Apple demands Mac sites reveal sources.

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
According to Macworld UK and Macuser Think Secret Appleinsider and The PowerPage have been ordered to reveal and documentation which could identify the source of the "Asteroid" rumour, or is it "Confirmed".



It will be interesting to see if any comply with the court order. I know that British National newspapers refuse to reveal sources to courts and have been held in contempt as a result. I have no real knowledge of US court powers, but I would be interested to know what sanctions they have if the sites were to destroy the info. Personally I would be surprised if any had either kept the information or that the information wasm't sent by anonymous means.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 23
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    so it is the 'asteroid' box then...



    i might be wrong here, but this product seems very niche for apple to be getting its knickers in a twist
  • Reply 3 of 23
    Even a rumors site is a form of journalism.



    As such, a court will not uphold any decision to force a party to reveal sources. This type of case has failed time and again, even when the entity trying to uncover the source is in the right.
  • Reply 4 of 23
    rhumgodrhumgod Posts: 1,289member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 9secondko

    Even a rumors site is a form of journalism.



    As such, a court will not uphold any decision to force a party to reveal sources. This type of case has failed time and again, even when the entity trying to uncover the source is in the right.




    You know what happens to journalists who keep their "integrity" even though a court order says they must reveal their sources, right? Off to jail...
  • Reply 5 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rhumgod

    You know what happens to journalists who keep their "integrity" even though a court order says they must reveal their sources, right? Off to jail...



    Worse yet, they could get a warrant and impound their servers for forensic analysis. Here's hoping AI can prove the source was completely anonymous so they can both comply with the court order and not betray a journalistic confidence.
  • Reply 6 of 23
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rhumgod

    You know what happens to journalists who keep their "integrity" even though a court order says they must reveal their sources, right? Off to jail...



    Do they do that in the US? The courts here don't bother anymore, it is such bad publicity.
  • Reply 7 of 23
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Addison

    Do they do that in the US? The courts here don't bother anymore, it is such bad publicity.



    Yes, journalists are jailed for years for not naming sources.



    There was even a high profile one recently but I can't seem to remember what it was about.

    [edit]Aha! Here's a link:

    http://www.penusa.org/penusa/ftw/FTW...listUpdate.htm
  • Reply 8 of 23
    There are a couple of journalists right now that are about to go to trial facing potential imprisonment here in the US for not revealing their sources. I hope they don't get sent there, obviously. If journalists can get sent to jail for not revealing their sources, then some will reveal them when push comes to shove. This of course then makes the sources less likely to speak to journalists and more information is kept away from the public.
  • Reply 9 of 23
    AppleInsider: Journalism or crap?



    It's mostly crap, but I stop in for my daily spoonful
  • Reply 10 of 23
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Those cases involved national security not industrial design.



    CIA leaks trump apple breakout boxes. No matter how cleverly designed.
  • Reply 11 of 23
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Anonymous sources, especially in government related stories, ARE our national security.



    We have more to fear from an all-knowing government than from journalists who won't say how they know something.



    I despise 'National Security'.
  • Reply 12 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler

    Anonymous sources, especially in government related stories, ARE our national security.



    We have more to fear from an all-knowing government than from journalists who won't say how they know something.



    I despise 'National Security'.




    National Security is like the government just being over protective parents. I want to know about the aliens man.
  • Reply 13 of 23
    dobbydobby Posts: 794member
    I can see Apples problem.

    Now that this 'rumour' is out other companies who can't think up their own product will do a copy cat and be better prepared to roll out an equivilent product leaving Apple with a very short profit term.

    I doubt possible mac upgrade rumours are detrimental to apples overall sales line as you expect a pc to have a newer CPU/ hard drive etc big deal.

    What you have happened if the iPod had been leaked in detail a year before release. Would Apple have the market share it currently holds?

    This new device does sound fairly niche though.



    Dobby.
  • Reply 14 of 23
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dobby

    I can see Apples problem.

    Now that this 'rumour' is out other companies who can't think up their own product will do a copy cat and be better prepared to roll out an equivilent product leaving Apple with a very short profit term.

    ...

    This new device does sound fairly niche though.




    Actually, apple is relatively late to the game. There have been dozens of identical products available for quite a few years. Hundreds of similar devices are available as well if you include USB audio interface devices.



    For example:

    http://www.samedaymusic.com/browse--2420
  • Reply 15 of 23
    Even if this breakout box is niche, Apple has two things they have to do:



    1) Protect themselves from future leaks by [whomever]. Who's to say [whomever] won't strike again, when a big deal is on the line?



    2) Protect themselves from future accusations that they are selectively pursuing certain parties in future cases punitively. IOW, showing that they aggressively pursue any and all violations of trademarks and whatnot. That way, future defendants can't claim that Apple is out to get them for some other reason.
  • Reply 16 of 23
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    Shit, I shouldn't have leaked that info.
  • Reply 17 of 23
    mac+mac+ Posts: 580member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by murbot

    Shit, I shouldn't have leaked that info.



  • Reply 18 of 23
    guarthoguartho Posts: 1,208member
    So, do we get to call the asteroid confirmed now?
  • Reply 19 of 23
    I still don't even know what the freaking thing is and really don't care. A Powerbook leak would've gotten my attention. A breakout box? Eh. I'm not proud that my musical talent hangs out around the radio tuner dial.
  • Reply 20 of 23
    Murbot, your kidding right... he...heh?\

    Anyways, who didn't see this coming? really, anyone?

    There are other posts on a breakout box, designed and working with/ possibly coming with garage band special editions.

    Asteroid...wow. lawsuits..



    yet again:

    GO! I CHOOSE YOU, STEVE JOBS, ATTOURNEY AT LAW!





    sooo.... anyone not see this?
Sign In or Register to comment.