It seems that Apple has been granted the right to search and destroy the sources of ThinkSecret’s information… and correct me if I’m wrong, but the case against ThinkSecret itself is different – Apple filed a separate suit against ThinkSecret alleging that they induced Apple employees to steal trade secrets. Dunno about you, but to me, thats just a convenient, valid legal excuse to sue the publisher.
Two of my favorite “read lines” with regards to the whole Apple charade.
There’s another old saying in my profession: The mission of journalists is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
A letter to Steve Jobs by Mike Langberg of San Jose Mercury News.
and…
Saying that no one has the right to publish information that could have been provided only by someone breaking the law, judge James Kleinberg ruled that online reporters for Apple Insider and PowerPage must reveal their sources.
via Linuxwrangler[article]: http://slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2114581& “Read: Who is a Jounalist?”
While I agree with the above mentioned, does anyone realize how this may impact “journalism” in general?
The two statements can be taken together as one coherent idea… that while Apple can sue the sources themselves (as implied by quote #2), they also shouldn’t sue the publishers (as mentioned by quote #1). But additionally, if all of quote #2 is accepted… any future endeavors in the spirit of journalism may be stifled.
Probably every [gossip] tabloid may just go out of business – since they aren’t allowed to publish “paparazzi-esque” shots, which are clearly violations of privacy. Or how will the media expose bad guys, when the “dirt” you can find on them is usually by some tip which also is a violation of the criminals’ privacy. Isn’t this the same reason why none of the real bad guys never get caught?
Of course, in fairness to the Apple et all, one of the major underlying issues also is the fact that a lot of people can easily claim journalistic rights to defend themselves. An [article][] discusses this:
Those who advocate a special legal privilege for journalists must accept that anyone who thinks he’s a journalist is a journalist, and figure out how to protect the activity rather than a defined group of people.
…
Thousands of bloggers ranting from their soapboxes mean that our political culture encompasses bracing debate about everything people disagree about. If you don’t like this raucous clamor emanating from cyberspace, you’re not really comfortable with democracy.
Jacob Weisberg
Bear in mind those two portions were taken out of their respective context… in the latter, in no way was he taking any side.
A lot of stuff can happen, and it will be interesting to watch how the world can change (if taken to such an extreme) by this little ruling. But of course different laws applies to different countries… just be glad you Aren’t in America for the meantime while this is blowing way out of proportion.