Slashdot Mirror
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."
Props on the 'Sneakers' reference. What a great movie. I'm pretty sure I've got it in my DVD library - I'll have to dig it up and watch it tonight.
Unless, of course, scissors can't cut rock...
When the pics were posted, most people said "No way!" and came up with a bunch of reasons for the pics to be fake... then it turned out they were real. I doubt there were any lost sales from the knowledge, as everyone was expecting PowerMac updates of some type anyway.
"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
Apple really tries to control any media exposure to its products with an iron fist.. I'm still kinda wondering if Time Canada (I think that's who leaked the new iMac) every felt Steve's wrath.
It's pretty simple. He screwed up. (And he got caught)
He shouldn't have done it. There's no defense for it. Apple might be going at it heavy-handed, but only a fool would have tried this knowing that Apple (Jobs) will hurt -vendors- over leaks. He bitch-slapped ATI over leaking, so he's going to -hurt- some guy that leaks a photo or sketch of a new machine design.
Yes, it's heavy-handed. Yes, it made me wince. But all in all, the guy did fuck up.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
Apple has a history of protecting its goods and creativity and for that reason, I somehow doubt if it mattered whether or not the person leaking the trade secret in this case was a contractor.
My understanding is that if Apple does not actively protect and police its trade secrets, then its innovative goods and ideas no longer receive protection as trade secrets. No evidence is required to show that Apple is an innovative company --- if it did not receive protection for its innovation, then it may have little reason to create future innovative products.
Considering the pervasiveness of companies to recruit employees from other companies by using 'moles,' and Microsoft's history of heavy-handed tactics, perhaps Apple has another reason to protection its innovation: Microsoft.
Do you truly believe Microsoft has never placed a 'mole' or has an Apple employee it relies on for information? For also this reason, Apple has no choice but to pursue trade secrets claims in court against everyone it can, or it will entirely lose protection.
Pretty much, Apple is all about innovation and cutting-edge products. Take that away, and all I see is a company making an OS, keyboards, and mice.
In the case of Apple Computer, yes, it is news. Remember that Wozniak was one of the founders, and he is a famous phone phreak, a blue box-er like Captain Crunch. He was hacking Ma Bell and hiding from the Feds back in the day.
Every corporation has a corporate culture. When was the last time you saw Microsoft publicly attacking it's one of its developers for 'leaking secrets'? It happens, but Apple has a disturbing history of jealously pursuing it's employees. The corporate culture of Apple has transitioned from the hackers' culture of Woz to a Culture of Fear. If you are a developer at Apple, high profile anti-employee actions like this send a message: secrecy first, collaboration second.
It's a very interesting transition. I'm not making a value judgement about, other than to say yes, it is News for Nerds.
Kill Trolls Dead. Here's
out of the guy is what it sounds like according to the article
:)
"This suit against Lopez helps show the company vigorously tries to protect its secrets, Mireles said. In addition, such suits could serve to deter other potential leakers, he said"
Apple has taken legal action against coworkers that leaked info in the past (also mentioned in the article) but I think the real reason why they got upset is
"Steve uses Macworld and other appearances more effectively than any other (technology) leader," Bajarin said. "In that context they want to have that surprise element," because posting those secrets early dilutes the impact, Bajarin said."
of course the lawyers will argue:
"Innovation is in Apple's DNA, so the protection of trade secrets is crucial to our success. Our policy is to take legal actions where necessary to preserve the confidentiality of our intellectual property," Apple said in a prepared statement.
Just because Apple made a great new OS - doesn't mean they're avid sourceforge users
Ave Molech Setting
That's why most large companies have, as part of their security policy, a documentation labeling policy. It is up to the document originator to properly lable such documents (such as, general use, internal use, confidential, trade secret, etc.). Then there is a correlating policy on how such documents are to be handled.
Well so any information that is not publicly known in a corporation is a trade secret? Using that mentality Apple can sue if an employee discloses whether or not Steve Jobs wears boxers or briefs.
The point was that there's actually a legal definition for a "trade secret". There is no copyright involved in this.
First off, if the contractor did leak the information then he was clearly in the wrong.
Second, Apple's attempts at "copyrighting" industrial design have always been a bit odious. I mean look at all the iMac-alike lawsuits they fired off. Don't you think some of the old terminals had already covered the ground of "screen w/ integrated electronics and keyboard on cord" form factor? Apple made it a little cooler with the translucent plastics, but it wasn't exactly ground breaking. Now, I can see a case for their newer iMac with the lamp arm (I still can't figure out if they're cool-looking or not).
So, the contractor violated an NDA. That's all well and good. But, did he really leak "trade secrets"?
BTW - the formula for coke is a trade secret. This means that no one really knows what's in there and Coca-Cola has to work hard to protect that information. This information was merely secret for the time being and was going to be fully revealed to the public just at a time of the company's choosing.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
I bet it was written by a lawyer.
Since signing the NDA wasn't a condition of employment at the time that it was signed, the NDA cannot be enforcable against the employee unless it is supported by consideration (ie, they must PAY you something for signing the NDA). Without consideration (a legal term), there is no contract.
The paranoid lawyer within me says that the they gave you an NDA without a date to muddy the waters and try to cover up the fact that it was signed after you were given employment, and was not in fact a condition of employment. The lawyers knew there was a potential problem and tried to bury it.
However, keep in mind that the lack of an NDA does not fully excuse an employee for liability for leaking trade secrets.
IAAL, but IANAELA (I am not an Employment Law Attorney).
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!