Apple just became the bad guys.

[sauergeek]

A California judge has ruled that online publishers covering Apple Computer can be forced to divulge their sources.

Notable from the article:

Apple maintains that California's Shield Law, which protects journalists from being forced to reveal sources, should not apply to Internet sites. In addition, the firm stated in court filings that free speech protections likewise should not apply to the three Internet sites.

Given its stance, Apple seems perfectly willing to eviscerate the First Amendment to keep people from publishing leaks. What Apple should be doing instead is internal counter-espionage to track those leaks, and punishing the employees who are talking too much. (Or I at least assume that Apple has a sufficiently stringent mandatory non-disclosure agreement to do this.) Sacrificing the First Amendment for corporate surprise is just plain wrong. I hope Apple ends up losing their shirt over this.

Comments

[andrewfeland.livejournal.com]

Simple, their lawyers get paid not to think so. Cynical, I know, but if Apple says "sue", well, they do sign the checks.

[sauergeek.livejournal.com]

Apple may sign the checks, but lawyers have a formal, codified code of ethics to obey. I hope that they are demonstrated to be in violation with a countersuit claiming malicious prosecution (filing a suit with no merit, just to harass) or abuse of process (using the courts to harass -- different from malicious prosecution in that abuse of process can show up in an otherwise meritorious lawsuit).