Apple lawyers issue cease-and-desist letter over $100K tablet 'bounty'

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A Web site offering up to $100,000 for details on Apple's forthcoming tablet has been asked by the Cupertino, Calif., company's lawyers to stop, alleging the "bounty" is in violation of California laws protecting trade secrets.



Attorney Michael C. Spillner, with Apple's law firm Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe sent a letter to Valleywag Wednesday evening demanding that the online publication discontinue its offer by 6 p.m. Pacific Time Thursday.



"While Apple appreciates vibrant public commentary about its products, we believe you and your company have cross the line by offering a bounty for the theft of Apple's trade secrets," the letter to Gabriel Snyder, editor in chief, reads. "Such an offer is illegal and Apple insists that you immediately discontinue the Scavenger Hunt."



Valleywag responded by sarcastically declaring Apple the winner of its "contest," by providing the "most concrete proof" of the tablet's existence yet through its cease-and-desist letter. But the publication said its request for information remains open.



"If you've found proof that the Apple Tablet exists and can share it with us, we're still offering prizes," editor Gabriel Snyder wrote. "Apple, of course, has plenty of good lawyers like Michael Spillner, so we reiterate our advice 'to stay within the bounds of the law.' And also: use anonymous email addresses! We can't tell Apple who you are if we don't know who you are."



On Wednesday, the publication gained publicity through its $100,000 "scavenger hunt." The publication said it would pay $10,000 for pictures of Apple's long-rumored tablet, $20,000 for a video of it in action, $50,000 for pictures or video of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs holding one, and $100,000 to let the Web site use the tablet for one hour.



With Apple rumored to hold an event in less than two weeks to unveil new products, speculation has been rampant that the tablet will see a public debut before the end of January. Reports have said Apple has rented the stage at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco on Wednesday, Jan. 27. Sources also told The Wall Street Journal that the long-awaited touchscreen device would likely ship in March.



But how the device works, or even exactly what it is, remains a matter of debate. General consensus suggests the tablet will be akin to a jumbo iPod touch, with a screen size between 10 inches and 11 inches. It will act as a multimedia, multi-function device allowing users to watch movies, play games, surf the Internet, and read electronic books and newspapers.



The tablet's alleged role as an e-reader picked up steam last fall when multiple rumors surfaced that Apple had contacted print publications to make their content available on a forthcoming device. While some have speculated that the device will be a "Kindle killer", it is widely believed Apple's new hardware will do much more than offer books and newspapers.



In an interview last September, Jobs said last "dedicated devices" like the Kindle will remain niche products, while multi-purpose devices like the iPhone "will win the day." Jobs also said he believes the market for e-books is currently very small.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 57
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    well not everyone who might have access to their products are covered by an Apple NDA so in theory someone could take a picture and not break any laws. I think that is what apple could be concerned about.



    NDAs cover a company and individuals who signed them, but if you happen to be not covered by either of those then you are free to snap pictures if you like and share them with whomever you like. Now taking one and handing it over is another story.
  • Reply 2 of 57
    buckbuck Posts: 293member
    I wonder if that's exactly what Gawker was aiming to achieve.

    Also it's kind of wrong for Apple to disclose the existence of the tablet in such a manner. Something just doesn't feel right there.
  • Reply 3 of 57
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,757member
    Confirmation of tablet.
  • Reply 4 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Buck View Post


    I wonder if that's exactly what Gawker was aiming to achieve.

    Also it's kind of wrong for Apple to disclose the existence of the tablet in such a manner. Something just doesn't feel right there.



    That would be the logical explanation.



    Gawker is grubbing for pageviews and really nothing in the high-tech industry right now is grabbing them like Apple tablet-related articles.



    The fact that Apple's counsel told a media source to stop soliciting trade secrets neither confirms nor denies the existence of the tablet, a cure for cancer, unicorns, etc.



    Gawker is full of it. Nobody reads Valleywag which is the reason why they aren't a standalone website anymore, just a column for the main Gawker site. This is just a sleazy attempt at pageviews. Valleywag contributes no insight into the high-tech industry.



    Gawker is just trying to jump aboard the Apple Tablet Rumor Pageview Gravy Train. They don't actually have anything to say, so they resort to this sort of pathetic grandstanding, like of like the Jon & Kate Gosselin of high-tech journalism. Typical Gawker behavior.
  • Reply 5 of 57
    How can someone get paid if Valleywag doesn't know who you are?
  • Reply 6 of 57
    In the words of Joe McGrath..."You can't put a bounty on a man's head..."



    ...and apparently not an Apple Tablet as well....
  • Reply 7 of 57
    DISCLAIMER: I think the Apple tablet is coming...and soon.



    This is pretty standard boilerplate stuff. I think that if Gawker were to produce a headline that went "$100,000 for anyone who can show us concrete proof that Apple is making a [something]" they would get a C&D. It's not confirmation for the contracted law firm (who likely don't know if this product exists) to ask them to stop offering a bounty. It could have the affect of someone saying "I don't have proof of the tablet, but I could show them [product x]. Maybe they'll still pay me for it!"
  • Reply 8 of 57
    Ah, journalistic ethics these days..... increasingly an oxymoron.
  • Reply 9 of 57
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    Valleywag responded by sarcastically declaring Apple the winner of its "contest,"



    Can Apple now sue Valleywag to get the prize?
  • Reply 10 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    well not everyone who might have access to their products are covered by an Apple NDA so in theory someone could take a picture and not break any laws.



    There are laws against the theft of trade secrets separate from and in addition to any contracts (NDAs) that may exist between parties.



    Even if you're not under an NDA, you can't just snap a picture/make a copy of a trade secret and sell it. Let alone nab and sell the actual (intellectual) property of Apple, Inc.
  • Reply 11 of 57
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    well not everyone who might have access to their products are covered by an Apple NDA



    I highly doubt this is correct.

    There are no "casual" observers of unreleased products.

    Quote:

    but if you happen to be not covered by either of those then you are free to snap pictures if you like and share them with whomever you like.



    Individuals do NOT have access to unlreleased products unless they are covered by an NDA. No one gets to wander around Apple R&D and browse.
  • Reply 12 of 57
    matlumatlu Posts: 14member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post


    Can Apple now sue Valleywag to get the prize?



    Nope. They never provided a picture. No $10,00 award for Apple. Too bad for Apple, lol.
  • Reply 13 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Buck View Post


    I wonder if that's exactly what Gawker was aiming to achieve.



    publicity for his little known site
  • Reply 14 of 57
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Apple should claim the prize themselves. At $800 and a 12% net profit that is worth the sale of 1000 units right there. (No, I'm not serious)



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Confirmation of tablet.



    Looks that way.
  • Reply 15 of 57
    any reason why the lawyer didn't address their client by their real name "Apple, Inc." You would think for something as formal as a cease and desist, they would get their client's name right.
  • Reply 16 of 57
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Confirmation of tablet.



    We didn't need any. I knew it was coming for two years. Just like we knew Apple were making a phone, they sort of had no choice.
  • Reply 17 of 57
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    I never read ValleyWag, but this just makes it a certain thing that I never will.

    What a bunch of shallow opportunistic a-holes.



    Besides, they are on even shakier leal grounds now given they can't use the excuse of not knowing it's illegal or that NDAs are involved. If someone *does* break their NDA and communicate with them, they are criminally liable if Apple ever finds out who it is/was.
  • Reply 18 of 57
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,625member
    Apple blinked.
  • Reply 19 of 57
    Wow how much more obvious could it be that the publication is apple and this all just to generate publicity before the event.
  • Reply 20 of 57
    ilogicilogic Posts: 298member
    I wouldn't stick around to find out what happens if I kept the contest up...
Sign In or Register to comment.