RealTechNews.com - Independent Tech

Sunday, March 06, 2005

Bloggers Must Reveal Sources?
This Can't Be Happening Dept: It started when a college guy posted leaked information on Apple's upcoming release on his blog, Thinksecret.com. And now it looks like a California court may ask three blogs to turn over their sources deeming a blog a non-journalistic vehicle. More from the BBC News Online:

"A California judge said in a preliminary ruling that bloggers should not have the same protection afforded to journalists under US law. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), representing the sites, said it was disappointed with the ruling.

"The case's outcome could be far-reaching for bloggers and writers.

"The civil liberties group EFF had asked California's Superior court to stop Apple pursuing the blogs' sources in February. The tentative ruling serves as an early indication of which way the court is leaning and is not the final ruling, Annalee Newitz, EFF policy analyst, told the BBC News website."

UPDATE: "Judge James Kleinberg delayed a final ruling on whether three Web sites can be classified as legitimate journalistic outlets and can claim protection under reporter shield laws, thereby avoiding subpoenas from Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple Computer Inc. The company recently filed a complaint against the sites—PowerPage.org, AppleInsider and Think Secret—in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California." Source: eWeek

# Permalink Posted at 6:18 AM 3 comments Email this Link

Comments on this Item:

I think that if an Apple employee, bound by a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA), is leaking information to the press (or blog site) then Apple has a legal right to know who leaked the information and protect it's intellectual property.

If the web site in question was bound by the same NDA and leaked this information you wouldn't have classified this article in the "This Can't Be Happening Dept" would you?

# posted by Anonymous 8:14 AM

That's true. As a journalist, if you violate an NDA, that's very bad news and not something you want to do. But, if you have a source that provides you with information that is credible, you have every right to publish it and protect your source. If I published info in my PC Mag column, my source would be protected, but then if I were to publish it on realtechnews, it would not? I think that opens up a major gray zone on what the difference between a "blog" and a tech news site.

# posted by Alice 10:32 AM

I think this boils down to Freedom of Speech versus contractural obligations. It is definitely a breach of contract for someone to break a NDA, however the journalist (or any other person) receiving the information is not bound by that agreement. There is nothing wrong with the journalist then publishing that information. I think companies should find another way to go after NDA violaters instead of going after the journalists.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Compaq do something similar to this when it reverse-engineered the IBM PC architecture? I don't know if IBM fought that, but I do know that they failed. I don't know why "big names" should be treated differently under the law.

See here: http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=reverse%20engineering

# posted by David 3:56 PM

Post a Comment