Slashdot Mirror
Apple to Settle with Tiger Leaker Vivek Sambhara
AC writes "According to DrunkenBlog which has the court papers, Apple will settle their case against Sunny (Vivek Sambhara) who was accused of taking a developer release of Tiger and putting it on a torrent site. Sunny was the student who gave an interview, and had Steve Wozniak donate to his defense. It is noted in the article that there is still a named defendant going to court and "a score of jon does"."
The article has this overwhelming tone of "thank god the poor kid was saved" and "this could happen to anyone", but I don't think it could. I certainly don't agree with how Apple handled the situation, but in my opinion this guy should have had more sense. I think taking a pre-release from an early access developer program and creating a torrent for it should set off alarm bells in anyones head. I have a hard time believing he didn't understand the possible repercussions of his actions in this case.
This leaves no bad taste in my mouth - Apple acted correctly from the start. Sunny broke a legal and binding contract, unlike the people sued by the RIAA who had no contractual agreement.
The rule about not suing poor people is oft quoted. I have heard it used by more than one poor student I know as a justification for any action they care to take. They figure that there are no consequences to their actions. This lawsuit is a consequence with a capital C. Frankly, if this convinces students that their actions might just have consequences, then it was worth the trouble.
Look, if you screw up, you have the chance of really, really suffering far out of proportion to the harm you intended. You may not - Sunny did not in this case - but you most certainly can. That is a valuable lesson, and it appears that it was learned.
Had Sunny driven drunk, he might have faced felony criminal prosecution, jail time, and a lot of problems in future life, even if he did not hurt anyone. One extra drink at a bar, and a misjudgment about your own impairment, and your life takes a sudden, dramatic, explosive downward turn. Sunny had a misjudgment that took about the same amount of time, and harmed about as many people as getting caught in a holiday sobriety test. He suffered worry, but his life was not ruined, he did not get jail time, and he did not have to give up his future. That was quite a win for him, and I suspect he, and a lot of other people, are going to be more careful in the future.
What separates this from the RIAA lawsuits, in my mind, is one simple crystal clear fact - he agreed to a legal binding contract. He agreed to not distribute the information, and then he broke the contract. This is serious stuff.
If nothing else, such leaks make Apple less likely to distribute proprietary information in the future. I need that information, and I want companies to trust in their NDAs, as otherwise, they will not tell me what I need to know to plan my future products. So, I do want people to take an NDA seriously, just like I want people to take all contracts they sign seriously. You may choose to break one, but for goodness sake, understand the potential consequences.
Apple would be stupid to let the issue go completely and Sunny was clearly in the wrong. Apple got an admission of guilt and any of their property he still had, and he got off with a slap on the wrist. Considering the situation, it looks like it turned out relatively good for everyone. Pushing it further would only bring more negative press to Apple and what's the point of getting a big court judgment against a college student?
It is the nature of BitTorrent, that if you're downloading it, you're also uploading it. That, you're not allowed to do.
Oh, and legally speaking, you don't own something just because you've already paid for it, when the delivery is still pending. Apple's still entitled to refund your money and not ship the product.
Your legal argument fails in the last statement. You are buying the Apple Tiger release version which is covered by any customer/vendor agreement that you sign with Apple. The torrent of Tiger was a pre-release and not the same version and thus not an identical copy. It is not covered by your agreement with Apple.
Now if you got a torrent of the Tiger release after Tiger gets shipped, you might still have issues. For all purposes you are not creating a backup copy which is covered by fair use. You are obtaining an illegally distributed copy of Tiger that you intend to use as backup. If you were to burn a DVD copy of your Tiger discs, that would be fair use.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Your situation is equivalent to buying an apple in a grocery store, leaving it on the counter, and stealing a different apple. You'd still be arrested for shoplifting.