Slashdot Mirror
Apple Defendants Interviewed
evands writes "There's an interview with Desicanuk, one of three named defendants in the Apple lawsuit alleging illegal distribution of a Tiger developer build, and Nessence, one of two administrators of MacTKA, the Mac BitTorrent tracker site where the build was initially posted, up at DrunkenBlog. The interview tells the whole story as a press release can not, from how Apple determined the kids to sue, to lawyers knocking on doors on Christmas Eve, and beyond. 'Collateral Damage' is a fascinating read which humanizes the whole messy situation."
Maybe it's time to look at OS marketshare to see how the different strategies work out.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Releasing a Tiger into the wild is never a good idea, even if you're an experienced Safari user.
What an idiot. This interview will become evidence against him.
When charged with a criminal or civil offense:
1. remain silent;
2. talk to an attorney;
3. if case unresolved, goto 1
Of course in the United States you do not have the right to an attorney if charged with a civil offense.
You also do not have the right to be silent at trial, unless your statement may tend to incriminate you.
Note that in the above program, there is no "grandstand / justify / brag to a blogger" statement.
"Some companies view a buggy leak as an opportunity to generate free buzz about the final product. Some view it as an opportunity to use the legal system to bludgeon extreme enthusiasts that have allegedly crossed the line."
And maybe some have so little respect for others that they'll violate the rules at every turn. Would it really have killed the Mac community to wait?
The guy lied, violated his NDA and posted valuable copyrighted material which he did not own to a public site. Let him twist in the wind.
When I mentioned it to a few people in various IRC chat rooms, they had asked if they could get a copy too. I made the foolish assumption that since I wasn't a developer, and I had a copy that it would be ok if I shared it with 5 or 6 fellow mac fanatics.
And then he's surprised when it escapes out in the wild. Don't they teach kids the safe sex warnings anymore? You're not just sharing with all your friends, you're sharing with all their friends too.
A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.
here: http://www.ramdac.org/article/id/256.html I remember 3 weeks ago when Nessence told me Apple called him on his cell, that this would get nasty. He sent me the legal documents Apple had sent before he came over last night to talk about it.
I don't want to get accused of shooting the messenger here, but it's worth noting that the author of "Drunken Blog" has, in the recent past, been caught posting lengthy tracts of stuff that just isn't true.
He wrote a lengthy rant about interface scalability in Mac OS X, bemoaning the fact that Tiger doesn't do Thing X that he thinks is really incredibly important, and explaining why everybody at Apple who disagrees with him is obviously an idiot.
Then along came the commenters who, probably by bending their NDAs, explained to him that Tiger does, in fact, do X, and that the author doesn't have the first idea what he's talking about.
Is this relevant to the subject at hand? Almost certainly not. But I'm a big believer in context, so I felt like maybe somebody would appreciate it if I shared what I knew of it.
so he goes through all the trouble of finding out about ADC to get the seed, but as soon as the torrent is disabled by a mod, he "assumes" that the file is messed up and deletes it? sounds more like he deleted it because he got fearful in getting an indirect confirmation that leaking it was wrong...
I'm wondering -- does this have anything to do with the screenshots of Tiger that were released on Macrumors a few months back? Some of you may remember this; I think Slashdot even ran a story about it (although unfortunately I can't find it at the moment).
What happened was this: Someone sent what they claimed to be Tiger screenshots to Macrumors.com. However, the article said "courtesy of Gary Niger from GNAA" or some such, so everyone assumed they were fake. But then they turned out to be real. The GNAA has been bragging ever since.
I guess what I'm really wondering is, are the defendants in this case GNAA members who got caught obtaining and posting these screenshots? Or is this something else, completely unrelated?
Hear recorded Slashdot headlines on your phone! New service beta testing. Just call (248) 434-5508
For $500 per year anyone who agrees to follow Apple's ADC NDA agreement has access to 5 "Software Seed Keys". Anyone can join can and obtain an ADC account for free and what are called "assets" can be passed to other ADC account holders in the same company. That way a company can have 5 developers directly downloading prerelease software with only 1 membership.
There are other, less secretive assets such as the right to buy a Mac system at a discount, albeit for development purposes and not for resale.
Apple also has much more tightly controlled seeds to key developers, these exist but the procedures and those who are involved are a tightly guarded secret. They used to be only distributed on physical media by private carrier.
The lawsuit involved the regular seeded software only, not the uber-secret stuff. To my knowledge that has rarely, if ever, made it into the wild.
The parent here is somewhat correct, but I feel like I should clarify:
The fifth amendment prohibition against compelled testimony only applies to criminal liability, and only applies to "persons."
If an elicited response in a civil case might tend to incriminate you in a criminal action, a witness can invoke the privilege against self-incrimination and refuse to answer that question. Remember, though, that if you waive the privilege, it is lost forever - so if you're not sure, SHUT YOUR MOUTH and find a way to consult with a lawyer. If you're at a loss for how to get an attorney, many state and local bar associations have lawyer referral services that are free to the public, usually with a free or cheap 30-minute interview or something.
In a civil case, just because a statement may tend to make you more liable for money damages in a civil action doesn't mean that you can make a blanket refusal to testify if called as a witness by the opposing party. To do so would not only nullify your defense and force the court to take your opponent's views at face value, but would also mean that individuals could escape liability in most cases by simply refusing to acknowledge it.
Also important is that civil liability has varying degrees of standards of proof, with ultimate responsibility generally relying on a preponderance of the evidence - both sides have an obligation to plead their cases, and the factfinder decides what "truth" is. Criminal liability, however, requires that the prosecution prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The criminal defendant can remain silent and the burden for the prosecution remains unchanged.
However, even in a criminal case, you can't use the defendant's silence as both a sword and a shield; once the defendant has chosen to take the stand and testify, they can't choose to only answer questions that would tend to prove their innocence.
I know I went a little overboard, but I always see people confusing the fifth amendment privilege and thinking that they can apply it where they can't. Just wanted to clarify.
Well that one's just a lie.
English is easier said than done.
i'm a member of the site, and have been for a while. it's interesting that apple didn't try to shut down the site at all. they merely wanted to make sure that tiger betas didn't appear on the site.
we have all their software well seeded with people downloading, and they didn't give a damn. it was just the prerelease software.
it seems apple doesn't care too much about piracy and "lost sales"- they just don't want people judging them by prerelease software and getting the wrong impression.
Maybe it would not have turned out differently the following way, but at least you cost them more time and resources doing so:
Before I found out I was being sued, they(lawyers) called me up to let me know they were doing an investigation. To be perfectly honest, the individuals who contacted me were polite and respectful. When I asked them if they were suing me, they let me know that if I cooperate, that Apple has a history of being a generous company.
I answered all the questions they asked regarding how I got the torrent, how long I had seeded it for etc. I was honest and as helpful as I possibly could be.
Wrong. Lawyers are not your friend. Their job is to help prosecute you.
We were given 'Door #1': "If you don't co-operate we'll sue you". We replied and upon replying received 'Door #2': "We understand it's P2P, but if you don't co-operate we'll sue you" or 'Door #3': "We are all adults here, cooperate and we assure you we won't sue all your users but we can't tell you what might happen to the uploaders".
How about the front door? You don't have to answer anybody's questions for any reason. In order for you to "co-operate" they need 2 other things:
1. An officer of the law holding a warrant
2. Your lawyer present.
This is a classic case of citizens giving up thier rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Even the Canadian has rights on foreign American soil. These guys just gave up all those rights, did the Apple lawyers and police officers jobs for them, and now they are getting sued!
Not to mention the fact that when GCC 4 is released with Objective-C++ support (by the way, the Apple developers have been very helpful in modifying their GCC changes so that they can be incorporated into the main trunk) we are likely to see at least one GNUstep web browser based on webkit.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
...how Apple plays this one.
Was the kid a bit naive? Sure. I'm occasionally on invitation-only torrents in the Mac, and multi-platform, scenes, and the trackers are adamant about people NOT distributing the torrent files, themselves, on other trackers. Always lots of warnings regarding "Don't share torrents, outside." So, I give the kid the benefit of the doubt regarding his belief that the buggy beta would stay 'inside' somewhat. He made, as Nixon put it, 'an error in judgment', no question of that.
I also believe that the real asshole in this situation was the 'paid-up' ADC Member who had the 'seed' of Tiger, in the first place, and 'gave' it to the kid with the freebie ADC account. (Trust me, the 'free' ADC accounts never see 'seeds' of an OS. Period.) He's the one who should be taken to the cleaners, not the kids.
Apple Computer is also made up of 'smart' people, with history and experience. And they should know, (as well as most of us here) that 'good' people do 'bad' things, and smart people are capable of doing the stupidest things.
I did some freelance work in the Securities industry (as an investment analyst for a small group of fellows), and one of the truisms in Markets and market interventions is this: The mechanisms put in place after a crisis, stock crash, etc, are never sufficient to prevent the next shock, and what is more, the mechanisms, themselves, almost invariably guarantee that the next 'event' will be far worse than the one that precipitated the intervention, and its so-called 'protection'. We'll just see... the ball is in Apple's court... for the time being.