Apple Accuses Worker of Leaks

booboothefoo writes "A former Apple Computer contract worker in Sacramento has been slapped with both civil and criminal charges for allegedly leaking Apple's trade secrets on the Internet." I think the real message here is "don't trust contractors." Or maybe "rumor sites are evil." Or maybe "Setec Astronomy."

Comments

or maybe the message is have some ethics?

[Anonymous Coward]

why is it up to the employer to not trust it's employees (contractors)?

why can't employees (especially so-called "professionals") have some ethics and do simple things like NOT STEAL FROM THEIR EMPLOYERS?

Re:or maybe the message is have some ethics?

[Twirlip of the Mists]

it's called being paid fairly

The wonderful thing about the word "fair" is that the opposing parties on any issue will have radically different ideas of what it means.

It is also the word that the parent of a six-year-old hates most. If I had a nickel for every time I've cringed at, "But it's not fair!" I wouldn't have to work for a living.

In other words, my friend, quit your whining.

why cant companies do something simple like NOT STEAL FROM THEIR EMPLOYEES?

If Slashdot ever posts an article about an employer stealing from an employee, you can post this comment again. For now, though, I think we should all just stick to the subject at hand. Okay? Thanks.

Re:or maybe the message is have some ethics?

[Mahrin Skel]

The message is that if you don't show any loyalty to your employees (if, for example, you employ them "at whim" through a temp agency, without benefits or job security) you shouldn't expect them to show any loyalty in return.

Way back once upon a time, I worked a fab line as a "contractor", it royally sucked. "Night and fog" atmosphere, people you work with would just stop showing up, and getting curious about why was a good way to follow them out the door.

--Dave

Re:or maybe the message is have some ethics?

[derch]

The contractor knew what he was getting into when he signed the contract. The contract should've said $X for Y hours of work or something to that effect. If the contractor didn't like it, he didn't have to sign it.

If the contractor took the job because that was the only job offer and he has no qualifications to work in another field, then tough luck. Shit happens when the economy is bad - that doesn't give you carte blanche to do what you want and break contracts.

Not quite

[bconway]

I think the real message here is "don't trust contractors." Or maybe "rumor sites are evil." Or maybe "Setec Astronomy."

That's funny, the message I took away from it was that if you violate a contract, the company has the right to, and often will, sue you.

Re:Not quite

[GeckoFood]

Exactly! From the article, here is a statement to further your point along:

Apple says an employment agreement that Lopez signed with Volt's Sacramento office prohibited him from divulging confidential information.

This is eactly what these agreements are for -- when you have some dumbass who decides to go against a contractual agreement, the nondisclosure is the company's legal route of recourse.

No tears shed for this guy. I hope they take him to the cleaners.

Re:Not quite

[Cheese Cracker]

The only way I would have any sympathy for this guy would be if it was not made clear to him what was and was not confidential data.

He must be pretty much behind the 8-ball if he doesn't understand that schematics and other details regarding upcoming products are confidential until the company has launched it. (some details might still be confidential after the launch...) If he's not sure, why not ask before going ahead on posting it?

Or the moral is...

[Tidan]

don't leak trade secrets. Duh.

Re:or maybe the moral is that Apple isn't Willy Wo

[sweetooth]

Obvious troll, but I'll bite I guess.

When you sign a non disclosure agreement and then disclose information covered by the agreement you have violeted a contract. At that point any company will follow through with legal action against you. Not just Apple or Microsoft. Any company that has trade secrets is going to do what they can to protect them. This isn't apple holding on to brainspace. This is about someone violating the terms of a contract and Apple following through on enforcing it.

Are you smoking crack?

[Soulfader]

Seriously. I should know better, but if you even read the summary, you would know that the guy was leaking trade secrets. It's not like they used a Vulcan mind meld on him to suck out all of his good ideas. He took proprietary work-related information from his employer and gave it away on the Internet.

On a side note, it's crap like this that really screws it for other contractors. When I was a contractor at HP, we had such a good working relationship with the people there that we were allowed to use the basketball court. None of the other contractors were.

Marketing?

[wotan2525]

I always speculated that Apple intentionally created and fueled all these rumor sites..... it does make sense. It's all sorts of free marketing and when a product does finnally see the streets there is enough buzz to attract major-media attention and get them some serious publicity.

Why would they want to jeopardize that?

My guess is that this guy seriously pissed some people off by doing other things.... like..... mocking the interface at the company xmas party.

Re:Marketing?

[tbien]

It's pretty simple. Those rumor sites are hurting Apples sales. Who wants to by a new Powermac/iBook/iMac/Powerbook etc. if he knows that only 3 weeks later he can have more for the money.

That way Apple can't get enough old machines out of the channel and they're losing money with it.

The Message I'm getting

[Alexander]

Or maybe the real message is, on a slow news day we have nothing better to post.

Really, in Lorne Greene/Marc Anderssen Internet years/time, how old is this news?

How controversial is it? If it weren't Apple but somebody as supremely unsexy like say, Unisys, would it even be news?

This is neither news - it's past it's prime, nor is it something "that matters".

Negative Apple Press Week?

[mbbac]

Is this Negative Apple Press Week on Slashdot? First there was the whole NTT thing where commenters refused to admit that NTT was actually using Apple technology. Then there was the stupid GNU Darwin post, and now this.

When did the e-mail announcing NAPWeek go out? I missed it.

Don't Trust Contractors

[Aggrazel]

You may as well say, don't trust ANYONE.

The only real difference between a contractor and an employee is how you get your paycheck. To say that someone is going to be more honest just because they are an actual employee is assinine.

I'm a contractor and I take my job very seriously, there is no way in hell I would ever betray the confidence of any of my employers. Not just because it would tarnish my reputation with future employers but also because I am that kind of person.

The company I am contracted to right now is very contractor friendly, I've seen some that are not. But the whole attitude that contractors are somehow less deserving of trust than regular employees really irritates me.

Now this guy clearly broke his contract. But it would not have made a difference if he were a regular employee or a contractor, the responsibility for trust is in the individual, not in how his contract of employment is written. I'm sure regular employees at Apple have the same moral obligations to keep a lid on trade secrets. /rant off

Re:Don't Trust Contractors

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Smart contractors develop relationships with their clients in order to cultivate repeat business. When an employee bails out for another job, they rarely think about returning to the original employer - often they even harbor feelings of great mistrust, feeling that they were treated unfairly which is what motivated them to look for a new job in the first place. Because of these common situations it often makes more sense to trust the contractors than it does to trust the employees.

Re:Not that it hurt anything

[ipjohnson]

He broke an NDA point blank, it doesn't matter if it hurt sales or not.

I have no simpathy for him he signed it, he knew what he was donig when he broke it. Why do you feel it makes a difference if sales where hurt?

Re:So?

[sweetooth]

This has nothing to do with collaboration or corporate culture, nor should it scare any of Apples employees. If you go to work for any company and you then turn around and violate your contract you shouldn't be surprised in the least when they come after you with thier lawyers. If this was a developer talking about the latest technologies on a public mailing list there is a decent chance Apple wouldn't need to puruse it as such. In this case you have someone providing information that should not have been discussed outside of Apples doors before Apple gave the go ahead.

IMO, if this was Apple going after an employee going after some developer for discussing information in a forum publicly without attempting to hide his identity, and not giving away "trade secrets", then it would be news. This is a corporation following up on the terms of a contract, nothing more.

Re:or maybe the moral is that Apple isn't Willy Wo

[mcg1969]

The People's Republic of China
Oooh, it's the People's Republic of China defense! Wow, you must be right, then!

Seriously, Apple is far from the only company with a supposed "history" of going after people to maintain what they call "trade secrets." Trade secrets are probably the most underappreciated intellectual property protection device to those who really don't spend their time thinking about it. Does anyone here know the formula for Coke? Kentucky Fried Chicken's Original Recipe Chicken? The secret sauce on the steak frites at La Relais d'Entrecote in Paris?

We talk about patents all the time on Slashdot, but for every patent a company pursues, there are loads of trade secrets they are protecting through secrecy. It has real advantages to patents, becuase unlike a patent you don't have to reveal a trade secret to get legal protection for it---you just have to be diligent about keeping it a secret. On the other hand, if someone obtains information about a trade secret through legal means---usually as a result of negligence on the part of the company or its employees---then that protection is gone. Legal trade secret protection actually requires that a company such as Apple be reasonably diligent about plugging leaks.

Re:Heh, Sneakers reference.

[Capt. DrunkenBum]

You asked for karma... You broke the unwritten law.

No karma for you!

Re:Apple... you disgust me.

[JordoCrouse]

I for one find this extremely disgusting. I understand that businesses need to protect their trade secrets, but I think this crosses the line.

Lemme see. The guy signed an agreement, took the confidental information, and purposely violated the agreement and posted the information on the internet. Oh, yeah, there was a line crossed, but news flash - it wasn't Apple.

If I had a company, and one of my employees breaks any NDA agreements like that, I'm gonna fire him first and turn him over the authorities second.

I don't care what sort of Stallmanistic view of society you have, you cannot possibly believe that somebody should be allowed to sign an agreement, and then break it because they feel that "information should be free".

When you sign your name to an agreement - thats it. You can't just go back later and say "oh, I was kidding". I hope when they throw the book at this guy, it hits him square in the forehead.

trade secret?

[asv108]

The definition of a trade secret

A secret formula, method, or device that gives one an advantage over competitors.

So how would releasing specs on a site that is dedicated to "rumors" help the competition? The action is probably a violation of the employee's contract, but a list of specs is certainly not a trade secret.

Are gateway and dell (I'm guessing they would be considered Apple competitors) going to change their strategic plans because of a list of specs given on an Apple rumor site? Probably not, I doubt that really care about Apple as a competitor, besides using their designs.

So even if Apple does win this lawsuit, I really doubt this will send a message to other employees contemplating sending specs. This along with Apple's other attempts to vehemently defend their "Trade secrets" and "trademarks" will backfire as usual. Apple should learn to use the role of underdog to boost its "nice guy" image instead of pushing legal actions that even MS wouldn't stoop to. Instead of attempting to rely on the unveiling of secret products at trade shows. Maybe they should try a different strategy?

Re:Not that it hurt anything

[Alyeska]

Here's how it hurts.

You're developing a product in a highly competitive market. That means you're paying employees and contractors money for, say, a year without any payback. That research is an investment.

The first damage comes when your leak gives your innovations away to your competitors. All that work, all that research, and your competitors can figure out your ideas for free, possibly even beat you to the marketplace.

But then theres more damaage: by leaking proprietary information, he damages the relationships between contractors and employers. Like the post says, "Don't trust contractors."

Re:So?

[margaret]

If you are a developer at Apple, high profile anti-employee actions like this send a message: secrecy first, collaboration second.

This has nothing to do with collaboration. The guy was leaking info to a rumors site about an upcoming product. He wasn't seeking input from the community about how to make it better. It probably just made him feel cool.

Re:Amazed by the Slashdot Response

[Zathrus]

I mean, information wants to be free, right?

Oh, of course.

So lets share secrets. Yours first. Social security number, date of birth, credit card numbers, etc. It's all just information.

If you tell someone something and ask them to keep it a secret, you get pissed at them when they don't. When you do the same thing and have them sign a legal affidavit saying that they won't tell anyone else the secret, then if they do you have the power of the court behind you.

And, you know what? They didn't have to promise not to tell the secret. You didn't have to share it with them either at that point. But once you promise, damn right you're going to get torched for breaking that promise.

Oh, and before you start going off on non-sequitors, the law does provide for breaking contracts when revealing wrongdoing. There's an entire section of law dealing with whistle blowing, so as to protect and encourage people to report illegal activity.

Re:Apple... you disgust me.

[JordoCrouse]

Take an extreme and fictitous example, a food company uses a secret ingredient and has all its employees sign a NDA to preserve the secrecy of that ingredient. An employee discovers that the secret ingredient is rat poison, what should they do? I would say the should report it to the authorities and the press, and the company should not have recourse to law through the NDA.

I agree - in fact it is your duty to report any illegal activities. But that should be reported to the authorities, not splattered all over half a dozen web sites before you get around to actually providing that pesky thing called proof.

Consider an old practice of IBM. They used to sell printers with a switch that changed the speed of the printer hidden inside the printer. They sold upgrades to these printers that involved an engineer visiting the customer's premises snd flicking the switch when the customer wasn't looking. Pure and simple IBM used secrecy to rip off customers. Trade secret or sharp practice?

Ah, but was it illegal? If so, then your point stands, but you simply can't be violating your signed agreements just because a company acts in a manner that you find repulsive. You can choose not to sign the agreement. You can choose to terminate your employment once you discover the truth. You are simply asked not to reveal the secrets once you have learned them.

And if you feel that it is illegal, then go tell a lawer or the approprate agency, and they will tell a judge, who will decide if it is potentially illegal, or just ethically corrupt.

But no matter the situation, taking confidental information that you promised to cover up and posting it on the web is wrong. I don't give a damn about your opinion, or your morals, or even the complete lack of ethics that 80% of these companies have. Its illegal for now. If you don't like it, then lobby to have the law changed. Until then, I say sign on the dotted line and live up to your oaths.

Re:Or Maybe Apple Truly Seeks to Protect Innovatio

[frankie]

Once a secret isn't secret anymore suing anyone is completely pointless in terms of protection of that secret

Suing the guy isn't meant to protect that (former) secret; it's long since become public knowledge. Suing is how they protect the next secret, and the ones after that...

Umm

[sulli]

I don't think so. Lack of job security is no excuse to violate a contract you sign with your employer.

Loyalty and ethics are not the same thing. Think of all those Enron "stars" - loyal yes, ethical no. Flip side is the contractor who quits when he feels like it, but honors your secrets (I've worked with several). I'll take the latter any day.

Re:As bad as Microsoft, if not worse

[RatBastard]

Microsoft does this all the time. They just don't get the press that Apple does. And to be honest, Apple pretty much begged for this story to be high-profile. And I'd say the same thing to the dimwit who leaked MS secretsa as I did to this boob: "You screwed up pal. Big time."

Sure, the Anti-Micro$h!t Linux-Uber-Alles geeks might rant like mad, but they are also taking Apple to task for this right now.

additional damages...

[SethJohnson]

The followup damages are this:

If consumers know that a new computer is about to be released with compelling features, it will be harder for retailers to sell the current inventory at the current retail price. Usually, in advance of a product introduction, Apple will curtail availability of products to retailers if the products are to be replaced. This helps prevent them from getting loaded down with the last model when the new model is released.

Blowing the secrecy of a new product release corrupts this process because consumers can make a tangible comparison of what waiting X days will get them vs. the mystery of knowing that a potentially-cool new product might be available soon. Retailers are then less-able to move the product that's currently on the shelves and they have to offer discounts on the leftover stock after the new product is out.