Apple verklagt Think Secret [Update_3]

Nachdem Apple unlängst gegen das Asteroid Bekanntwerden sowie drei ADC Mitglieder die 10.4 Betas verteilten vorging, folgt nun die nächste Klage, die sich direkt gegen den Think Secret Herausgeber und 20 weitere unbekannte Personen richtet.

The suit, filed Tuesday in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, Calif., aims to identify who is leaking the information and to get an injunction preventing further release of trade secrets. However, in filing the suit, Apple identifies specific articles that contain trade secrets, indicating that at least parts of those reports are on the mark.

CNET verspricht weitere Details in Kürze, solange darf spekuliert werden, ob der Anlass iWork oder 500$ iMac lautet.

Update: Das ging schnell, die Klage fand tatsächlich aufgrund von beiden Gerüchten statt. Zum 500$ iMac:

Apple says the article "disclosed numerous confidential details regarding the technical capabilities of Apple's unreleased computer product as well as Apple's confidential marketing plans."

Und im Zusammenhang mit iWork:

"The postings on Think Secret included detailed technical specifications and product code names," the lawsuit maintains. "Apple had maintained and protected this Future Product Information as trade secrets."

Zusätzlich werden die Informationen zu iLife 05 erwähnt und insgesamt Unmut über die kontinuierliche Gerüchteflut von Think Secret in den letzten Jahren geäußert. Als zusätzliche Problematik wird gewertet, dass Think Secrets Nick dePlume (dessen wahre Identität Apple nicht bekannt ist) Personen zum 'Geheimnisverrat' aktiv aufforderte.

Update_2: John Gruber hat sich Gedanken zur Klage gemacht:

You may disagree with Apple’s vigorous pursuit of leakers, but this is not a case of big bad Apple putting the screws to a little guy. Fried’s report at CNet makes it clear that Apple Legal has warned Think Secret (and, one presumes, other rumor mongers) repeatedly in the past few years.(...) If Think Secret wasn’t prepared for this, it’s because they’re foolish, not because they weren’t fairly warned.

Dan Gillmor ebenfalls:

If a company wants to control its own employees' activities, including by firing or suing workers who reveal secrets, that's a company's right. When it seeks to put a gag on the people who merely receive the information, that's going way too far.

Update_3: Nick dePlume äußerte sich erstmalig gegenüber Reuters zu der Klage:

"We're confident that Think Secret's reporting is consistent with the right and privileges granted by the First Amendment," dePlume wrote. "The complaint is being reviewed, and Think Secret defers further comment until it has been analyzed."