Asteroid: Apple darf zwangsverfügen [Update_2]

Richter James Kleinberg hatte sich bereits vergangenen Donnerstag vorläufig in Apples Sinne ausgesprochen, heute fiel sein endgültiges Urteil: Apple darf per Verfügung Nfox, den Email Service Provider von Powerpage.org, zur Herausgabe aller im Zusammenhang mit Asteroid stehenden Daten zwingen (Nfox wehrte sich dagegen bisher sowieso nicht). "Unlike the whistleblower who discloses a health, safety or welfare hazard affecting all, or the government employee who reveals mismanagement or worse by our public officials, (the enthusiast sites) are doing nothing more than feeding the public's insatiable desire for information," Kleinberg wrote.[...] The information about Apple's unreleased products "is stolen property, just as any physical item, such as a laptop computer containing the same information on its hard drive (or not) would be," the judge wrote. "The bottom line is there is no exception or exemption in either the (Uniform Trade Secrets Act) or the Penal Code for journalists--however defined--or anyone else." Eine an Apples Produkten interessierte Öffentlichkeit ist nicht mit dem öffentlichen Interesse gleichzusetzen, beschied Richter Kleinberg, der betonte, dass es sich bei der Entscheidung lediglich um die eine Zwangsverfügung handelt. Über die damit verbundene Klage gegen Unbekannt sei keineswegs entschieden. Die EFF hat nun eine Woche Zeit gegen das Urteil in Berufung zu gehen. CNET hat die komplette Geschichte, alles zu Apples aktuellen IP-Klagen gibts hier im fscklog.
Update: Wie bereits angekündigt wird die EFF (Pressemeldung) in Berufung gehen. Dies wurde gegenüber TMO bestätigt: "The court decision is disappointing in that Judge Kleinberg agrees with Apple that they have exhausted all avenues of finding out who leaked the information," EFF attorney Kevin Bankston said. "We disagree with this because the judge has given no analysis as to why he thinks they have fulfilled their obligation." Mr. Bankston said his clients are also disappointed that the court created an exception to the reporters privilege "when there is a mere allegation of a trade secret violation." He said the EFF believes this point affects "any and every business reporter in America." Die komplette Urteilsbegründung gibt es als 1,9 MB PDF ebenfalls bei TMO.
Update_2 13.03.05: Apples einziger Kommentar dazu war laut NYT: "The judge ruled that there is no license conferred on anyone to violate valid criminal laws." Joe Wilcox schreibt: "Based on the judge's ruling, I would conclude there is legitimate cause to assume that Apple trade secrets had been leaked. But many other vendors could make similar arguments about leaks--the aforementioned free marketing--if they wanted to. Apple may have won the battle, but I'm not convinced it will win the war, if the result is the alienation of enthusiasts that are the core of the Mac community. Apple also depends on the goodwill of journalists and product reviewers. I polled five journalists this evening all pretty sour on Apple because of the case. As a result of the ruling, two said they won't report on Apple any longer. I can't say that they can realistically keep the stance (their editors might have something else to say), but the sentiment is there."