Agreed. However, even though I haven't seen the content, I was under the impression that the site was an apple review site. Was the information really harmful to apple? If not, what's the issue, other than a rogue employee.
The harm is Apple not enforcing its contracts and thereby losing the ability to do so.
This seems like the Black Friday information issue. Wal-Mart and Target, et al, all want to keep sale items secret so you choose their store based on reputation. This hurts the consumer slightly, when you find out that a better deal was to be had at the other end of the mall. If that's the real issue, I can see why Apple might be a bit upset, but there again, don't go after the publisher, go after the employee's who are breaking trust with you. The publisher is providing a valuable service to the consumer based on knowledge at hand.
Apple is taking on the publishers because they know from whom the leak came. Apple is using the legal system to ferret out the identity of the NDA violator. Welcome to the Rule of Law and Property Rights.
If Apple had won the desktop, there would be no Mac Mini. Compare Apple's behavior now to their actions when they owned a much larger chunk of the desktop. They were arrogant and awful.
I should like to point out that the Macintosh has never had a significant share of the desktop market. Apple had market dominance during the Apple II era only. Apple paid for its arrogance by failing to maintain its marketing leading position after IBM entered the PC market. Apple failed to convert Apple II users into Macintosh users
The confidentiality of sources stands scrutiny only when the public interest is served. What is the public interest in the Apple case? None, there is however shareholder interest. Allowing people to freely violate NDAs or other contracts under the guise of freedom of the press or freedom of speech is a gross abrogation of responsible journalism, and it brings possible direct harm to those who have invested in Apple, Inc. which harm Apple must prove to the court in order to receive legal relief such as compelling the defendants to reveal the source of their information.
If the defendants truly feel that this case is one of free press and protecting sources, they can always go to prison by refusing to comply with any potential order to divulge. Otherwise, they need to get off this pony and cough up.
An excellent point and one which I meant to make in my commentary. In fact, I think that to a large degree modern democracy owes its existence to rabble rousing.
The US is what it is because of such publications.
We already have people to decide who is and is not a journalist - for example, the Canadian Association of Journalists, the International Federation of Journalists, and so on. This is how real journalists get press passes, by the way - they join the associations, which check their credentials, and issue passes.
The Canadian Assn. of Journalists (CAJ): the only requirement for membership is filling out a form and paying a fee.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)membership is through national organizations which are members of the IFJ
Looking at the member organizations listed as members of the IFJ, all are labor unions. The primary purpose of unions is to protect the union members from competition and poor working conditions. None of the IFJ members from the US have codes of ethics or conduct readily available for public inspection. Contrast that to engineering societies, they have their codes of ethics/conduct easily discoverable. Here at the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET) one can find a list of member engineering societies. Checking a few of them reveals that membership is only possible for Baccalaureate of Science: Engineering (B.S.E.) degree holders or students in B.S.E. programs. One will also discover that codes of conduct and ethics are readily available to the public.
Here are some more journalist orgs but these have codes of ethics/conduct for members
Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) has a code but membership is open to those being paid as journalists, those retired from being paid as journalists, those who agree with the goals of the SPJ, those who live with SPJ professional members, and under-/post graduate students.
International Journalists' Network (IJNet) membership is through national organizations but they do have a very prominent link to access the Codes of Ethics of member organizations.
I doubt this 'blogger' is a member of any professional journalism organizations. I doubt they have any formal training, or indeed any training whatsoever. I'm curious as to how 'journalism' can be confused with some guy writing something and distributing it to the masses. If I print flyers and distribute them on the street corner, am I a journalist? No. If I tape posters to streetlamps and hydro poles, am I a journalist? No.
Yes, you are. Are you a paid journalist? No. Are you a professional journalist? No. Does being a "professional" journalist guarantee that you will have training, formal or otherwise? No. Unlike medicine, engineering, law, and architecture to name just a few professions, journalism has no licensing requirement and no standards for becoming a journalist other than to be paid to be a journalist.
Journalism is a profession that requires both skill and responsibility. To call bloggers 'journalists' is akin to calling an MCSE an 'engineer'. The word is far from the truth, and if being called a journalist requires nothing more than a voice, then the single most important career possible in an open and democratic society suddenly means nothing. When a loud voice and a sense of self-righteousness can be considered equal to understanding of ethics, unbiased reporting, and facility with the language, then 'journalism' is suddenly just a word, and all the respect it once deserved is lost forever.
Ideally, journalism is a profession that requires skill, responsibility, ethical behavior and impartiality. Journalists, however, have no licensing process. Engineers do. AFAICT, in order to qualify as a journalist, one need only be hired to perform such duties. There are no formal requirements of edu
Slashdot Mirror
The harm is Apple not enforcing its contracts and thereby losing the ability to do so.
Apple is taking on the publishers because they know from whom the leak came. Apple is using the legal system to ferret out the identity of the NDA violator. Welcome to the Rule of Law and Property Rights.
I should like to point out that the Macintosh has never had a significant share of the desktop market. Apple had market dominance during the Apple II era only. Apple paid for its arrogance by failing to maintain its marketing leading position after IBM entered the PC market. Apple failed to convert Apple II users into Macintosh users
The confidentiality of sources stands scrutiny only when the public interest is served. What is the public interest in the Apple case? None, there is however shareholder interest. Allowing people to freely violate NDAs or other contracts under the guise of freedom of the press or freedom of speech is a gross abrogation of responsible journalism, and it brings possible direct harm to those who have invested in Apple, Inc. which harm Apple must prove to the court in order to receive legal relief such as compelling the defendants to reveal the source of their information.
If the defendants truly feel that this case is one of free press and protecting sources, they can always go to prison by refusing to comply with any potential order to divulge. Otherwise, they need to get off this pony and cough up.
An excellent point and one which I meant to make in my commentary. In fact, I think that to a large degree modern democracy owes its existence to rabble rousing.
The US is what it is because of such publications.
The Canadian Assn. of Journalists (CAJ): the only requirement for membership is filling out a form and paying a fee. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) membership is through national organizations which are members of the IFJ Looking at the member organizations listed as members of the IFJ, all are labor unions. The primary purpose of unions is to protect the union members from competition and poor working conditions. None of the IFJ members from the US have codes of ethics or conduct readily available for public inspection. Contrast that to engineering societies, they have their codes of ethics/conduct easily discoverable. Here at the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET) one can find a list of member engineering societies. Checking a few of them reveals that membership is only possible for Baccalaureate of Science: Engineering (B.S.E.) degree holders or students in B.S.E. programs. One will also discover that codes of conduct and ethics are readily available to the public. Here are some more journalist orgs but these have codes of ethics/conduct for members Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) has a code but membership is open to those being paid as journalists, those retired from being paid as journalists, those who agree with the goals of the SPJ, those who live with SPJ professional members, and under-/post graduate students. International Journalists' Network (IJNet) membership is through national organizations but they do have a very prominent link to access the Codes of Ethics of member organizations.
Yes, you are. Are you a paid journalist? No. Are you a professional journalist? No. Does being a "professional" journalist guarantee that you will have training, formal or otherwise? No. Unlike medicine, engineering, law, and architecture to name just a few professions, journalism has no licensing requirement and no standards for becoming a journalist other than to be paid to be a journalist.
Ideally, journalism is a profession that requires skill, responsibility, ethical behavior and impartiality. Journalists, however, have no licensing process. Engineers do. AFAICT, in order to qualify as a journalist, one need only be hired to perform such duties. There are no formal requirements of edu