding with the employee concerned - don't bother. If you're ever called upon to sign an NDA, you can make that decision for yourself, just as he did. He decided to sign it; he decided to breach it. His fault.
What we should really be concerned about is the willingness of Yahoo to roll over for a corporation. If you went to them and said, "I want to know all the info you have on this person", they'd tell you to buzz off. Why is a corporation treated differently? In fact, this isn't even a criminal case; it's a civil suit, so it's not obstruction of justice to not release the necessary info.
Well, the secrecy of Apple's upcoming projects is becoming incredibly important to them. So they made an example of this guy for breaking his contract with them. Yes, chance are, his contract included a Non Disclosure Agreement (whose contracts lately haven't?) and he broke it. I say fry him.
So there I was. Naked. In a refrigerator. With a potroast on my knees. Smokin a cigar. That's when it got REALLY weird.
Boo to /. for once again getting the news wrong and double-boo to all of those who once agin posted without bothering to look up the material for themselves.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
What principals did this guy further by sacrifising his job? The only thing he did was release a few photo's of a product that was to be released in less than 24 hours. What good did he do for the sake any principal or what cause did he sustain? He knowingly broke his companies rules and now you want to make him a martyr?
Personally, I think it's drastic to sue him. However, that's Apples call to make. The fact is, this guy released confidential information that he had signed and agreed not to release. When he did that, he did so after signing a NDA saying that Apple could sue him, fire him, etc. He did it anyways.
If this guy is a sacrificial lamb, it's because he volunteered for it when he leaked the photos that he knew he shouldn't leak.
Come on everyone. Most of the Slashdot readers aren't stupid. Let's nominate this guy for a Darwin Award, not Martyrdom.
kwsNI
Apple gets lots of press time with surprise announcements of new, fancy computers. They don't want that impact dulled by leaked documents/pictures/specs.
I doubt that Apple will really hammer this poor schmoe -- what can they get out of him? Millions of dollars? I don't think so. It's more likely an internal corporate move to put the scare in employees about leaking stuff to rumor sites.
I think it's a loser proposition for Apple, though. If Apple would just work with the rumor sites (or better yet, the "real news" sites), and take their public image more seriously, they could acheive the same goals with less embarrasment.
Or, if they want to influence and/or destroy their credibility, they could buy advertising from them. We all know that advertisers get preferential treatment from Slashdot :) <GD&R>
Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
Apple Sues Everybody
Apple: America's Cutest Company
--------
www.ridiculopathy.com
Attorneys at Laww (not to be confused with Law) allow us to represent you ;-)
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
"Until recently I worked for Apple, and was not permitted to tell the world the truth about Apples internal technologies. But, now that I am no longer employed (though not at all disgruntled, honest) I can speak the truth.
Apple runs Linux on all it's internal servers! There! The truth is finally out.
Apple runs Linux everywhere. In fact, they preload it on all machines to test them properly, and then load MacOS for shipment to customers. Apple will not use MacOS in-house because it's not stable enough, the GUI looks too unprofessional, and (especially with the candy colored Aqua UI) the interns keep licking the screen. Steve Jobs often says "GUIs are for panty-waists and tree-huggers! Real people use C shell!"
Further more, Apple does not use any colorful or rounded cases in-house. Yes, Apple employees prefer beige, blocky cases, since it makes them feel like real professionals.
Oh, and Orcale has something to do with it as well.
Resumes provided upon request."
There you have it folks, the truth behind Apple's colorful peal. And you heard it here first.
The REAL jabber has the /. user id: 13196
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
However, I've begun to notice that it simply is not possible for a programmer to gain full time or contract employment without signing an NDA. In essence, there is an intellectual property cartel, whose near-complete grasp on the job market allows it to slowly ratchet up the restrictiveness of employee NDAs.
The prospective employee could, of course, choose to enter another professions, or start his own company. Or his services might be so valuable that he could have the NDA requirement waived. Nevertheless, it seems like the little guy who is coming right out of college and into an entry level position with a software firm in the United States is getting the shaft. Those other options are not attractive, or even possible.
Does anyone think that one could make a legal argument that the NDA was signed under protest, or duress, due to the complete industry lockout of anyone who won't sign an NDA?
"Your Honor - I kept telling Mr Jobs - the roof - it leaks over my cube ... right onto the computer - but he didn't do anything other than screaming at me to stop complaining and work harder ..... then one day there was this blinding flash ...."
Trade secrets are trade secrets. Use or disclosure of trade secrets is not only actionable, but its also quite wrong -- wrong in the way we all understand the word.
Information is leveraged by companies for commercial advantage in a variety of ways and for a variety of reasons. At times the timing of the release of that information can be critical. Whether a particular act was or was not problematic for Apple at the end of the day, uncontrolled leaks of confidential and trade secret information rob the company of something -- if only the discretion to make their own decisions when the informaiton is to be released. The degree of actual harm to Apple goes only to the measure of the damages, and not to the degree with which the conduct was wrong.
This employee broke the rules, probably broke his or her employment agreement, and did something he or she knew or should have known was wrong.
If Apple "just let it go," as some here have suggested, other employees may well be encouraged to trade information for favors. Whether it needs to press the point or not is, IMHO, Apple's call and Apple's perogative.
We do ourselves and our causes no service by defending the indefensible. This employee, who was trusted with confidential information about new unannounced products, should not have shared it with anyone else.
>willingness of Yahoo to roll over for a
>corporation. If you went to them and said, "I
>want to know all the info you have on this
>person", they'd tell you to buzz off. Why is a
>corporation treated differently?
It's simple really. Steve Jobs didn't just call up Jerry Yang and say "Hey, could you tell us who this guy is?"
Apple filed suit against "John Doe" first, and was therfore able to issue a subpeona to Yahoo for the info in question. Yahoo's privacy policy has an exception in it saying that they WILL turn over your information if required, by law, to do so. Well guess what... discovery procedings before a civil trial give the plaintiff the right to subpoena pretty much anything they feel related to the case. And a subpoena, issued in California, IS legally binding against Yahoo... were they to refuse, I don't think any PERSON would go to jail for contempt, but the company would be facing some hefty fines.
It's not a matter of one corperation kissing another's ass... it's a matter of complying with the law. If YOU *DID* file a lawsuit against a Yahoo user, YOU would ALSO have the right to subpoena yahoo's records on that person.
This was actually covered on
Here's a clue to the Yahoo bashers:
Corperations are *NOT* your friend. They may supply a service you like at a good price, and the staff may be friendly. But the corperation is *NOT* your friend. They will NOT fight YOUR legal battle FOR you!!! (unless you pay them a lot of money to do so, and that's only if we're talking about a law firm)
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Imagine all the people...
The reason Apple did not handle it "internally" is because they needed the lawsuit to force Yahoo, on account of its GeoCities subsidiary, to release ISP information for the pictures "worker bee" linked to on the AppleInsider.com message boards. Then they also needed the legal action to force the ISP to release a name to match with an IP, etc etc. Someone above said something to the effect of: "why'd Yahoo take it up the ass for a corporation, but I couldn't ask them for the same thing!!!" Well sonny, that's because Apple has lawyers, and you don't. You don't think Apple would've liked to have handled it internally?
Of course they would, but this both allows them the legal ability to nab the dude who broke his NDA, and then to serve as a warning to all other employees.
worker bee hung out at the Apple Insider Forums and was considered to be a unreliable source at first. This all changed after he was proven right about the new products at MacWorld NY.
He published the iBook specs, and then Apple pulled the plug on Mr.Bee.
Regardless of whether you think Apple was right or wrong, it is clear that after worker bee's leaks the information didn't really spread that far. Only after Apple started issuing dozens of subpoenas and publishing the information themselves via their PR people did their terribly confidential trade screts leak to a more widespread audience and the mainstream news outlets.
So when Apple takes Mr.Bee to court, are they going to fess up to the damages they themselves caused? Or blame it all on him? Probably the latter. I highly doubt the courts will pay attention to the large Apple Rumor community and the fact Apple themselves legitimized the claims and in the process, spread the information far and wide, causing the damage they were so hurt by.
Yahoo is a different beast. When you post to Yahoo, they get lots of info that they can use to track you. Some work-arounds exist, but the clueless user will probably make the fatal error of providing his/her own email address to receive the password for the new account. Also, unlike /. they make no claims that they will attempt to preserve anonymity.
sulli
sulli
RTFJ.
It's on MacNN.
My employer is likely to sue me next. My cube has leaked a few times. Mostly when I've spilled a coke or some ice water on my desk. It's not my fault that they didn't make the cubicles waterproof!
What? Apple cube? No thanks. I'm not hungry.
Huh? A computer? Made from apples? Like I'm going to believe that after the Potato Server hoax!
This sounds like a classic Steve move. Having seen the kind of damage a leak can do I think it's great that one of the slime balls who betrays a trust gets to feel the sharp end of an action like this. They might have enjoyed their 15 minutes of infamy, now they are paying the price and good riddance. If this is the only way to take away the stock benefits someone has accrued from employment at the company he betrayed then so be it.
I have no sympathy for them.
I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, contact an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
The criminal/civil distinction you are trying to draw simply doesn't apply here.
Yahoo did not simply hand over information to a corporation. They complied with a court order to do so. They would have done the same had an individual obtained the order. This is the same thing (and mistaken perception) of a few months ago when it was misreported that companies were allowed to search employeess' home computers--that to was in the course of litigation, and under court order.
hawk, esq.
A cartel is a group restricting output, working as a group instead of competing with one another. Among other conditions, you must have a way to keep newcomers out.
The folks that want NDA's, however, are *fiercely* competitive, both in the product market and for employees. A more reasonable conclusion is that NDA's are necessary to the the firm in order for it to compete successfully; otherwise, the firms would drop the NDA's, saving time and money while regaining a recruiting edge.
hawk
How exactly do you handle tracking down someone with a subpeona 'internally'? If you can't track the person down, how exactly are you going to reprimand them?
Apple had to go to the courts just to find out who the guy was.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
No we (if by 'macweenies' you mean Mac users) wouldn't. If a person signs an NDA and violates it, they deserve whatever comes down on them. They didn't have to sign it, did they?
As for Microsoft, given that most of their ideas comes from other companies, an NDA there would seem a bit redundant. I guess they could protect implementations, but you usually get a strong whiff of their vapor long before any actual product ships.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
150 million dollars of non-voting Apple stock it be no means "significant". It's a drop in the bucket.
And the real kicker is, Apple had Microsoft by the balls on that deal, not the other way around. Read up on it if you want to know the reason.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff