Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Fires Five Employees for Downloading Leopard

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the never-tell-on-yourself dept.

BuzzardsBay writes "The good folks at VARBusiness are quoting a ThinkSecret report that claims five Apple employees got canned over the unauthorized downloading of the Leopard OS. According to the article: one of the employees says: "Because we had the character to tell the truth and to face the consequences of our actions, we were terminated. If we all lied and denied it would we still be working at Apple today? Even more so, is that the kind of person that Apple wants working for them?""

24 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. The consequences were that you got fired.. by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    congratulations, you faced em.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by Alfred,+Lord+Tennyso · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The term "accepting responsibility" has taken something of a beating lately. The new definition is "admitting guilt but denying any repercussions". Please update your dictionaries.

    2. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by Scudsucker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More like if you use the same penalty for those who tell the truth as those who lie and get caught, you remove all the incentive to tell the truth in the first place.

    3. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by Arker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It makes perfect sense, and many legal systems historically have used this principle. A functional legal system will attach a penalty for crimes which exceeds their actual cost, proportionate to the chance of getting caught. I.e. if you destroy $100 worth of property, and confess to it immediately, you pay the $100 back, but if you have to be caught, you must pay significantly more than ($100*X/1), where X is the likelihood of apprehension in those circumstances. So if you have a 50% chance of evading punishment entirely, the fine needs to be over $200, otherwise it's rational to attempt to evade detection. If the fine is for example $500, and your chance of evading detection only 50/50, it makes good sense to immediately confess and pay $100 instead. If most people do that, then law enforcement can realistically attempt to catch the rest, but if the fine is the same amount either way, everyone attempts to evade, law enforcement has too many cases to chase, the chances of evading and the number of offenders attempting evasion start increasing in a feedback loop, and the result is uncontrolled breakdown of law, or a police state, which is sort of the same thing, and at any rate equally undesireable.

      The whole plea-bargain system in this country, btw, is NOT an example of this. It actually has the opposite effect. If you confess your crime immediately, you won't be able to plea-bargain, since you have nothing to bargain with. But if you evade, not well enough to avoid arrest, but at least well enough to give your lawyer something to work with, that's how you get a plea bargain. This actually increases the incentive to evade, driving ever-increasing law enforcement requirements...

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    4. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by yardbird · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The incentive to tell the truth in the first place is being able to look at yourself in the mirror.

      The point is that "accepting responsibility for one's actions" is being used to mean "looking for an optimal outcome given one's actions".

      --
      Free, legal music for iTunes users.
    5. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh c'mon! WTF is wrong with you all? Is the world so black and white in Slashdot that if someone protests about being punished too hard, they can only be advocating no punishment at all?

      The (ex)Apple employees are protesting that they came clean and yet endured the same punishment they'd have endured if they had not come forward but been caught anyway. The complaint is not that they were punished at all, it's that the punishment was excessive and gives nobody any incentive to be honest.

      And they have a point. And this not about murder, where arguably the action is so severe that the appropriate punishment should always be dealt, it's about a case of copyright infringement. Yes, there's room for Apple to take a more lenient line with truth tellers than with those who lie. Especially when given the case is ultimately about whether an employee can be trusted with the company's proprietary inside information, the issue of whether they lied or not in an investigation is actually relevent.

      Apple has arguably over-reacted. And whether it did or not, it has most certainly cut off its own nose to spite the face of others. Firing is an expensive act. Apple can expect to lose the productivity the fired employee would have given to the company during the time it recruits and trains the replacement, and recruiting is hardly cheap either. Further, it has made its own future investigations harder because it will not get the cooperation of employees who see themselves as ultimately loyal.

      Apple can hire and fire whoever they want, for whatever (legal) reason. But that doesn't make this anything other than, at face value, assuming there's not more to it than TFA, a dumb decision. And certainly, the logic Slashdotters promote of "IF THEY HATE THERE PUNISHMANT, TEHY MUST FINK BEENG PUNICHED IS RONG!!1" is utterly irrelevent and idiotic.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by MaestroRC · · Score: 5, Informative

      We all know Apple is incredibly protective of their IP. Part of that IP is keeping everyone from just being able to get a copy of what they have in development, so as to keep some things closed and hidden until *they* want to talk about it.

      Note: I AM an Apple employee, and I would expect that if I did the same, I would face the same punishment. Apple's new hire training actually goes over all of this, and states exactly the punishment for doing anything against their policy. Part of that policy is that if you use or divulge unreleased software or information without the proper authority, you *will* be fired, at the least. I'm sure if they wanted to, they could have taken this much further.

      Think here for a minute, these guys downloaded an illicit copy of Leopard, knowing that just that was grounds for being fired, *and then* proceded to talk about it at work, where they were overheard. Surprising to me would be if they *didn't* get canned.

      --
      I hate sigs...
    7. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is this inability to read and comprehend what someone else has actually written, instead insisting on merely glancing at their words and assuming they say what you expect, that makes me despair for the future of society.

      Let's do some reading.

      What you claim: "You act as if they have a God-given-right to work at Apple."
      What he really said: "Apple can hire and fire whoever they want, for whatever (legal) reason."

      What you claim: "What we have now is the whining of somebody who doesn't like that he is being held accountable for his own actions."
      What he really said: "The complaint is not that they were punished at all, it's that the punishment was excessive and gives nobody any incentive to be honest."

      Welcome to the wonderful world of the straw man argument, where answering people's points is too hard, so you just pretend they said something stupid instead and tell them how stupid they were to say it. You've got a bright future ahead of you in politics.

    8. Re:The consequences were that you got fired.. by GeckoX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True, all very true.

      And yes, Apple has every right to handle these things however they like.

      I do have to argue though that Apple creates these circumstances themselves. Think about it:

      Apple's working on this new release of their OS. Everyone that works there knows it. No one has seen it. No one there can use it, even though they are building it. It's all very hush hush and secretive, very typical Apple style. A build gets leaked onto the internet...a couple employees find it...Hey! I'm working on that! I'd sure like to see it, sheesh, what's the harm if any script kiddie out there can play with it, why can't I play with the darned thing that the company I work for built?

      Apple is NOT the DOD. They can, but maybe shouldn't treat their employees like they are.

      --
      No Comment.
  2. Is that the kind of person apple wants? by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is that the type who steals or the type who thinks being honest about their crimes absolves them of punishment?

    1. Re:Is that the kind of person apple wants? by Scudsucker · · Score: 5, Informative

      As to Apple, the whole company has been turning into shit since introducing CD keys for home OSX installs 2 years ago.

      Eh? I never had to use a cd key for any of my Tiger installs. Methinks you are talking about Server, not client.

    2. Re:Is that the kind of person apple wants? by Analog+Penguin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Confusion at best, FUD at worst. OS X has never required CD keys for home installation. The "Family Pack", which lets you install on up to five machines, has no CD keys, either. Apple has traditionally taken a "give the consumer the benefit of the doubt" view of their OS. There are no technical barriers preventing you from buying one copy of Tiger and installing it on a hundred machines, but Apple trusts you not to do so

      As was mentioned above, however, OS X Server does require CD keys for installation.

    3. Re:Is that the kind of person apple wants? by Guido+del+Confuso · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh yeah? Well what the hell is this that I'm staring at? I bought a Umax Core Duo 7500 with Mac OS X from eBay just last week.

      Well, based on the fact that there is no such thing as a "Umax Core Duo 7500", I would guess that you're likely staring at an empty crack pipe.

    4. Re:Is that the kind of person apple wants? by Crimsane · · Score: 5, Funny

      Eh? I never had to use a cd key for any of my Tiger installs. Methinks you are talking about Server, not client.

      The torrent was probably mislabeled.

  3. who is suprised by this? by spacerodent · · Score: 4, Funny

    Honestly who is suprised by this? Dur they would have fired you. Back when you interveiwed for min wage jobs and they asked you, "is it ever 'ok' to steal from a company you work for?" ... heres a hint.. DON'T SAY YES!

  4. A bit more context by exley · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From TFA:

    "All of us know that we violated our NDA and ethics policy. Therefore, because we had the character to tell the truth and to face the consequences of our actions, we were terminated," said one of the fired employees, who spoke with Think Secret on condition of anonymity.

    If you are full well aware that you violated the Non-Disclosure agreement -- in addition to the ethics policy -- you signed when you came on board, then, well, you should be full well aware of the fact that all you can expect is to be fired over it. NDAs are sort of a big deal for companies. Ethics, on the other hand, are a big deal unless if you have enough power.

  5. They were just retail employees by aarku · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The summary left out a big piece of information, in my opinion. They were just retail employees, not developers. I was puzzled why some developers at Apple *didn't* have Leopard at first.

  6. On the other hand... by davmoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "All of us know that we violated our NDA and ethics policy. Therefore, because we had the character to tell the truth and to face the consequences of our actions, we were terminated,"

    How about the lack of character you showed by violating the NDA in the first place. If you had any character (or ethics) you would have obeyed the obligations of the contract you signed.

    On your next job application where it asks "Why did you leave your most recent job?", now you can write "I was fired because I was fucking stupid."

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
    1. Re:On the other hand... by Descalzo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Well, I think they gained some of their character back by coming clean. Then they immediately lost it again by whining about getting canned.

      Character is a precious thing. I hear at school all the time, when someone comes clean and they still get the consequences, "So this is what I get for telling the truth?" No, that's what you get for (insert broken rule here). What you get for telling the truth is trust and respect.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
  7. Re:DreamWorks Comparison by cunina · · Score: 5, Funny

    Would Dreamworks have fired office staff if they had been talking about downloading a hot new Dreamworks movie via BitTorrent like "Over the Hedge"?

    I'd fire anyone at any company for watching "Over the Hedge."

  8. Oh puhleez... by mellon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From an ethical perspective, you have two things:

    1. Employee does something that runs counter to the company's stated policy in an important way. Bad employee - no biscuit.

    2. Employee tells the truth when lying might have saved their job. Good person - refused to lie even when lying seemed to be of benefit.

    There's no reason to mix these two - they're separate actions. One's a mistake, one's a sign of character. So of the mistake, you say "oh shit, that was really stupid, I wish I hadn't done that." And of the truth-telling, you say "yay, I'm glad I did that."

    When you try to mix the two, it wrecks the good taste of telling the truth. Don't regret doing the right thing. Just take this lesson forward and try to avoid doing the wrong thing in the future.

    --Speaking as one who was burned by exactly this kind of thinking in high school, and wasted a lot of emotional energy on it.

  9. Random Thoughst Having Just Recently Awoken by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The actual ThinkSecret web page includes a more complete quote from the fired employee:
    All of us know that we violated our NDA and ethics policy. Therefore, because we had the character to tell the truth and to face the consequences of our actions, we were terminated," said one of the fired employees, who spoke with Think Secret on condition of anonymity. "My only question is, if we all lied and denied it would we still be working at Apple today? Even more so, is that the kind of person that Apple wants working for them?
    That first part is of interest. They have apparently been fired for violating Apple's NDA and the corporate ethics policy. Last things first: Anyone who has been required to go to "Corporate Ethics Training" at a big US corp like Apple knows that the term Ethics has been redefined by corporate america. It is not about morality, or taking the ethically correct action. It is all about making sure your actions don't get the company sued, and if they do get sued, making sure they have lots of CYA to keep from losing in court and having to pay out mucho moola.

    That's all there is to corporate ethics policies, nothing more and certainly nothing on which anyone should being using to judge a person's character.

    As for violating Apple's NDA - sounds like they used bittorrent to get a copy of the software from someone else who had originally made it public. That means they did not themselves take an internal copy from Apple and redistribute that. They only did what any other person on the net was capable of - go to a public website like isohunt and use the public information to get into the public torrent for the files.

    Because bittorrent makes you a redistributor as well as a simple downloader, I am sure they are technically in violation of Apple's NDA - but realistically their employment at Apple had nothing to do with their downloading of a copy.

    Thirdly - Apple, or rather whatever uptight member of lower middle management who actually made the call to fire these guys, is cutting off their nose to spite their face. Any retailer should be ecstatic to have store employees as interested in their own products as these guys (kids?) are. How many times have you all gone to best buy, or compusa or circuit city, etc, etc and been told absolute bullshit by some ignorant "sales associate?" When you've got employees that are so into your own products that they hunt down pre-release versions on the internet just check out for themselves, you need to keep them around, not fire them for trivialities.

    Last and probably least, but it made me chuckle, did anyone else notice the plagarism at VAR Business? Their link to the story at ThinkSecret includes an unnecessary "?www.reghardware.co.uk" in the URL, which is another computer news website. Looks like a violation of corporate ethics policy to me.
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    1. Re:Random Thoughst Having Just Recently Awoken by rahrens · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First - ethics,

      Exactly, they got fired because they talked. As a retail employee, you are supposed to keep your mouth shut. If they had been exercising that particularly (to Apple) valuable skill, they'd still have a job.

      Second - the NDA.

      WHERE they got it doesn't matter. Leopard is a product that is restricted. Not just unreleased. Apple has what is known as a stovepipe organization. Some would term it as a firewalled org., too. What that means is that, depending on WHERE you work will determine what products you have access to. The NDAs the employees sign most likely have a clause that prevents them from getting access to information in other parts of the org., to prevent leaks. So where they got Leopard isn't at issue, simply the fact that they had it is enough. They work in the retail stores, so thay would have NO access to it at all.

      Third - cutting off of the nose

      Not an issue. Public reaction is not something they worry about here. The NDA these people violated spells out the consequences of the violation. If Apple doesn't fire these people, the next time Apple tried to do that, THOSE employees could go to court and use these cases as examples of how Apple had 'constructively changed' the terms of the NDA by this action. In the business world, the firings are normal and expected.

      --
      "Money is truthful. If a man speaks of his honor, make him pay cash." Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Robert A. Heinlein
  10. True Story by acvh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many years ago I was arrested (erroneously, but no matter) and while awaiting my turn in court I got to see the previous night's arrests being arraigned. There had been a prostitution raid, and a number of women were brought into court. One by one they would approach the bench, plead guilty, get fined $500 and be released. One woman, indignantly denying being a hooker, said she was only on her way to the corner store for groceries when she was arrested. When she pleaded not guilty the judge set bail at $1500 and remanded her to custody. Her response: "Wait a minute! If I'm guilty I pay $500 and go home? If I'm innocent I pay $1500 or go to jail? I plead guilty!" The public defender tried in vain to dissuade her, but to no avail. The judge accepted her guilty plea and she went home.

    The moral: I don't know.