Woz, Others Ask Apple To Go Easy On Tiger Leak

tabkey12 writes "Drunkenbatman posts this impressive article with a pointed quote from Apple co-creator Steve Wozniak and 24 others from all parts of the Apple Software world, criticising Apple's stance against a 23-year-old pre-med student, desicanuk, who distributed a pre-release Tiger build over a popular Mac Bittorrent site. There's also an interview with desicanuk on drunkenbatman's site. (Original Slashdot article here.)"

Comments

Credibility

[Odo]

Posted by "Drunkenbatman". On "drunkenblog.com". Defending "desicanuk". Quotes people from "Delicious Monster", "DaringFireball" and "Unsanity". Submitted to "slashdot.org" by "tabkey12".

Two questions:

1. How do we expect to be taken seriously with pseudonyms like this?
2. How many /.ers didn't even blink while reading the intro?

Of course look who's talking; Odo, a fictional shapeshifter... <sigh>

Re:Credibility

[Stephen Williams]

Are you kidding? "Drunkenbatman" will look awesome on the guy's future Pulitzer Prize.

-Stephen

Re:Credibility

[HeghmoH]

I don't know about all of them, but Unsanity is one of the most well-known Mac software companies out there. Delicious Monster is pretty well-known too, although their fame is rather recent and it remains to be seen if it'll last. People must take names like these pretty seriously, because the companies seem to be doing reasonably well.

Re:Credibility

[Speare]

All this about letters from "Wozniak" to a company named "Apple."

Credibility requires context. Someone unfamiliar with any of those proper nouns will have zero context, so there will be zero credibility. Add context, and things start to fall into place. Not every business needs to have a respectable name like "Federated Usable Computational Devices, Inc." and not every person must be a Smith or a Jones.

Re:Credibility

[Anonymous Coward]

2. How many /.ers didn't even blink while reading the intro?

What? You mean we're supposed to read the whole thing?

Re:Credibility

[NardofDoom]

How do we expect to be taken seriously with pseudonyms like this?

If someone gives respect because of my name and not what I have to say, then I don't really care if they're not listening; they're not the type of person I want to associate with.

How many /.ers didn't even blink while reading the intro?

At least this one.

Re:Credibility

[PsiPsiStar]

Who would take a job site seriously with a name like "Monster?"

Re:Credibility

[Vombatus]

Not to mention his co-author, StonedRobin

Woz is too much of an idealist

[prodangle]

As much as I admire Woz's idealism, I wouldn't take business advice from him!

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as I admire Woz's idealism, I wouldn't take business advice from him!

Let's see .. Wozniack is a billionaire .. and you .. hmm?

Let me see here .. remind me again why I should take advice from you over someone who's made billions of dollars? And before you blab something about how it was all Steve Jobs business acumen .. well if Woz was such a business dope he would have told Steve off and stayed in his job at HP instead of taking a mad risk and forming Apple with nearly nothing.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Nexum]

Woz is not a billionaire.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[gl4ss]

yes, but that's not the point, the point is that if you continue doing this kind of shit then people will see straight through your companys intentions and when your company is largely dependandt on very zealous fans that buy anything you make because it is from you it's a bad thing to piss them off.

and then you have a company kick started on money made from making (_black_ hat)hacking tools for the phone system suing some kid that just posts things that people email to him- obviously if they had some values once about freedom to do things they don't have them now.

like, hello, wtf? if that's not spineless from a company that's trying to act 'better' than the competition then what is..

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, I wish I could end up in the kind of soup that Jobs ended up in with NeXT. A $400 Million buy-out which led to a boardroom coup opportunity in which he regained control of his old multi-billion-dollar company!

Please Lord, let me make a few mistakes like that!

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Anonymous Coward]

People are not fans of Apple because Jobs is a nice guy. He's not. He's infamous for his absurdly hot temper.

People are not fans of Apple because they are warm and fuzzy towards those who they see as a threat to their interests. They're not. This goes all the way back to the Apple ][ and the lawsuits over the Frankline computers which were designed to mimic them.

People are fans of Apple because they keep cranking out impressive innovations to the way humans and computers interact, and when at their best, sell really spiffy hardware that takes advantage of these innovations.

As long as they do that, most of us are fine with them being asshats.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Vollernurd]

Woz is only wealthy because Steve Jobs found a good way to sell his product for him (well, that's the source of his original pile of cash). They worked well together on the Apple computer and Apple II, that's all. It sometimes happens that the brains behind a product only makes money on it because someone else was market or business savvy enough to sell it well. It helps that it's a good product too.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, that hockey puck mouse is BY FAR the greatest innovation in computer history. It even has bi-directional force feedback when I throw the fucker against the wall.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Anonymous Coward]

"Woz is only wealthy because Steve Jobs found a good way to sell his product for him "

No, Steve Jobs is only wealthy because Woz figured out how to create an elegant personal computer.

There are a lot of smart people in the world.

There are a lot of people who are good at selling.

Without Woz, there is no Jobs. Without Jobs, there is no Woz.

There are equally responsible for Apple, along with about 3 other people who you've never heard of.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[eviltypeguy]

An interface for MP3 players that "doesn't suck" (click-wheel) is one thing.

Expose desktop window management, etc.

Of course I could name lots of other things, but you would consider them "eye candy", which sometimes is every important to the overall user experience...

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Anonymous Coward]

To us ACs, anyone with enough cash to buy a chicken sandwich for lunch is a billionaire.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[paganizer]

I have to disagree with that, AC.
There are lots, and lots, and lots, and lots of excellent valuable ideas, concepts, things being made.
If you don't have someone to sell your idea, concept or thing, you are not going to make any money.
I know. believe me, I know.
The only way The Woz would have made a pile of money off the Apple without Jobs, is if he was lucky enough to have another Jobs-type stumble across him.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Ohreally_factor]

If I could tell where the quote ended and your response began, I might have actually read your post.

Formatting. It's a word, look it up.

Re:Woz is too much of an idealist

[Couldn'tCareLess]

And I have to disagree with that, paganizer :-)

One person has a great technical idea but no clue on selling, another has great business sense but couldn't rewire a plug. They combine, form a team and get rich. Amen.

To paraphrase you: "There are lots and lots and lots and lots of excellent business people able to sell valuable ideas, concepts and things. If they don't have someone to have an idea, concept or thing then they are not going to make any money.

Intellectual Property

[uq1]

This is intellectual property of Apple, and should be treated as such.

He pirated software, he should pay the penalty.

No sympathy here.

Re:Intellectual Property

[mirko]

He distributed non-ready software : in other words, his Tiger distro is already obsolete.
I suggest the following :

1. Apple folks leave him alone and eventually revoke his ADC membership
2. They begin a reward scheme, randomly offering thingies (.Mac, softs... : things that don't have much material value -software is easily reproductible- but that people will like to show off) to some clients so that it will incitate others to buy more stuff from them
3. They get a nicer image
4. They profit

Re:Intellectual Property

[jonathanduty]

I agree except that his fault isn't that he pirated software, he gave away something that wasn't his and he broke several legal agreements I'm sure he had with Apple. It was a very stupid move on his part and I'm sure he will pay legally and professionally. Would you ever hire someone with that on his record?

Re:Intellectual Property

[Paradise Pete]

it's more the breaking of confidentiality with his employer that should be the issue here

He doesn't work for Apple. He's a medical student.

Re:Intellectual Property

[clarkcox3]

The problem isn't that he pirated software--Everyone and their mom does that. The problem is that he broke a contract. Period.

He signed something that says "I will not do that"; Then he did "that". It doesn't matter whether "that" is distributing software, selling stock, or hopping on one foot through a crowded subway. He agreed that he wouldn't do it.

Re:Intellectual Property

[Myuu]

Normally I would tend to agree with you, but I think Woz getting involved brought out another point to me.

The fact is that while Woz and Jobs were this guy's age, they did the same and a lot worse crap, blueboxing, drugs, etc. Look at where they took the world. Apple, the company that is supposed to be about going against the grain, is not living up to itself. In addition, by them suing this guy, they are holding back somebody that could have done a lot of good for others.

I think Apple is just feeding the fears that, as a result of the success of the iPod, the company is changing from what it used to be.

Re:Intellectual Property

[LurkerXXX]

Even worse, he's going to be an M.D.

Would you trust your doctor to keep your medical information confidential when he has no problems breaking written contracts of confidentiality? I'd never want to be a patient of someone like that.

Re:Intellectual Property

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Or:

1. Rain hell on the moron dumb enough to get caught.
2. People take your NDA seriously.
3. You reinforce the image that you are working on stuff so valuable you are willing to go to court over it.
4. Profit.

Perhaps you have never worked in a technology company. You walk out the door with a prototype, and it shows up out on the street, you are going to get sued. Unless you work for the company. Then you are fired, then sued.

Embezzel the company for a few hundred thousand dollars, steal laptops, get caught buying hookers and drugs with company money, they let you go quietly. They often don't press charges.

But you compromise, or come close to compromising, the crown jewels, they have to tear into you. It's like defending trademarks. The only property they own is what they are willing to defend.

What's his defense?

[bigtallmofo]

From everything that I've read his defense to Apple's charge of him posting the pre-release software is that he's a kid, please feel sorry for him.

I feel sympathy for him too, but how do you stop leaks if not punish the people that perpetrate the leaks?

Re:What's his defense?

[gowen]

he's a kid, please feel sorry for him.

He's 23, for God's sake. He's not a kid, he's an adult.

And given that he *must* have been aware of the
i) illegality
ii) traceability
of his leaks, he's a particularly stupid adult.

Spare your sympathy for people who deserve it.

Re:What's his defense?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes he did. He admits he created a Torrent and made the file available on an "invite only" network. He very clearly knew what he was doing. He even asked for help in creating the Torrent because he had never done it before; but it clearly shows he fully intended to distribute the file and knew that others would download it.

Re:What's his defense?

[Maestro4k]

Spare your sympathy for people who deserve it.

• So yes, he doesn't terribly deserve sympathy, but.... What are the penalties being sought? Is Apple going after the maximum allowed by law for this? If so then the penalites far outweight the actual crime. While I don't feel sorry for him (yes, he's old enough to know better and should have known better), I don't think it's right to send someone into financial ruin for the rest of their natural lifes over one fuck up.

• Penalize him fairly to punish him for his crime, but leave him a chance in hell to come back from all this and be a productive member of society. If he's going to spend the rest of his life flipping burgers to pay off fines, he'll be completely useless to society, and it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up committing suicide.

  So yeah, he's an idiot, but does the punishment truly fit the crime? Is this a case where he could have broken into Apple's HQ, slaughtered the entire Tiger OS team with a hatchet and gotten a lighter sentence? (Note I have no clue what the punishment will be, damn work blocks all blog sites.)

Re:What's his defense?

[nordicfrost]

I have read the interview, and I have a bad feeling about this guy. He claims that he was unaware of any uploading in BitTorrent, how can you be unaware of it? The whole systems is based upon the fact that as soon as you download, you become an uploader! FTA: "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."

Well, if you grasp the concept of illegal software distribution (and I'm not agreeing to the concept, just retelling it as it actually is), he has just admitted the "crime". You are dealing with the law and a private company eager to protect its secrets. I suggest you buy a cluestick and hit yourself over the head with it until you realise it is illegal.

Now, unless he pleads insanity; not understanding what you are doing when you are doing a crime is no an excuse. If I spit chewing gum on the streets of Singapore do you think they'll be lenient on me just because I didn't know it was a crime? Nope.

When I went to law school (relax, I'm not a lawyer) a professor had a saying about my Scandinavian country: "People here seem to think they are born with an insurance for screw-ups. As soon as they do something stupid, they expect sympathy and help from the government." The same can be applied to Desicanuk, you screwed up, broke a contract and actually did a crime. Now fess up and be a man.

FTA: "When I signed up for the free ADC account, I didn't read the agreement. I suppose a lot of us don't read word for word every thing you agree to." Yeah, well you should have. It is retarded to sign something without reading and understanding it. EULAs, which I hate with a passion, are a slightly different thing, but the contract with ADC is something you really should read. An unread contract will almost always bite you in the ass, tell it to my GF who signed a contract with a private school and now has paid thousands of dollars because she signed up for the military while having committed to the contract.

You live, you learn.

Re:What's his defense?

[zestyalbino]

Of course Apple has every right to punish him, but what kind of punishment is fair? Ruining his life seems overzealous.

Apple wasn't hurt financially or otherwise from his actions. That doesn't make what he did okay, but it should be considered when determining the fairness of the punishment they want to dish out.

IMHO it would be much more appropriate for Apple to settle this out of court. They could request some form of monetary compensation (an amount that will stretch the finances but not lead to ruin), then have their marketing department portray desicanuk as an example, with a warning that next time they won't be so compassionate. This keeps the community happy, Apple's good-will thriving and doesn't ruin desicanuk's life.

Re:What's his defense?

[DenDave]

Yep, the kid made a mistake. He shouldn't have gotten confused by Apple's Open Source PsychoBabble.. Don't get me wrong, I love my mac, worship the product, though, not the company. Now he can learn from his mistake and download Linux.

Re:What's his defense?

[XMyth]

Even if he was telling the truth, he still leaked it. Only to "5 or 6" people that he *didn't know* and thought that they wouldn't themselves leak it.

Very stupid if you ask me.

Re:What's his defense?

[Maestro4k]

Most likely, assuming they win, he'd declare bankruptcy, give up most of his (likely very few, if he is as "kid"-list as other seem to say) assets, and thus pay only a tiny slice of whatever amount they win. This would be a major setback, but unfortunately not all that uncommon of one.

• This may vary by state, but in at least some you cannot have judgements dissolved in bankruptcy. My deadbeat dad tried this years ago to get out of the judgement against him for back child support owed -- and failed. In fact he ended up with his wages garnished after that, and it took him until I was about 30 to pay off all the money owed. So bankruptcy's not always an option.

• Also, bankruptcy is ceasing to be much of an option for anything except perhaps large companies. Banks and credit card companies have managed to get the laws changed, I think you can't dissolve all, or at least most, of credit card debt anymore so a bankruptcy isn't helpful even if you're drowning in debt. Kinda sad, I'm sure there were some deadbeats who filed it just to avoid paying, but I really doubt _all_ of bankruptcies were like that.

Re:What's his defense?

[Anonymous Coward]

1) There are several forms of punishment other than financial ruin.

Yes, but civil court doesn't allow for "creative sentencing" like the lunatic-fringe judges/public prefer. All it allows for is monetary compensation for wrongdoing committed between individuals (corporations are considered individuals).

2) Do you honestly believe that punishing people ever stopped anything? It might, just MIGHT, stop the person being punished from repeating the behavior. But murder and rape have been punished for a loooooong time, and there are no indications that these activities will ever cease.

Yes, I'm sure if a close family member was raped, you'd be completely blasse-faire about the whole situation and not want to see the perpetrator punished.

Listen, laws do help. If people know they're going to be punished for committing an illegal action, a wide swath of people are far less likely to commit a crime. Others will still go ahead and do it. Those are the people you can't stop. Those are people we call criminals. There's a reason they're prosecuted like this. Because they're criminals.

The remaining people? Those are the ones you want to stop, because if you don't, society as we know it will return to anarchy.

Frankly, if I discovered my doctor had something like this lurking in his past, I sure as hell wouldn't want the slimeball working on me. Poor judgement like this can easily lead to poor judgement in dealing with patient good vs. HMO profitability.

There's a very good reason why lawyers get disbarred after breaking the law. And they're lawyers... I expect my doctors to less scummy than the average lawyer.

Re:What's his defense?

[Vellmont]

This is clearly a case of a massive corporation against a lone individual. His age is irrelevant. What is relevant is that he has no means to defend himself against a multi-billion dollar corporation with an axe to grind, and that his intent wasn't malicious.

This is a civil matter, so there's no jail involved. However, why should Apple computer be able to ruin someones life through financial means just because they have multi-billions of dollars and he has.. well probbably almost nothing? I'm sure Apple will trump up millions of dollars worth of "damages" in a miss-guided attempt at "sending a message". In this case Microsoft is actually the better company. How many times have pre-releases of windows been leaked, but yet they've never gone out on the warpath with big lawsuits?

Re:What's his defense?

[gmknobl]

Yes, he's an adult legally. "Not otherwise though," says the 40-some year old computer programmer.

A) They should punish him
B) They punishment should not be harsh unless Steve Job's tax returns were hidden in the released code. Suggest Multi-thousand dollar fine - like @$5-10K + community service.
C) He should definitely loose all rights to anything MAC unless he ponies up money like the rest of us; this includes loosing any apple accounts at iTunes, etc.

Re:What's his defense?

[MattBurke]

This isn't about guilt - he's admitted what he's done. It's about the disproportionate punishment which comes from things like this nowadays.

If they slap him with a stupid debt then that's his life ruined. If he'd have shoplifted the 5 or 6 copies he said he distributed, he'd have been a lot better off legally. Heck he'd have been better off if he'd have hijacked a truck full of the stuff at gunpoint! It isn't even release software!

Re:What's his defense?

[wtrmute]

Sorry, he does merit sympathy. Let him who has never used P2P to download something of questionable legal status cast the first stone. He's got as much right to sympathy as those shmucks who were bitch-slapped with lawsuits by the RIAA/MPAA... They also downloaded (and shared!) copyrighted material which, while not covered by an explicit NDA, are still not allowed to be given out for free.

Re:What's his defense?

[Vellmont]

The wealth of the litigants is completely irrelevant.

It's completely relevant. How can any person defend themselves against a multi-billion dollar corporation with teams of lawyers on salary if said corporation gets a bug up their butt? Trials are supposed to be fair (even civil trials), and this is clearly a case of unfairness. Do you really like a world where corps have the power to do whatever they want to individuals because they can sue you into oblivion?

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Actually it's not a crime, and there is no "time". This is a civil matter.

Re:What's his defense?

[Vellmont]

He doesn't need to defend himself. He actually did everything he was accused of. Hiring a lawyer is simply throwing good money away.

You obviously don't understand the civil system. This isn't about guilt or innocense, it's about damages and liability. This isn't a criminal trial where a judge/jury determines if you're innocent or guilty of a crime. This is a trial where the plaintiff says how much monetary damage they had inflicted on them, and the defendant has to defend against the amount of damage, liability for that damage, etc. The lawyer would take apart all the ridiculous "damage" claims that Apple will likely fabricate, and/or argue the defendant isn't liable for said damages.

Re:What's his defense?

[gowen]

There's a LONG standing tradition of companies just making up numbers to make it look like a big case,

But if the judge is too inexperienced to spot this, you're screwed which ever way you go about it.

Re:What's his defense?

[stoborrobots]

Unless you count getting GPL'd software via BitTorrent as "download[ing] something of questionable legal status", I'm sure that there are at least a few of us around who have not used P2P in such a manner...

Some of us do believe in respecting copyright/trademark/patent "property" rights while they exist... even while arguing against them.

Re:What's his defense?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

That's like asking how anyone can defend themselves against a charging bull after ignoring the "No Trespassing" and "Danger Bull" signs while hopping over a barbed wire fence and wearing a red jacket.

Re:What's his defense?

[Goo.cc]

"This is clearly a case of a massive corporation against a lone individual"

No, this is clearly a case of a lone individual illegally distributing the copyrighted material of a massive corporation.

"why should Apple computer be able to ruin someones life through financial means just because they have multi-billions of dollars and he has.. "

So you're saying that if you screw someone with lots of money, they shouldn't be able to sue you in return?

Re:What's his defense?

[Vellmont]

So you're saying that if you screw someone with lots of money, they shouldn't be able to sue you in return?

That's a big load of crap, and you know it. There's no real damage here. This is a beta release of software already given to thousands of people that's going to go public in a few months anyway. This case is about the culture of Apple and likely Steve Jobs going ape-shit every time something "leaks".

Re:What's his defense?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

How unclear is patent law? The patent is published. The rules governing patents are published. The enforcment of patents has been the same since day 1 in this country, and it benefits the small-time entrepreneur every bit as much the megacorp.

Defamation is defamation. Free speech is free speech. The boundary between the two has been an ongoing debate since before the founding of this country. Take out "megacorps" and insert "Nobility" or "Celebrity" and you have the same cases going back for centures.

Trade marks are another item that are government registered and widely published. And like free speech, debate over common usage versus the trade mark owner goes back to the beginning of case law.

As far as trade secrets go, a trade secret can be between 2 people, or 2 million. The size of the distribution doesn't matter. What the law cares about is a) do you own the material and b) did you attempt to limit the distribution of it. Don't bitch at me, that is what case law dictates.

And as far as monetary damage goes, if someone takes your product and starts minting a cheap copies, that hurts your bottom line. This is Econ 101. This is why there are Patent and Trademark laws on the books. This is why there is a civil court system. That is why we have Copyrights.

One of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, was, after all, a retired printer.

Re:What's his defense?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

If they slap him with a stupid debt then that's his life ruined. If he'd have shoplifted the 5 or 6 copies he said he distributed, he'd have been a lot better off legally.

According to the article there were about 2500 downloads from his seed. That is 2500*$130=$325K. Now add in any damage from leaking the public beta to the public, including bad PR caused by the leaky betas, now include Apple's legal fees to get an injunction + restitution. This theoretically cost Apple a lot of money, and it was something he agreed not to do. I mean if I sign an agreement that says I won't take a dump in the food at a restaurant if they let me into the kitchen, then I do that and lots of people get sick, and sue, and their business goes downhill, I'd damn well expect to be sued for the damage caused. This guy has no excuse. He's supposed to be a med student, which further reduces my faith in the profession. He will probably have a lot of debt to pay off and that is a good thing.

P.S. your comments about hijacking a truck are moronic. He is not going to spend 8-10 years in prison for this, he is going to be in debt until he pays for the damage he caused.

Re:What's his defense?

[Vellmont]

How unclear is patent law? The patent is published. The rules governing patents are published. The enforcment of patents has been the same since day 1 in this country, and it benefits the small-time entrepreneur every bit as much the megacorp.

Parent law isn't as unclear as much as it's unfair. Anyone with a suitcase full of money can sue any competitor they think they can take on with a trumped up patent portfolio. Patents are weapons, and unless you have the money to defend yourself, you lose no matter if you're in the right or not. See power of large corps above.


Defamation is defamation. Free speech is free speech. The boundary between the two has been an ongoing debate since before the founding of this country. Take out "megacorps" and insert "Nobility" or "Celebrity" and you have the same cases going back for centures.

Kinda sounds like you're saying the law IS unclear. Why does the fact that evil bullshit has been going on for centuries make it allright? Murder, rape, and theft have been going on since recorded history, but yet stranglely we still think they're wrong.

As far as trade secrets go, a trade secret can be between 2 people, or 2 million. The size of the distribution doesn't matter.

Don't give me that. 2 million people knowing something is NOT a secret. Trade secret relies on something ACTUALLY being a secret. If it's generally known, guess what? It's no longer a secret.

And as far as monetary damage goes, if someone takes your product and starts minting a cheap copies, that hurts your bottom line.

Except that's not at all what happened here. You've only invented your false scenario because if you stated the truth, it'd be quite obvious there's no monetary damage. No one minted cheap copies, as of yet there's not an actual final product yet! This was a BETA, not the final product. If anything it would only increase sales of the final product since no one runs a beta OS once the final release comes out.

bt

[maharg]

TFA suggests that bittorrent is at the heart of tiger. Perhaps Apple should look closer to home ?

OT

[Anonymous Coward]

$ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.

I wonder, why do "The Regents" own the rights? Not "The Students" or "The State of California"? Anyone?

penalty?

[essreenim]

he should pay the penalty...of death?

That's just it. It's a big public taboo over something which is equivalent to shop lifting. Sigh, People always fear what they don't understand!

The 83 year old dead file swapper, Gertrude, would have been laughing her false teeth out at you all if she was alive..

Re:penalty?

[Jim_Callahan]

On the other hand, he's pre-med. Shoplifting is a bad move when the strength of your career rests on your ability to keep oaths about confidentiality and professionalism.

He should probably change his major. Literature, perhaps. Lots of nice jobs that require no integrity that a lit major can get.

Pre-Med

[Refrag]

I personally don't want a doctor with this sort of ethics to do anything to me in the future. I hope Apple sues him into oblivion.

Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[Willeh]

While i don't agree with Apple's too strong stance on this (if it was an RTM copy of Tiger it would be different), BUT the portrait being painted of him as a samaritan made me very nauseous. I doubt volunteers at hospitals are exempt of NDA's, copyrights and other lala fairytales dreamed up by our corporate friends.

Bottom line: he should have known better, but Apple shouldn't be giving themselves bad press by continuing. They probably won't now after outcries like this, preferring to show some teeth to discourage potential "innocent" uploaders leaking more stuff, then back off to act as a "Benevolent" corporate entity. Maybe Steve Jobs would do some p.r. by volunteering at the same place as mr. Gentleman Pirate?

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[Skye16]

Actually, he said he never read the NDA. Thus it wasn't knowingly.

And who wants to read an NDA? Some people force themselves, just like people who give themselves enemas. It's essentially masochism. If he said "I didn't read the big blinking red sentence that said 'REDISTRIBUTING IS ILLEGAL'", I would buy your theory that he's lying, but who, aside from the afore mentioned masochists, read things that begin "Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Binary Code License Agreement
for the
JAVATM 2 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT (J2SDK), STANDARD
EDITION, VERSION 1.4.2_X

SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC. ("SUN") IS WILLING TO LICENSE THE SOFTWARE IDENTIFIED BELOW TO YOU ONLY UPON THE CONDITION THAT YOU ACCEPT ALL OF THE TERMS CONTAINED IN THIS BINARY CODE LICENSE AGREEMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL LICENSE TERMS (COLLECTIVELY "AGREEMENT"). PLEASE READ THE AGREEMENT CAREFULLY. BY DOWNLOADING OR INSTALLING THIS SOFTWARE, YOU ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT. INDICATE ACCEPTANCE BY SELECTING THE "ACCEPT" BUTTON AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AGREEMENT. IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO BE BOUND BY ALL THE TERMS, SELECT THE "DECLINE" BUTTON AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AGREEMENT AND THE DOWNLOAD OR INSTALL PROCESS WILL NOT CONTINUE..." (etc etc etc for about 82 thousand goddam pages).

I'm not saying this relieves him of responsibility, but there's a huge fucking difference between knowingly breaking a confidentiality agreement and ignorantly (and irresponsibly) breaking one. And believe me, there is no way they're going to let him be a doctor without pounding that confidentially crap into his skull.

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[utexaspunk]

No kidding. We need a law for this kind of stuff similar to the federal truth in lending laws that require you to basically put the gist of an agreement, the important details, at the top of the contract in plain english.

Better yet, since I'm sure there will still be loopholes in that sort of thing, it could be interesting if there were some sort of universal file format for legal documents (and I don't mean word perfect, har, har) where I could have one generic agreement that I read in detail once and check what I agree with, will and won't do, then when I get a new one from a manufacturer it can show me how they differ. I'd like that... ...which, I guess, means it'll never happen :)

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[Skye16]

So...copyright infringement and breaking a contract is the same as baby killing and kitten slaying? O.o

(I know you were just exaggerating, I just wanted to use 'kitten slaying' in a sentence today.)

I feel sorry for the guy too. I don't want to see him think this was okay. But I'm certain that this guy is scared out of his mind. They all are. Hell, I was scared out of my mind when I got an underage drinking citation; a 150$ fine had me shitting bricks, so to speak. For 2 weeks I was hoping for death. That was 150$. I can't even imagine what 1,500$ would have been, or 15,000$, or 150,000$, or 1.5$ million dollars. I know that, financially, I would have been right out of college and working at McDonalds for the forseeable future trying to pay that off. 1500$ could be done with a semester off. 15,000$? 5-7 years. 150,000$? Never. Not in my entire life will I have 150,000$ spare money to spend.

Chances are amazingly great that, with 5-7 years off, I would never be going back to college. I'd be flipping burgers or scrubbing toilets. Being overly enthusiastic and extremely shortsighted should not result in the ruination of your entire life. What benefit are you to society if you're making minimum wage and scrubbing a toilet as opposed to making 100,000$+ a year, with about 30,000$ of that going to pay taxes? And how is getting 300$ payments a month from a guy making minimum wage for the rest of his life going to do ANYTHING to help recoup supposed losses resulting from these "damages"? It makes no sense.

Scare the shit out of him. Scare the shit out of the rest of the people who read about how absolutely terrified this kid is. Then let him go. No one is going to benefit by crushing his opportunity to be a relatively beneficial member of society and relegating him to food-stamps poor.

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[American AC in Paris]

Actually, he said he never read the NDA. Thus it wasn't knowingly.

...so he signed a legally-binding agreement without reading it? And you're defending this mind-bogglingly foolish behavior?

So it's long. Boo-fucking-hoo. If you can't handle spending a couple hours reading and comprehending a contract before signing, get a lawyer to read and comprehend it for you. Just because you may not take a contract all that seriously doesn't mean the other party shares your disinterest.

OTHERWISE, don't go signing legally binding agreements without knowing what you're getting into!

I'm not saying this relieves him of responsibility, but there's a huge fucking difference between knowingly breaking a confidentiality agreement and ignorantly (and irresponsibly) breaking one.

Not in the eyes of the law, there isn't. If you're going to sign a contract, you'd damn well better understand what you're signing--and don't be surprised when you're expected to live up to your end of the deal. Not bothering to read and understand a legally binding document is every bit as willful as understanding and violating said document--especially when the issue at hand isn't some niggling interpretation of language but an obvious and blatant violation of the core concept of the agreement.

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[American AC in Paris]

Taking into account human nature does NOT relieve him of responsibility. But it SHOULD mitigate some of the trouble he's in.

How do you mitigate the fact that he went and violated the single most central tenet of the contract he signed? This is on par with trying to keep your home by saying that you didn't bother to read the mortgage before you signed it, and thus didn't really understand that you had to make monthly payments on your loan!

Like I said at the end of my post, this isn't a debate over some dubious interpretation of three words nested in sub-paragraph thirteen of section six. This is a willful and blatant violation of the very core of the agreement! Hell, even if he hadn't read anything beyond "Non Disclosure Agreement", he'd know that what he did was in violation of at least the spirit of the agreement.

I'm not arguing that he should be gutted and dried for display. I'm simply saying that there is absolutely no way he should garner sympathy because he didn't even read a contract before signing it.

I am looking at the situation in human terms. What this guy did was an obvious and blatant breach of a legally-binding contract. There is simply no way he didn't know what he was doing was wrong, save for a stunningly high level of stupidity that, frankly, is precluded by the fact that he's smart and saavy enough about filesharing (and the issues surrounding IP) to go about launching a BitTorrent seed. He's looking for sympathy he honestly doesn't deserve. I do feel sorry for the poor bastard, but it's the same kind of sorry I feel for the type of person who gets carted to the hospital with carbon monoxide poisoning after trying to tune his engine with the garage door closed.

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[jcenters]

Bottom line: he should have known better, but Apple shouldn't be giving themselves bad press by continuing. They probably won't now after outcries like this, preferring to show some teeth to discourage potential "innocent" uploaders leaking more stuff, then back off to act as a "Benevolent" corporate entity.

Maybe their strategy is to team up with Woz for a good-cop / bad-cop thing. Sort of like this:

Jobs: You damn kid! That'll be the last time you steal my software!

Jobs charges at the kid, then Woz grabs him, struggling to hold him back.

Kid: I'm sorry Mr. Jobs. It's just that Tiger looked so shiny and delicious! I couldn't help myself!

Jobs: *growls*, bites at the kid, still held back by Woz's muscular arms

Kid: *cries* I'll never do it again!

Woz: You better run, kid. I can't hold him for much longer.

Kid runs away screaming, Jobs and Woz burst into laughter and high-fives.

Jobs: That was fun, let's go grab a cappuccino.

Re:Nausea: The Great Equaliser?

[ltbarcly]

He probably isn't going to have to pay any money. The publicity is going to do exactly what Apple hoped to do with the fine, convince people it isn't worth it to release beta Apple software into the wild. Once all the publicity dies down Apple will probably just let him off the hook (although now that he has this defense fund they'll probably want that, he certainly has no right to it if the case is dropped).

I have never understood the Warez mentality. Oh, sure, I'll gladly download from bittorrent all day, but why would someone put themselves at risk just to let other people download software?

Perhaps it is because they have a philosophy where charging for software, or charging too much for software is wrong. They would have to be pretty retarded for this to be the reason though, since Warez certainly HELPS non-free software compete against free software in the long run. Every person who downloads Photoshop, who wouldn't have gone out and bought it, is actually helping Adobe. They are learning a propriatary program. At worst they get free use out of it. At best they will become skilled at it and someday use it at a job. When they are employed they will want to use Photoshop, and the business will purchase it (or if the business already uses it then there will be more available skilled people, driving the wage down, which encourages them to keep using it).

If Warez weren't available, then this person would probably use The Gimp or something, now repeat the above argument, except The Gimp gets wider use. Plus this guy will show all his friends how he got this awesome peice of software, and it's free!

I guess Warez is best explained by some kind of nerd fetish for getting software, and the 'leetness' of letting people download it.

Undisclosed Sum

[wren337]

This would be a great place to see them settle for an "undisclosed sum" (like a dollar), on condition that neither party discuss the matter further. Everyone wins; Apple doesn't publicly "back down", and the guy gets his life back.

Or they could grind his bones to make their bread, whatever. I don't know him.

Nah - Let the case continue

[the_Bionic_lemming]

I say Jobs should take this to court.

It'll give me lots of jabs to toss at a guy I work with who is as firmly entrenched as a Mac dude as I am a PC dude.

Heck, I hear about it when Gates and Microsoft do stupid stuff , so why not give me some more ammunition as Jobs gets laughed out of court? It's got all the delicious points - A kid running a web site sued out of existance over disclosing something that ultimately proved to be a mountain out of a molehill. :)

Re:Nah - Let the case continue

[the_Bionic_lemming]

No - this is a lawsuit on a Beta release that the lawsuit claims permanent and egregious damages from.

One would be led to belive that apple will lose the company all over the leak of a beta.. developer.. safari...

So now, some kid in Canada is facing fighting a lawsuit in California where no matter what - He's screwed financially no matter which way he goes. Over something that won't cost apple a dime.

Nice.

Re:Apple's Dilema

[qwertphobia]

But Apple do not really sell software at all.

Take a look at Apple's software page and tell me how many applications you see there. Most of these are not provided for free, and some are pretty expensive.

Small Fries

[GR1NCH]

Honestly, I think the whole deal is bullshit. Its just the big exec's lashing out at small fries because they can't get their hands on the big fish. Guess what? The real pirates out there aren't scared by you suing a college student that knows nothing about computers and had to have someone teach him how to seed a file. In fact they probably feel safer knowing that you are wasting your time suing this kid instead of them.

Re:Small Fries

[cioxx]

What you're describing here is not Apple.

There is no 'big fish' pirate group breathing down Apple's neck like few notable groups do with Discreet and Steinberg, defeating any elaborate anti-piracy scheme days after it is put into place. 99% of Mac software is either freely installed on multiple machines or can be enabled by a serial key.

The real pirate, in this case, is Joe Sixpack with an ADC account.

If Apple fails to enforce their NDA, it could be damaging to the company. On the other hand, if they sue the shit out of this guy and few of his accomplices, the developer community and "fanatics" would get outraged. It's a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation.

Personally, I'd like to see this guy face the consequences in 10k increments. I do, time to time, download something which is not quite legit, but even I'm not stupid enough to touch an official beta seed assigned to my account.

Having read the interview with desicanuk on drunkenblog, and knowing his medical aspirations, perhaps the world would be better served if he didn't apply such excellent decision-making in the operating room.

Re:Apple's Dilema

[rebeka thomas]

> But Apple do not really sell software at all. They sell hardware,
> and they sell fashion

Awesome. Since Microsoft do not really sell hardware at all - they sell software... It must be OK for me to just go take a Microsoft Intellimouse, and a Microsoft keyboard.

Cool.

Re:Greed

[profet]

Apple sues over pre-release of upgrade that consumers are asked to pay for, and people don't agree with the policy? Who'd of thunk it?

Welcome to the real world...

The real problem is that you don't agree with apple's naming conventions.

Call a product Windows 98 and then change it's "upgrade" to Windows Me (please no ME jokes...) and everything is dandy.

Call a product OS X 10.3 and then its "upgrade" OS X 10.4 and people moan and bitch.

The truth of the matter is, $129 ($99 for students) for a new operating system is a steal. If you can't afford it, fine, no reason for you to upgrade. Microsoft will charge you around three times that.

summary...

[constantnormal]

1) Kid signs up for limited freebee ADC membership, knowing that it does not include access to Tiger beta, in order to have "real" developer (who should certainly know better) place a d/l seed in his area. -- mildly unethical.

2) Kid, excited with his "prize", sends it out to his web "buddies" so they can share in the radiant joy. Exceedingly stoopid.

3) A restricted beta of a product Apple intends to make hundreds of millions of $$$ from is released into the wild for free. Entirely predictable.

4) Apple gets justifiably upset, sues all in sight. About all that Apple can do at this point is make an example of them.

5) The Woz feels sorry that the Kid is getting punished for his unthinking brush with Reality, donates $1000 to his defense.

So what can we learn from this?

1) Apple needs to tighten up ability to transfer software assets between classes of ADC members.

2) Kids (or anyone) that act in an unthinking manner can expect to be educated. Think of it as Evolution in Action.

3) People will gawk at a grisly highway accident, whether on concrete or etherial roadways.

Move along folks.

Re:summary...

[nutshell42]

3) A restricted beta of a product Apple intends to make hundreds of millions of $$$ from is released into the wild for free. Entirely predictable

And it doesn't affect their bottomline a bit. Come on it's a *beta* for a reason and as soon as they start shipping Tiger, shipping millions of *rippable* CDs I might add, you're gonna find ISOs of the release version on every p2p net. I really don't see why they're making such a fuss about a leaked beta

Re:summary...

[Vellmont]

Why is the big mantra on slashdot "this guy is stupid!", as if this is the ultimate sin? I guess "stupid" people don't deserve anything but contempt. Calling someone stupid is the new kike/nigger/dago/wop/chink/gook/raghead/fag/guinea /kraut.

Did I leave anyone out?

Re:summary...

[hawk]

5) The Woz feels sorry that the Kid is getting punished for his unthinking brush with Reality, donates $1000 to his defense.

Of course, this *could* just be Woz having flashbacks . . . :)

hawk

Re:summary...

[justins]

Kids (or anyone) that act in an unthinking manner can expect to be educated. Think of it as Evolution in Action.

While you're almost certainly just quoting a crappy science fiction novel in an effort to be cute, everyone ought to think about this for a minute: do you really want a legal system based on Social Darwinism?

Re:Stallman was right

[Anonymous Coward]

> Of course they do but the point is that if this was a GPL'd
> piece of software there would have been problem with the guy
> distributing it in this way

And if it rained liquid iron from the sky we'd all be burned. We aren't in a fantasy world where Tiger is a piece of GPL software.

Tiger is licensed to people under licenses decided upon by Apple. People break that license and Apple gets upset. Many slashdotters seem to think Apple shouldn't, and should just turn a blind eye to it.

If they think that, then they should also not get upset when a company breaks the license terms of GPL software, ie by incorporating GPL code into a proprietary closed source app.

So why is it OK to break Apple's license and go all "awwww Apple should turn a blind eye" when if the GPL was being broken by the same guy, most of slashdot would call for his lynching, be posting his home phone number, address, contact details, criminal records or what have you, online.

Re:Apple's Dilema

[1000101]

"But Apple do not really sell software at all..

What? Apple had $213 million in 1Q05 in software sales, and estimates $1 billion in software revenues for this year. And you think Apple doesn't really sell software??

Re:Prerelease

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you don't really know much about the software seeding in the Premium ADC accounts, bub.

Here's a hint: If you take the last posted build of an OS before the retail version, you have the retail version. Software Update works on it. Apps install and work on it.

Millions of Mac users would sign up and download Tiger build 8F61 (or whatever the hell the build number is) and Apple wouldn't make nearly as high of a return on their product, /and/ they'd be paying for the bandwidth to give it away.

(This was posted from a machine using the last posted build of Panther, updated all the way to 10.3.8.)

Re:Apple's Dilema

[kaleco]

I agree with you about it not damaging software sales, but what they're really worried about is people trying a buggy, unfinished version of Tiger and getting put off by it. They don't want their unfinished code getting into the hands of the public -no matter how unjust, some animosity from buggy code could develop which may affect the brand perception Apple rely on.

The question remains:

[earthbound kid]

Who is DrunkenBatman?

Some have speculated that DrunkenBatman is DrunkenBruceWayne, a theory I too once believed. However, after I publicly aired my suspicions, he and I were kidnapped by the DrunkenPenguin then saved by DrunkenBatman. So I've seen DrunkenBruceWayne and DrunkenBatman, together. ...However, I should note, where was DrunkenRobin during all this? Just hanging around the DrunkenBatcave? We can only drunkenly speculate, I guess.

If I was Apple

[FidelCatsro]

And if tiger was a bit of music or art or something i was working on . Then some guy(23 is not a kid , I'm 23 I stopped being a kid a long time ago) I was showing it to , decided to make a copy of the work and hand it out. I imagine i would be rather pissed off , and probably want to punch the guy, so from this i can understand the actions of apple up to this point.
But that would be it , I doubt he will do it again .He has suffered his virtual punch from Apple,Although he comes out with the "I'm so Naive" Which would probably make me want him to suffer a while longer for coming out with such a load of nonsense .

Now as much as i believe that all software should follow the GNU way , I also respect the rights of developers to decide how they distribute the work they have created.
distributing Commercial software over Bittorent in the USA is not a good idea , its playing with fire and if you're caught you will get burnt.
I do feel sorry for him though

Regarding the interview

[benja]

Somewhat off-topic, but it amuses the hell out of me when people call copyright infringement "piracy" but then believe that not all copyright infringement is piracy.

From the interview (one of the admins of the bittorrent tracker speaking):

[T]he tracker isn't built on pirated files. Drivers, service manuals, user guides, and old games which are not available anymore or are from companies which no longer exist. There are videos of recent events and old favorites which you can't buy. I have never seen the tracker without a significant amount of files which aren't pirated.

You see, all of these are copyrighted unless they're around a hundred years old (depending on jurisdiction). Of course distributing them is not copyright infringement ("piracy") if you have permission by the copyright holders, but I highly doubt this site has permission to distribute those service manuals and -- especially -- games.

Just because the company making them is gone doesn't mean there isn't a copyright holder -- there's always some creditor happy to pick them up. They may not sell the game any more (at least currently), but that matters zilch. They may not be suing you because they don't have enough to gain from it, but that doesn't mean they can't and it doesn't mean that this isn't copyright infringement.

Yes, it sucks. You see, that's one reason why some people think copyright law sucks. Especially with the super-long copyright terms of today.

I find people annoying who copy old proprietary games, don't feel that they're doing anything wrong, and then go, "I totally respect copyright law! I would never pirate anything!" If you think copyright is so cool, how come you are so happy to bend it when it's inconvenient?

(NB. I admit that I haven't actually checked the site; the games there may yet be under license terms that permit re-distribution after the company making them has folded. If so, sorry of associating the general rant with this specific case. But I doubt it.)

damage dollare amount not specified

[sacrilicious]

TFA:

Going by what [Apple's] asking for in the court papers, this isn't an area where they are planning on being particularly merciful when it comes to damages.

For the record, the supplied document lists Apple's requests as follows:

• Compensatory and examplary damages to be determined at trial
• Injunctions restraining the distribution of the software
• Injunctions restraining the breach of the agreements (not clear what that means)
• An accounting of any profits the defendants have derived from their distribution of the software
• The cost of the suit
• Any other relief the court deems just and proper.

Some /. postings on this topic assert that Apple seeks to financially ruin the defendant. Given the lack of a stated dollar amount above, do we have a foundation for believing this? I'm not pro-Apple on this, I'd simply like to know if we're going on (warranted) cynicism, or general precedent, or specific precedent, or logic....

It really comes down to this...

[Quarters]

As to the question, did I do exactly what Apple is accusing me of doing? I did share the file. So in that regard yes. But there was no malicious intent.

He needs to look up the definition of malicious. He came into posession of a piece of copyrighted software and then made the conscious decision to seed it to others. He was pirating and he was trafficing stolen goods.

Apple has every right to go after him.

Re:It really comes down to this...

[justins]

He needs to look up the definition of malicious. He came into posession of a piece of copyrighted software and then made the conscious decision to seed it to others. He was pirating and he was trafficing stolen goods.

Apple has every right to go after him.

I think people are really speaking past each other in this argument. Yes, Apple is legally in the right. They'll have a heck of a time proving they suffered significant damages, but still, these guys obviously violated their contract. Apple wins, and now, sports.

That's not really the point. Apple's fucking with these people's lives, in spite of the fact that they didn't cause any real harm. Dragging them into a federal court and forcing them into debt to defend themselves is just bad behavior, particularly in light of the fact that these were supporters of Apple.

It's about the distinction between "morally" and "legally" right, and believing that the punishment should fit the crime. Apple's response here is vastly out of proportion with what was necessary... which seems to sort of appeal to some people's sense of justice, nowadays.

About Steve Jobs....

[10Ghz]

Off-topic, I know but... I was just reading the article about Woz on Wikipedia. It contained this interesting piece of info:

Woz left Apple for good on February 6, 1985, nine years after setting up the company. Wozniak then founded a short-lived venture called CL9 which developed home remote control switches. Out of spite, Jobs threatened his suppliers to not do business with Wozniak or risk losing Apple's business. Wozniak was able to find suppliers other than the ones he had worked with for years, but was disappointed in his former friend's bitterness.

I never knew that Jobs was such an ass. Egomaniac? Sure! Asshole? it seems so.

Re:About Steve Jobs....

[10Ghz]

Well, Woz's web-site has this little story:

I went to FROG Design, a company that had designed the enclosures for many Apple products. They came up with several design possibilities for my remote control. But one weekend (I heard) Steve Jobs encountered this product design there and blew up. FROG told us they could not do it for me. They even tried to collect money after this attrocious thing. I suspect that Steve had a bad impression of my departure, probably fueled by a very inaccurate article in the Wall Street Journal that made it sound that my reason for leaving Apple was because of bad feelings about Apple

So yes, there does seem to be some truth in the claim. Funny, people seem to get mighty upset when it's hinted that maybe Steve Jobs is not that great of a guy. Personality-cult, perhaps?

Traditional Crime Vs Digital Crime

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone know the consequences of the following.

1. A person breaks into apple HQ and steals 20 copies of Tiger on CD. They get caught.

2. A person uploads tiger via Bittorrent. They get caught

I assume for the first you'd get a suspended sentence for first offence or a few months in Jail.
But for the second I guess you'll be paying for it for the rest of your life.

Conclusion throw away your keyboard and trade in for a crowbar.

Marketing justifies theft?

[evolutionaryLawyer]

Not his fault? Gimme a break.

We are all incapable of resisting marketing and ad copy? Boo-fricking-hoo. I go to the Detroit Auto Show and I see a Ferrari, I like it, it's a sexy fucking car, I want it. Because Enzo Ferrari is so good at making a street legal F1 car, and he spends so much money on marketing it (F1 team anyone), it is not my fault if I steal the car, it is Ferrari's? Give me a break.

Now I am a liberal, but pulling this socialist crap is ridiculous. If marketing makes products so irresistable to you that you ruin your credit, whore yourself out for $5 a shot in the mouth, or steal, you have nobody to blame but yourself, because you are an idiot who cannot control impulses.

Your logic justifies raping a provocatively dressed woman. She made you want it so much that you just had to take it. Nice.

The kid was stupid, he broke the rules. He didn't just get a gray-market copy, he then set out to distribute a gray-markey copy. The 5 or 6 friends part is bullshit, he had more people in mind, or should have known it wouldn't stay small. It is like telling 1 friend in highschool that your parents are gonna be out of town for the weekend. You either know it is gonna get around or you are so stupid that you derserve what you get.

Re:Marketing justifies theft?

[geoffspear]

And this is why the seeds are only supposed to be available to developers who are willing to pay for a higher level of ADC membership.

It would be very sad if this lead Apple to stop trusting small developers, and started only giving pre-release software to heavily screened big corporate developers. Adobe and Microsoft would still be able to make sure their software would run on Tiger, and the small developers would be screwed.

Remember, the purpose of ADC seeding isn't to create hype for a new OS release, it's to let developers get their software ready to be working when the new OS comes out. If they wanted to create hype, they wouldn't make everyone who gets the software sign an NDA.

Re:Stallman was right

[Richard_at_work]

If someone distributed the Linux kernel under conditions that do not meet the GPL, what would you be saying then? The code was licensed under an agreement, whatever agreement that happens to be, and this person broke the terms of that agreement.

The Problem

[catdevnull]

I'm not pro-corporate. Let me say that up front.

Apple has a NDA that they require of all developers who receive "pre-release" copies of software in development. If Apple does not pursue litigation then their NDA basically means nothing. They are perfectly within their legal rights to insist that the agreement be kept. So, the poor bastard who's getting sued should have known better.

There are open source packages out there to distribute freely without the wrath of the owner. It seems that there are many slashdot readers who are not mature enough to recognize that the world doesn't work that way. I'm not saying it's right--I'm just saying that just because you think IP laws are rubbish or do not apply to you doesn't change the fact that they the law and they do, in fact, apply. It's naive to think that electronic civil disobedience will not be met with the very sharp teeth and claws of the corporate legal eagles/weasels. Everyone always says, "Oh, that poor grandmother or little kid getting picked on by the corporations."

Fight the law with the law. Vigilante piracy isn't going to magically tip the law in the favor of Utopian RMS world. It's friggin' common sense people--DO NOT TAUNT HAPPY FUN CORPORATIONS. Everyone here knows it's against the law to share copyrighted music, software, or some other IP. If you do it anyway don't bitch if you get caught. Just because we don't like the corporations doesn't make it right to steal from them--that makes us immature miscreant punks. And the legal system will treat you as such.

This world runs on money--corporations are greedy entities that will suck the lives out of every human being. Don't buy corporate. Fight with your power as a "consumer" by not being one. DON'T BE A CONSUMER WHORE but be a law-abiding citizen, too. [PSA brought to you by catdevnull].

Re:The Woz

[infinii]

Advances would stop?

Here's an honest question. Do you really think your computing experience has improved that greatly on your spiffy new 3.4Ghz P4 compared to back when you had a P2 class machine?

IMO it hasn't. You've gone from Win95 to WinXP.

Look at the Apple scene now. OS 9 to OS X, now that's progress.

What's the problem again?

[Trailer Trash]

So, this guy (not a kid, he's 23) makes Apple's OS available on bitorrent and now they're suing him? Okay, that's what happens. I read about how this is going to ruin his life. I guess I'm confused, but his life will go on, he'll just owe some money.

Ah, but he won't be able to finish med school. Is that what we're so worried about? I'm not sure that I want someone with such poor judgement being a doctor.

Call me a jerk, mod me down, whatever. The guy did something really stupid, something really illegal, and now he's being asked to pay.

By the way, Woz. If you want to help the guy, $1000 isn't going to do much.

One other thing while I'm burning karma. To the guy who wrote that he wonders if the company is being run by Jobs or greedy lawyers: you might want to consider the oh-so-tiny possibility that this is the result of Jobs running the company. I don't blame him, I'd do the same thing.

I just don't find this surprising, except for the people rushing to his defense.

Microsoft will charge you around 3X that? No.

[name_already_taken]

Microsoft will charge you around three times that.

No, they don't.

If you buy the retail version of Windows XP it will cost you a couple of hundred dollars, but if you want to upgrade from a previous version of Windows to Windows XP, it costs $99 (for regular consumers or business people, not students).

That's $30 less than Apple charges regular folks for an OS X upgrade, according to your post.

SP2 for XP is a free download too, so I'm not sure where you're getting your information. I don't like Microsoft any more than the next guy, but prices are pretty easy to check.

Windows XP Upgrade $99

Apple to blame to a major extent

[kanweg]

I'm an Apple fan (ok, a little less so if Apple does this kind of things), but I think that Apple is to blame to a major extent.

- Apple is very much aware of rumor sites and knows their following crave for Apple-news before it is out. This sure keeps people interested in what's comming up from Apple. I for one visit those sites regulary and keep me in touch. (I don't like sites speculating on pricing, because it is too easy to get excited about a product, which may become a disappointment if the product is indeed as good as rumored, but at a higher price. If they'd not speculated it, it would probably still be considered a good price).
- Apple can easily make the Tiger beta's such that they only run on Macs with registered MAC addresses (ethernet addresses, whatever) which are unique for a computer. So, if a beta gets out in the wild nobody can run it.
- Apple makes a fool if itself by writing in the writ that they are in such a competitive business and their IP must be protected blah blah blah. Firstly, if they did really care, they had take proper precautions (see previous point). Secondly, Steve said that companies like Microsoft are busy integrating Tiger's Spotlight technology into Office. For that, you need a Tiger beta. So, the competitor who has 95+% marketshare has a copy of
that intellectual property. Apple can handle the rest: even the current version of Mac OS X is a great product.

Sure, the guy did something wrong. Apple, oet him pay $2500 Tsunami disaster relief and let it go.

Bert

Re:Apple to blame to a major extent

[derubergeek]

Apple can easily make the Tiger beta's such that they only run on Macs with registered MAC addresses (ethernet addresses, whatever) which are unique for a computer.

Easily? What you're suggesting is to distribute the OS in a crippled form (one that wouldn't actually go to production, and would therefore be different software) so that they can guard against people who have accepted NDAs from leaking the IP.

Of course, one could always distribute the MAC address with it and then you could reprogram the MAC address on your card. Oops. Do I see a loophole?

By your way of thinking, they were fools to expect people to abide by their contractual obligations and therefore get what they deserve. Remind me not to enter into a contract with you.

Re:Microsoft will charge you around 3X that? No.

[profet]

Windows XP Upgrade $99

Um... did you even bother going to the linked page? $99 = used copy of Windows XP Pro.

From Microsoft, Windows XP Pro for $299, Upgrade = $199

Now... also keep in mind that $129 gets you the full version of the OS. So its $129 vs. $299.

RTFA.

Re: Federated Usable...

[sczimme]

Not every business needs to have a respectable name like "Federated Usable Computational Devices, Inc."

So the company would basically be FUCD?

:-)

Re:Microsoft will charge you around 3X that? No.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

If you buy the retail version of Windows XP it will cost you a couple of hundred dollars, but if you want to upgrade from a previous version of Windows to Windows XP, it costs $99 (for regular consumers or business people, not students).

All of this is trying to compare apples and oranges. For example the difference between Windows 98 SE and Windows ME was window dressing and bug fixes. The difference between ME and XP was mostly bug fixes and some new features (from an end user point of view). In fact, the only reason I upgrade to a new version of Windows is because my company pays for it, or because the old version will not get vital security fixes. On the other hand, each OS X release (aside from the free one) was mostly new features. All the major bug fixes and all the security updates are available for the older versions.

I guess what I am saying is yes, Windows can be upgraded more cheaply than OS X if you always buy the most current release of each OS. Apple is faster to add new functionality and release new versions, and each version costs slightly more than a typical Windows release. On the other hand, you get a lot more for your money in terms of new, useful features. Also, since each version of OS X gets faster instead of slower, you don't have to buy new hardware as often and when you do, you can bring you OS license over to the new machine, if you so desire. With Windows, each OS version is tied to a machine and cannot be transferred to a newer one. It is a very unequal comparison.

federal law, not state

[hawk]

I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice. If you get your legal advice on slashdot, your psychiatric problems are more serious than your legal ones.

That has *absolutely* nothing to to with the state.

The bankruptcy code definces certain types of debts that are not dischargeable in bankruptcy, including debts for

1) support payments
2) recent taxes
3) intentionally caused harm
4) fraud
5) student loans for several years
and many others

Liability for disclosing the information in this case would be far-fetched. *HOWEVER*, if he "induced" the employee to break the NSA, that could be the tort of interference with contract, and could come under the intentionally caused harm category.

hawk, esq.

modify that last paragraph

[hawk]

That phrasing should be for the macrumors litigation, not this one.

Uploading it to share it would certainly be an intentional copyright violation, no matter how many he expected to download it (1 or 1,000,000). It's not the general liability, however, that would be nondischargeable. It's the intent to cause the harm that matters.

hawk, esq.

Ding ding -- Proportionate Justice in civil cases

[ianscot]

You nailed that. The hallmark of any decent system of justice is its sense of proportion.

As a nation, the US is struggling with that "proportionate" part.

Think of all the ways in which we're drifting, semi-consciously, toward authoritarian responses to crime. The death penalty, "three strikes" mandatory sentencing rules that take sentencing away from judges in order for politicians to appear "tough on crime," drug sentences that put people away for disproportionate sentences compared with the punishment violent criminals get hit with. Any sense of proportion goes out the window once you've got the public responding to politicians who'll play to that. We've got plenty of /. posters who reacted to the "webcam break-in" story last week by saying "throw away the key" when they found out the guy only got 11 months in prison. Politicians eat that stuff up.

(Or take a look at Martha Stewart; it's completely freaking clear that she didn't do anything other big stock players aren't doing right now. She's being made into an example. Meanwhile Ken Lay? Connected to our President, and I don't notice him doing crime for destroying countless Enron employees' retirements through his quite extreme reckless behavior and that of his entire energy junta. That's not proportionate justice.)

Meanwhile, the corporate influence on government is simultaneously de-fanging potential civil suits against big corporations and giving them those corporate entities the ability to completely ream individuals who can't defend themselves in any real way against the money the big players can array against them.

This guy sounds like a fool -- the "I'm not hiring a lawyer" idiocy that some posters here are backing has partly gotten him into this spot. ("The person who represents himself as a lawyer has a fool for a client.") But he shouldn't be destroyed. He should be made aware that he has to think about what he's doing, and he needs to feel that message.

What needs to happen is that he gets a lawyer, Apple makes a big show of being amiable about this but also bares its teeth for a while, and everybody goes home with the usual "undisclosed settlement" -- equivalent to a month's salary for him, or something like, but never to be disclosed.

How this public letter approach is going to play will be interesting. Apple doesn't want to take bad PR, no -- so they need a way to come out of this as the Good Company.

In other news, man bites dog!

[MachineShedFred]

Oh come on now. Even you must realize that you are the exception to the rule. There's always a few, and they feel compelled to inform everyone that they are the exception.

Let's just clear this up now: no one ever said that each and every P2P user is violating copyright (well, except maybe the irrational thinkers at the MPAA / RIAA), but it's pretty safe to say that most P2P users are violating copyright law, or have violated copyright law in the past.

All clear? Mmkay.

Puh-lease, What do you think Non-Disclosure means?

[imgunby]

I hate to call BS on this one, but BS. It wasn't a EULA he click-agreed to; it wasn't even a confidentiality agreement, assignment of invention or other document. The NDA is a *gasp* non-dislcosure agreement which I would hope a reasonably educated person would understand. To take something you had to NDA to access, and then share via a poorly understood P2P application, then claim youthful stupidity is, well, stupid.

If the EULA, NDA and other agreements he had to read were too much for him to comprehend, he should have taken that as a sign... perhaps something as complex is medicince is out of his league

Re:Stallman was right

[obender]

If someone distributed the Linux kernel under conditions that do not meet the GPL, what would you be saying then?

You are turning things around. This guy is being accused of distributing something. Breaking the GPL would mean not distributing something. You can easily undo the wrong to the GPL by distributing the source.

So from a negative point of view the difference is between wrong you can easily repair and wrong you have no way of repairing. Apple is not asking this guy to straighten his ways, it's asking for a punishment. While I would no go as far as saying that one is about fear and one is about love the contrast is obvious.

So Compu-Global-Hyper-Meganet is out?

[Blaede]

Man I thought that would be one sweet and respectable name for an ISP

Missing the point.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

The point here is not that this guy should go un-punished, but that the punishment is unjust/excesive. Does this guy really deserve to basiclly have the rest of his life ruined, simply for breaking the NDA and copyright of some software?