You need to rethink that statement. Jobs didn't violate NDAs when he talked about unreleased products but he's absolutely talked about unreleased products. This is not up for debate as it's literally the key thing people remember about Jobs doing his job!
Even if the products were released that day, immediately after an event, he was still talking about unreleased products during every single one of those events. Announcing new things was the entire point of those events. Then you have email replies to assure customers that certain product lines haven't been abandoned, countless interviews where he talks about products he's already mentioned on stage but haven't yet been released, and earning calls where he did the same.
A reasonable person might ask how much it would have really cost Apple to ensure that phones could not film without first obtaining a code number or other authorization.
Huh? The iPhone X being used to film something is not the issue. It being the subject of a film is the controversy here. Codes and authorization built into the pre-release iPhone X to prevent it from filming would not stop the girl from pulling out her personal iPhone and filming the screen of the pre-release iPhone X.
In other words, assuming the girl used an Apple device at an Apple controlled facility to make unauthorized recordings, it is reasonable for a jury to ask if Apple could have and should have prevented the recordings from ever having been made. To answer the "could have" question, one need only look to see that Apple holds patents for disabling videos at live events, it could have a feature in iOS to enable automatic MDM enrollment of visitor devices or custom iOS controls --maybe just a single line of code that checks the GPS coordinates vs. the developer-status of a device before allowing recordings. (Hmm, what's that in the Timezone dialog? Oh, Cupertino, I see.) The fact they don't do this is pretty stupid regardless of this case. The answer to the "should have" question is not for you or me to decide, but you can bet the attorney for the poor bastard they just fired will likely have a few ideas: was it too much of a financial burden, was it reasonable to expect this to happen, etc. Again, not our call.
Wait, so... the Boston Red Sox should also require automatic MDM enrollment, and support such, if even exists, for all devices that could possibly be used to record the game? IOS, Android, Windows Phone, etc? Should the Red Sox then also seek a license to Apple’s patented process for preventing video recording and require each game attendee to install software that enforces that process on the device? Because if they don’t, they won’t be able to sue a game attendee who publishes or otherwise rebroadcasts video of the sporting event? Do you see how silly it seems now what you are suggesting Apple should be required to do?
It would be more than reasonable to assume MLB is actively seeking to implement such a technology. It probably won't be automatic MDM enrollment done at a visitor's check-in booth because that would take too much time, but Apple holds a patent for an alternative though venues will feel that the solution is needed beyond just iOS.
Wow.. I had to watch a couple of her other Videos to make sure I wasn't “jumping the gun” on this issue.. so I did and... DUMB AS A BOX OF ROCKS!
She asks her Dad “Is this the 10 or the X?” and her Dad quickly informs her that it's “the 10.” She then lets us all know that “It's the 10, Not The X, and Don't Forget it."
Shazam-Wow.. it must be awful to be her brain! whew.. just the way she said it... Yikes!
So, should they now also sue all the Apple Event attendees who showed off the iPhone X on camera and on their Vlogs... at the Opening Event hands-on demo... which was held earlier in time? Here's your subpoena, CNET.
How would you know this information? Have you been on the campus? Let me tell, cases like that go to court and the perspective might be very different for this guy, he may win his case against a firing! Be very careful, there is know way you know what happened!
it's public common knowledge. look it up! Apple (and others) have a strict no photo/video policy. just that policy alone was grounds for him to get fired. and rightly so!
Apple held the engineer to standards that are well known to both parties. The engineer knows he screwed up and has accepted the consequences of his actions.
Why blame Apple? Don’t you understand that people are responsible for their own actions, and if you violate a contract, there are consequences?
I suppose you blame the police, prosecutor and judge for destroying the bank robber’s life, too.
Bank robber probably threatened people with a gun.
just when I thought Apple was a loving, caring and diverse company.
Apple is the only tech company that protects user privacy and goes to great length to protect the environment. Your opinion changes nothing.
I was appalled at the accompanying video with this article. Apparently the daughter is getting all manner of evil responses from complete Internet losers. The Internet has become the source of most evil in the world because of anonymity. People release their innermost hate and vitriol since no one knows their name. The Internet is the most vicious social network in existence.
Finally, I think AI management should have turned off the comments for this article like they do for political ones. There’s no reason for it.
Apple takes their NDA’s very seriously. His firing was meant to send a message to other Apple employees and in my opinion was completely appropriate. Sorry to be so harsh, but when you work for a(ny) company you abide by their rules or face the consequences...
It is extremely correct. The engineer is fully culpable in the fact that his offspring gained access to material she never should have been able to touch. I've worked at the corporate support level at companies with a much lower profile than Apple's and I've seen instant firings for serious NDA breeches. And this is about as serious as it can get. YOU SIMPLY DO NOT TAKE SENSITIVE WORK HOME WITH YOU. Or if you must for some reason, you keep it locked down from curious fingers. Or face the consequences for your lapse.
It really stopped being sensitive the day of the keynote. Hundreds of Apple engineers went home and showed their wife and family members the iPhone X they had been working on that day. Clearly post nov 3rd Apple wont fire anybody for posting a video of their iPhone X but the details of the iPhone X are as public now as they will be then.
Most people support Apple's decision, but they don't stand a chance when this engineer realizes he has to take it to court (because he may not work again, at least at the same level). The reason is that double-edged sword that Apple uniquely wields in controlling the technology, not to mention that facility. A reasonable person might ask how much it would have really cost Apple to ensure that phones could not film without first obtaining a code number or other authorization and what precautions were taken to assist employees with authorized visitors in complying with the security policies. The answer to these questions probably mean this girl will have her education paid for while she stars in her own cable show.
He would have no case. California is an at-will state, so unless he was discriminated against on the basis of race, gender, religion, etc., he can be legally fired for any reason, as long as it's factual. That said, I do agree that Apple, or at least the staff at Cafe Mac, was equally responsible for the breach, having done nothing to prevent openly filming the X.
Personally allowed, in violation of corporate contract.
Steve Jobs was no angel, Apple has a double standard here.
Steve Jobs didn’t talk about unreleased products. There’s no double standard.
Damn Right! You'd never catch Steve breaking any rules! ... Oh wait! That's why they fired him -- he wouldn't follow their rules...
For all those "rules is RULES" guys who support Apple firing this guy -- do you support their firing of Steve for the same reason? (Not following rules)...
I was appalled at the accompanying video with this article. Apparently the daughter is getting all manner of evil responses from complete Internet losers. The Internet has become the source of most evil in the world because of anonymity. People release their innermost hate and vitriol since no one knows their name. The Internet is the most vicious social network in existence.
Finally, I think AI management should have turned off the comments for this article like they do for political ones. There’s no reason for it.
Your first paragraph has merit. Technology has added much value to our lives, and also a lowering of communication standards and virtue in many online interactions.
However, just because you deem a topic or comments to be undeserving of your continued interest or validity is no reason to suggest censoring those of us who find the discussion with merit.
and beyond that, I have noticed a similar coarse attitude on your part during many commenting sessions. And not that it is wrong on your part, just that it takes a village of commenters to round out a discussion, and explore the merits of the many points of view. No censorship is the standard to be hoped for.
i thank AI for allowing this discussion to proceed.
How would you know this information? Have you been on the campus? Let me tell, cases like that go to court and the perspective might be very different for this guy, he may win his case against a firing! Be very careful, there is know way you know what happened!
it's public common knowledge. look it up! Apple (and others) have a strict no photo/video policy. just that policy alone was grounds for him to get fired. and rightly so!
How would you know this information? Have you been on the campus? Let me tell, cases like that go to court and the perspective might be very different for this guy, he may win his case against a firing! Be very careful, there is know way you know what happened!
it's public common knowledge. look it up! Apple (and others) have a strict no photo/video policy. just that policy alone was grounds for him to get fired. and rightly so!
Cafe Macs is open to the public - at least you can bring people in. So whatever rules apply within Apple proper can’t apply there.
This does not violate NDA. Because Apple already disclosed iPhone X to the world.
Until the phone is available to the public, nothing about it can be disclosed by mere employees. A mere employee cannot speak for the employer as NDA contracts would make clear.
What did she show in the video that wasn't already shown in the keynote?
It doesn't matter.
It does actually. Both morally and legally. NDAs are not enforceable if something is already public knowledge.
That said he does work in an at will state so Apple can do what they want.
If his NDA prohibited him from allowing anyone outside of his working group who are under the same NDA to access or use the device (I'm sure it does), then the NDA is absolutely enforceable. Disclosure of information that has been made public and allowing someone to use a device that is not publicly available are two different matters.
What did she show in the video that wasn't already shown in the keynote?
It doesn't matter.
It does actually. Both morally and legally. NDAs are not enforceable if something is already public knowledge.
That said he does work in an at will state so Apple can do what they want.
Incorrect, NDA's remain in-force on company property, with as-yet unreleased technology, regardless if a keynote presentation was made or not. The phone in question was a pre-production unit with custom software, some of which now has leaked to the public as a result of this stupid act on the part of both the father and daughter.
Please try and show a little less ignorance and learn about how NDA's work before making such statements, doesn't shine a good light on you.
Good... Glad to hear that you are retreating with your tail tucked between your little legs... But, I'll give you a "Nice Try" if it makes you feel better!
And with that one statement you provided the previous poster right about you, and your adolescent behaviour.
Personally allowed, in violation of corporate contract.
Steve Jobs was no angel, Apple has a double standard here.
Steve Jobs didn’t talk about unreleased products. There’s no double standard.
Damn Right! You'd never catch Steve breaking any rules! ... Oh wait! That's why they fired him -- he wouldn't follow their rules...
For all those "rules is RULES" guys who support Apple firing this guy -- do you support their firing of Steve for the same reason? (Not following rules)...
And now, you've outed yourself out as a troll with that stupid vitriol...
Cafe Macs is open to the public - at least you can bring people in. So whatever rules apply within Apple proper can’t apply there.
Wrong, video taping ANYWHERE on campus is strictly prohibited, and Caffé Macs is public accessible by escort only, the rules extend to the visitors, and the escort must make the rules clear to them, and can be held accountable for their actions in the event of a breach of protocol.
Comments
Even if the products were released that day, immediately after an event, he was still talking about unreleased products during every single one of those events. Announcing new things was the entire point of those events. Then you have email replies to assure customers that certain product lines haven't been abandoned, countless interviews where he talks about products he's already mentioned on stage but haven't yet been released, and earning calls where he did the same.
She asks her Dad “Is this the 10 or the X?” and her Dad quickly informs her that it's “the 10.” She then lets us all know that “It's the 10, Not The X, and Don't Forget it."
Shazam-Wow.. it must be awful to be her brain! whew.. just the way she said it... Yikes!
i guess the screen is pure knockoff then.
Finally, I think AI management should have turned off the comments for this article like they do for political ones. There’s no reason for it.
That said he does work in an at will state so Apple can do what they want.
... Oh wait! That's why they fired him -- he wouldn't follow their rules...
For all those "rules is RULES" guys who support Apple firing this guy -- do you support their firing of Steve for the same reason? (Not following rules)...
However, just because you deem a topic or comments to be undeserving of your continued interest or validity is no reason to suggest censoring those of us who find the discussion with merit.
and beyond that, I have noticed a similar coarse attitude on your part during many commenting sessions. And not that it is wrong on your part, just that it takes a village of commenters to round out a discussion, and explore the merits of the many points of view. No censorship is the standard to be hoped for.
i thank AI for allowing this discussion to proceed.
Please try and show a little less ignorance and learn about how NDA's work before making such statements, doesn't shine a good light on you.
GeorgeBMac said: And with that one statement you provided the previous poster right about you, and your adolescent behaviour.
GeorgeBMac said: And now, you've outed yourself out as a troll with that stupid vitriol...
Wrong, video taping ANYWHERE on campus is strictly prohibited, and Caffé Macs is public accessible by escort only, the rules extend to the visitors, and the escort must make the rules clear to them, and can be held accountable for their actions in the event of a breach of protocol.