| Recent
Articles |
Roundtable Chatting About Apple’s Future
SiliconValley.com's weeklong roundtable on all things Apple includes a couple
of odd choices for membership. Way back in June of this year...
Apple’s
New Fritter: The Nano
I don't know if I want this new Apple toy or not because as small as it is, I
would inevitably leave in my jeans and it would get washed but it is cool...
iPod Nano... Hot Cakes
Now this is sexy! Today Apple announced the iPod nano, a very elegant, slim digital
player that supersedes the iPod Mini...
Apple
Hits Big With Nano
The iPod Nano, a smaller version of the iPod with a color screen, and the long
awaited Motorola iTunes phone debuted today...
|
|
09.14.05
Apple
Asteroid Case May Crash
 By
David Utter
Apple may have violated federal and state laws in planning to subpoena journalists
for their sources before doing a full internal investigation.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation announced it had won a request in court to
have documents in the Apple v. Does case unsealed. Those documents show the company
did not thoroughly investigate internally the disclosure of information related
to a trade secret first.
Representing the two sites sued by Apple, PowerPage.org and AppleInsider.com,
the EFF requested the unsealing of documents amid suspicions that Apple may have
went after journalists for those sites prematurely. Those sites published information
on a rumored FireWire audio interface for Apple's GarageBand program; the project
was code-named Asteroid.
The EFF now says that Apple did no investigation beyond a forensic check of email
servers and a single file server. Additional investigative options like checking
workstations and obtaining sworn testimony from employees was not performed.
Apple had resisted the opening of court documents, claiming the internal investigation
itself was a trade secret. The court rejected that assertion in unsealing documents.
EFF counsel claims the First Amendment and the California Constitution require
Apple to exhaust all other options before issuing subpoenas to journalists regarding
their sources. The case will be heard in California's Court of Appeal, but a date
has not been set.
About the Author:
David Utter is a staff writer for WebProNews covering technology and business. |
