Newspapers Back Apple Bloggers
puke76 writes "Remember the bloggers being sued by Apple? Well now they've attracted the attention and support of some major newspapers. There's a story over at BBC. The newspapers are arguing that journalism sources should be protected. Can we blog without legal repercussions?" From the article: "Recent corporate scandals involving WorldCom, Enron and the tobacco industry all undoubtedly involved the reporting of information that the companies involved would have preferred to remain unknown to the public..."
I am an ardent backer of free journalism, but I see this case pushing a very fine line. Where does "journalism" stop and "somebody just writing something down" start?
Suppose someone writes a trade secret in an anonymous Slashdot story submission? In an anonymous Slashdot comment? In a LiveJournal entry? In a Slashdot journal entry?
Should these all be protected under the guise of journalism?
The Internet blurs the line between professional journalism and amateur writing, which is one of the great things about the new levels of communication that is available to anyone able to get online.
This case can hold the precedence to start the "slippery slope" of protecting anything written online. While this might sound like a wonderful idea to the "Information wants to be free" crowd, I see it as being very dangerous.
This case is a bad test of the "bloggers as journalists" question anyway. Had a paper newspaper done the exact same thing, the law would not protect the paper either. ThinkSecret knowingly asked someone to disclose a trade secret, and then knowingly published this "secret" for no reason other than to publish it (and maybe reap some ad revenue).
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
...become a "newspaper"?
I actually heard a report on BBC Radio today about Apple's image, which touched upon the whole rumour site issue - they had an interview with the EFF lawyer who defended the sites. The basic point was Apple had slightly tarnished it's "little kid taking on the world" image.
And quite another to be charging advertisers.
Let's face it, these are not Uncle Joe blogging about a rumor, these are folks making a buck off someone breaking a confidential agreement. Even bona fide journalists go to jail when they break the law or encourage someone to break the law to get a story.
I don't like NDA's, but the reality is they are legal and binding agreements. And breaking an NDA to get a 10-20 jump on an announcement is, in my view, rather stupid.
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV