Apple Defendants Interviewed 339
evands writes "There's an interview with Desicanuk, one of three named defendants in the Apple lawsuit alleging illegal distribution of a Tiger developer build, and Nessence, one of two administrators of MacTKA, the Mac BitTorrent tracker site where the build was initially posted, up at DrunkenBlog. The interview tells the whole story as a press release can not, from how Apple determined the kids to sue, to lawyers knocking on doors on Christmas Eve, and beyond. 'Collateral Damage' is a fascinating read which humanizes the whole messy situation."
Go figure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe it's time to look at OS marketshare to see how the different strategies work out.
Go figure...Respect, be damned. (Score:4, Interesting)
And maybe some have so little respect for others that they'll violate the rules at every turn. Would it really have killed the Mac community to wait?
Re:Go figure...Respect, be damned. (Score:2)
I can certainly understand how apple does not want this released into the public because it will give the product an undeserved bad reputation.
People (especially BOFHs) will not say "oh it's a pre-release of course it doesn't work perfectly". They will instead say "the next version of mac os x sucks".
All developers who signed up for the pre-release program had
Re:Go figure...Respect, be damned. (Score:4, Insightful)
This guy took advantage of a favor that a friend did for him and distributed the Tiger beta to other people. Whoever he got the beta from probably didn't want him giving it to five or six other people. That's a breach of trust between him and the company a well as him and his friend. Now his buddy could potentially get in trouble for it. He's caused a huge fucking mess because he figured he'd play Robin Hood. Well, now he's getting what came to him. Maybe now he'll take implied trusts and legal documents with his signature on them more seriously.
Re:Go figure...Respect, be damned. (Score:3, Interesting)
At every conference we get the "talking to" from Apple about not doing this. I have never done anything like this and I suspected that real developers would not. This guy was not a developer - he was a power user who had no real need for to have the seed.
I've got users to think about. I need these seeds prior to the release of the OS to make sure that my products aren't going to bre
Re:Go figure... (Score:5, Insightful)
from the link:
I made the foolish assumption that since I wasn't a developer, and I had a copy that it would be ok if I shared it with 5 or 6 fellow mac fanatics.
As to the question, did I do exactly what Apple is accusing me of doing? I did share the file. So in that regard yes. But there was no malicious intent.
STFU.
Re:Go figure... (Score:2, Insightful)
This guy is a 30 year old pre-med student. Either he is flat out lying or he has an actual smart person doing his med school work for him. NFW someone that stupid and naive is in pre-med.
Re:Go figure... (Score:2)
Re:Go figure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe if you've been on Mars for the last few years you might not understand that piracy = bad but I don't believe I've seen any press releases regarding manned missions to anywher
Re:Go figure... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, not very convincing.
Re:Go figure... (Score:2)
Re:Go figure... (Score:3, Interesting)
And as for this "bad publicity" thing of which you speak
Re:Go figure... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Go figure... (Score:2)
Maybe it's time to look at OS marketshare to see how the different strategies work out.
As an "Extreme Mac enthusiast" myself, I concede that Apple's strategy of "surprise releases" is problematic. It punishes enthusiasts. It discourages small developers, who unlike the bigger players (MS and Adobe) don't have as much advance notice that they'll be losing APIs that they depend on. It really discourages enterprise level spending, as those customers like to plan their purchasing strategy for a few years
Re:Go figure... (Score:4, Interesting)
Brent Simmons (a well known and respected Mac developer) released a "buggy" version of NetNewsWire 2.0 [ranchero.com], presumably to "generate free buzz about the final product."
What did he get for his trouble? How about being publically berated [napsterization.org] because a clueless user didn't know the definition of "beta."
As another poster put it, "you don't get to decide Apple's strategy for them." You're not the one that's going to have to deal with complaints from clueless users that don't understand why the pre-release version of Tiger has borked their mission-critical data.
Re:Go figure... (Score:5, Informative)
This is completely irrelevant. In order to get the pre-release builds, we have to sign a legally-binding agreement that states, among other things, that we will not redistribute the seeds that we get. This has nothing to do with copyright, it has nothing to do with free publicity. This is about contract law, it is about people signing contracts, and entering into agreements that they have no intention of upholding.
Re:Go figure... (Score:2)
Re:Go figure... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Go figure... (Score:3, Informative)
From TFA:
He got the seed through ADC - when he joined ADC, he was bound by its terms and conditions. Specifically:
Tiger (Score:5, Funny)
Remain SILENT (Score:5, Insightful)
When charged with a criminal or civil offense:
1. remain silent;
2. talk to an attorney;
3. if case unresolved, goto 1
Of course in the United States you do not have the right to an attorney if charged with a civil offense.
You also do not have the right to be silent at trial, unless your statement may tend to incriminate you.
Note that in the above program, there is no "grandstand / justify / brag to a blogger" statement.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:5, Insightful)
When charged with a criminal or civil offense:
1. remain silent;
2. talk to an attorney;
3. if case unresolved, goto 1
He's only an idiot if he's trying to weasel out of it and plead not guilty. By his account, he's accepting responsibility for his actions and thus not an idiot. Hard concept to grasp, I know....
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't have to the do the second in order to accomplish the first. A person with more intelligence and experience might realize that during an emotional situation one's judgment might not be the best, and that even though the person was a central player in the situation he might not know the entire relevant facts and law to judge one's own liability or guilt or to make conclusions about the situation.
THAT is why you remain silent. Not because you are avoiding responsbility for your acts.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:3, Interesting)
This issues aren't whether he did it or not--they have him nailed cold; nothing he's said will dig him in deeper. This is all extenuation and mitigation in advance of the trial.
He's not putting himself at Apple's mercy--he's trying to get mercy from Apple. There's a difference.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
And before you say that he's an idiot for not reading everything
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:4, Insightful)
Close, but wrong. You are correct that, in relation to the purely civil matter, there is no Fifth Amendment right.
However, you always have your Constitutional right against self-incrimination for criminal prosecution. In this situation, while the lawsuit is a civil one, you can still exercise your Fifth Amendment right if the information being sought would expose you to criminal prosecution. In this case, that is definitely the situation as copyright violations can also be criminally prosecuted.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Assuming this information, pleading not guilty is a very dangerous thing to do. He's alre
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2, Insightful)
Note that in the above program, there is no "grandstand / justify / brag to a blogger" statement.
I don't think they are bragging, it's calculated PR. Their responses are worded to present a "nice boy who did wrong" image of themselves. I think the hope is that people read the blog and feel for them which leads to bad PR for Apple and Apple goes easy on them or drops it altogether.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2, Interesting)
Note that for many civil offenses that harken back to the old "chancery" courts, you are not even entitled a trial by jury. A judge is far less likely to be swayed by this kind of "MEA CULPA!"
Apple will just ask the court the simple question "If this guy really wanted to accept responsibility and not grandstand, why didn't he quietly admit his liability to us and humbly acce
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
So will all the evidence he provided Apple when they called him up and he "answered all the questions they asked regarding how I got the torrent, how long I had seeded it for etc. I was honest and as helpful as I possibly could be."
The same traits that got him in trouble in the first place, which causes him to say, "I suppose sometimes, honesty has a way of kicking you in the arse."
Insightful??? Was:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2, Insightful)
Google "strict liability tort."
That is another reason to talk to an attorney before giving interviews--the law is a three-thousand year coral reef and you are just a polyp. Your intuition and perspective suck.
Civil != Criminal (Score:3, Insightful)
In a civil case, the plaintiff is the master of her claim. If the plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues, it's not like the defendant can waive the jury demand that
Re:Civil != Criminal (Score:2)
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:4, Informative)
Anyway, there's another big lesson to be learned here - for the love of god, BT servers, disable logging. If you have logs enabled then you're only helping out anyone who might sue you.
-- james
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
What difference does it make?
I can log on to a torrent and in mere seconds have a list of people who, by the nature of bittorrent, are all sharing, and thus all guilty of infringement if the torrent happens to be for copyrighted material.
It would be trivial for a copyright holder to write a script that would spider for
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:4, Insightful)
(Does anyone else remember when that would be considered a joke rather than a realistic suggestion?).
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
But, all this is irrelevant. The moment he said: I didn't think I was doing anything wrong, we have learned he is a liar.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Right, because you read his mind while he was doing it, and you know with 100% certainty that he thought he was in fact doing wrong. Um, yeah.
Whether he should have known he was doing something wrong is a different matter than whether he did in fact know he was doing something wrong.
There is no "civil" fifth amendment privilege. (Score:5, Informative)
The fifth amendment prohibition against compelled testimony only applies to criminal liability, and only applies to "persons."
If an elicited response in a civil case might tend to incriminate you in a criminal action, a witness can invoke the privilege against self-incrimination and refuse to answer that question. Remember, though, that if you waive the privilege, it is lost forever - so if you're not sure, SHUT YOUR MOUTH and find a way to consult with a lawyer. If you're at a loss for how to get an attorney, many state and local bar associations have lawyer referral services that are free to the public, usually with a free or cheap 30-minute interview or something.
In a civil case, just because a statement may tend to make you more liable for money damages in a civil action doesn't mean that you can make a blanket refusal to testify if called as a witness by the opposing party. To do so would not only nullify your defense and force the court to take your opponent's views at face value, but would also mean that individuals could escape liability in most cases by simply refusing to acknowledge it.
Also important is that civil liability has varying degrees of standards of proof, with ultimate responsibility generally relying on a preponderance of the evidence - both sides have an obligation to plead their cases, and the factfinder decides what "truth" is. Criminal liability, however, requires that the prosecution prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The criminal defendant can remain silent and the burden for the prosecution remains unchanged.
However, even in a criminal case, you can't use the defendant's silence as both a sword and a shield; once the defendant has chosen to take the stand and testify, they can't choose to only answer questions that would tend to prove their innocence.
I know I went a little overboard, but I always see people confusing the fifth amendment privilege and thinking that they can apply it where they can't. Just wanted to clarify.
Bzzt (Score:2, Informative)
A reasonable belief that information concerning income or assets might be used to establish criminal failure to file a tax return can support a claim of Fifth
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2, Insightful)
For example if you tell what you really did in an altercation then you do have a problem if the other person lied about what happened and they cops think the truth is in the middle.
I like what the Book of Proverbs suggests: avoid the courts as much as possible.
However, when asked to speak the truth and you refuse then the assumption is that you have something to hide and th
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Huh? I think the difference is just that the state won't pay for your attorney in a civil case. There is some logic to that.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
The right to free legal assistance in criminal cases began with an interpretation of the sixth amendment, which begins with the words "In all criminal prosecutions." It is maybe a stretch, but at least reasonable, to interpret the constitution to imply that the state ought to provide counsel to the accused in a criminal case. It just doesn't apply in civil cases.
More info here:
http://criminal.findlaw.
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
The rule is.....for any offense where a jail sentence is a possibility, the accused has the right to counsel.
With that in mind, it's easy to see why it doesn't apply in civil cases; these guys aren't going to jail, but they are going to owe Apple a nice chunk of money. OJ was found liable for the wrongful death of his wife and Ron Goldman, and h
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
Well, I should point out that my explanation isn't an oversimplification - the constitution really does say that. Check the findlaw link, honest. :) The fact that traffic cases have their own little corner of the law is pretty weird, actually. I have a lot of theories about that but this probably isn't the place.
RE: spoken with true lawyer weasel words! (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps there is sometimes far greater value in getting things "off your chest" and publicly clarifying a situation before the rumor-mongers go wild, twisting it into something completely different than it is?
When you're just a student with limited finances and limited personal property, you already *know* there's not too much financial damage a corporation can do to you. (Can't get blood from a turnip,
Re:Remain SILENT (Score:2)
It only seems that way because developed countries don't teach much history beyond North American and European history.
What's Messy? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What's Messy? (Score:2)
IP law is fucked up. It is punishing children for doing what they are told to do on Sesame Street.
Re:What's Messy? (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple was *not* passing out the software "for free" - the seed key he used to obtain the build was not part of his free ADC membership, and was sent to him by another idiot that chose not to honor *his* NDA. He had no legal right to the build to begin with - the ADC memberships that get you pre-release versions of stuff cost a fair bit of money, and he's gone on record as saying that he was trying to find a way to get his hands on Tiger without actually having to pay for it. Once having gotten that, he proceeded to give it to some friends. For him to say that "I didn't know I wasn't allowed to do that" paints him either as disingenuous, or someone that just doesn't have a clue. Neither is a particularly good quality to see in someone that wants to be a doctor.
Pre-med without a clue (Score:2)
Not only is he ignorant of how laws work in the US with respect to copyright and theft, his motivations to study medicine are also suspect:
Anyway, I'm a junior in college - and despite popular belief I'm not a programming major or computer science aficionado; I'm just a plain ol' pre-med student. My passion lies in medicine. I'm one of those hippy-save-the-world Canuks. I suppose that's due to committing myself to lif
Re:What's Messy? (Score:2)
A "very, very painful fine" could financially cripple him for the rest of his life, for a mistake of comparable magnitude to mistakes made by pretty much every young person (excepting your own perfect self, I'm sure). I'm not saying Apple should just blow it off altogether, but a little mercy isn't going to kill them, either, and he's a
Re:What's Messy? (Score:2)
How did THAT happen? (Score:5, Insightful)
When I mentioned it to a few people in various IRC chat rooms, they had asked if they could get a copy too. I made the foolish assumption that since I wasn't a developer, and I had a copy that it would be ok if I shared it with 5 or 6 fellow mac fanatics.
And then he's surprised when it escapes out in the wild. Don't they teach kids the safe sex warnings anymore? You're not just sharing with all your friends, you're sharing with all their friends too.
His story is BS (Score:2)
Um... hello? Look at the channels you had to go through to get the software! Apple doesn't have a link to it on their home page for everyone to download!
And he's a frequent reader of Mac rumor sites... come on, those sites are always talking about people being sued for leaking software.
If his story is true, he needs to get out of college because he's too stupid to be a doctor.
Re:How did THAT happen? (Score:2)
The fact is, most things in life that are in any way, shape or form "rewarding" involve a certain level of risk. A risk-free life is a pretty d
It's nice to be loved (Score:2)
Re:It's nice to be loved (Score:2)
They've got you thinking you can go to jail for that...
Rather flawed reasoning... (Score:2)
Re:Rather flawed reasoning... (Score:2)
IANAL.
I have the Legal Documents (Score:3, Informative)
Why arent we teaching kids that stealing is wrong? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Copyright infringement != Stealing (Score:2)
Re:Copyright infringement != Stealing (Score:2, Insightful)
Calling it "stealing" is weaseling language used by people who want to make something relatively harmless seem like a serious crime worthy of serious punishment.
I hate to blow your mind, but it isn't.
Re:Copyright infringement != Stealing (Score:2)
Re:Copyright infringement != Stealing (Score:2)
Re:Copyright infringement != Stealing (Score:2)
The barber has to prove that he performed a service at a reasonable price at your request for you to be convicted, and sense its 5000 there would be next to no punishment. hell if you steal a CD from a store its 5000 and is petty theft, get less time for stealing 10 CDs then shareing them on the net.
either way still diffrent copyright infringement.
Anyone know what it is calle
Re:Here we go again. (Score:2)
Perhaps you'd want to check legal definitions, and not a dictionary.
Luckily, this is a casual conversation where we are using words to convey general concepts, not a court of law where very fine nuances are extremely important and many words have different meanings. Thus, a dictionary is a perfectly good place to go to see if a word is correctly being used to describe something, in non-legal terms. And that entry demonstrates that according to the defenition of stealing accepted by basically every eng
The dev is at fault (Score:2, Insightful)
You can't release those to people outside the company. He should be the one targetted in this suit, not some poor college student. He should face disciplinary action (and hopefully fired!). Keeping this guy around will just mean it will happen again! He has no problems handing out seed-keys, as mentioned in the article.
Apple really should fire the dev.
Well, for all we know, maybe they already have. But rea
Re:The dev is at fault (Score:2)
Proceed with caution (Score:3, Informative)
He wrote a lengthy rant about interface scalability in Mac OS X, bemoaning the fact that Tiger doesn't do Thing X that he thinks is really incredibly important, and explaining why everybody at Apple who disagrees with him is obviously an idiot.
Then along came the commenters who, probably by bending their NDAs, explained to him that Tiger does, in fact, do X, and that the author doesn't have the first idea what he's talking about.
Is this relevant to the subject at hand? Almost certainly not. But I'm a big believer in context, so I felt like maybe somebody would appreciate it if I shared what I knew of it.
Re:Proceed with caution (Score:3, Interesting)
This seems to be about High PPI problem, a blog post I put up about increasing pixel density and resolution independence and the problems faced with moving to the new models. There was one part that I considered to be wrong: which was that Apple didn't seem to be working on it going by what had been rel
he probably knew what he was doing is wrong... (Score:5, Insightful)
so he goes through all the trouble of finding out about ADC to get the seed, but as soon as the torrent is disabled by a mod, he "assumes" that the file is messed up and deletes it? sounds more like he deleted it because he got fearful in getting an indirect confirmation that leaking it was wrong...
Amazing (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me play devils advocate here for a minute.
We have a company here that's suing 21 year old mac fans for participating in the illegal sharing of a beta build of their OS.
We have a company here that's extracting information from someone they are about to sue under false pretence.
We have a company here that's suing a side aimed at their fans because the site spreads some rumors about new products.
We have a company that refuses to use an open standard, or e
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Informative)
Well that one's just a lie [apple.com].
Re:Sigh (Score:2)
Apples use of the code and further development is effectively a fork and has diverged from the original sufficiently enough for it to be hard work to include it into the original.
The khtml developers could include apples code if they wanted, but they'd have to unpick it, mangle it, etc to make it happen and it turns out that's too much work for them to do.
So you're saying that apple should be obliged to write their code twice now, once for the original project (khtml) and once for their fork (webcore) and
Re:Sigh (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here you go (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Here you go (Score:2)
Apple is pretty incredible isn't it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Let me refute your inaccurate points:
>We have a company here that's suing 21 year old mac fans for participating in the illegal sharing of a beta build of their OS.
No, we have a company here that's suing a 21 year old and others for violati
Re:Amazing (Score:2)
Tiger screenshot leak controversy (Score:3, Informative)
What happened was this: Someone sent what they claimed to be Tiger screenshots to Macrumors.com. However, the article said "courtesy of Gary Niger from GNAA" or some such, so everyone assumed they were fake. But then they turned out to be real. The GNAA has been bragging [www.gnaa.us] ever since.
I guess what I'm really wondering is, are the defendants in this case GNAA members who got caught obtaining and posting these screenshots? Or is this something else, completely unrelated?
ADC Security (Score:5, Informative)
There are other, less secretive assets such as the right to buy a Mac system at a discount, albeit for development purposes and not for resale.
Apple also has much more tightly controlled seeds to key developers, these exist but the procedures and those who are involved are a tightly guarded secret. They used to be only distributed on physical media by private carrier.
The lawsuit involved the regular seeded software only, not the uber-secret stuff. To my knowledge that has rarely, if ever, made it into the wild.
it's interesting... (Score:3, Interesting)
we have all their software well seeded with people downloading, and they didn't give a damn. it was just the prerelease software.
it seems apple doesn't care too much about piracy and "lost sales"- they just don't want people judging them by prerelease software and getting the wrong impression.
does...not...compute... (Score:2)
From the news page [torrentskickass.com] of the site in question:
In light of what has recently taken place, we are going to be making some major changes. We are first going to be migrating to and creating a new forum for all the users. The tracker will keep running but we will make some changes. We will disable the ability to integrate torrent information in the forum. However, we will also enable RSS accessibility. There will be other major changes - possibly even moving to a new tracker system. The system we have now is ver
Re:does...not...compute... (Score:2)
How it should have gone down (Score:4, Insightful)
Before I found out I was being sued, they(lawyers) called me up to let me know they were doing an investigation. To be perfectly honest, the individuals who contacted me were polite and respectful. When I asked them if they were suing me, they let me know that if I cooperate, that Apple has a history of being a generous company.
I answered all the questions they asked regarding how I got the torrent, how long I had seeded it for etc. I was honest and as helpful as I possibly could be.
Wrong. Lawyers are not your friend. Their job is to help prosecute you.
We were given 'Door #1': "If you don't co-operate we'll sue you". We replied and upon replying received 'Door #2': "We understand it's P2P, but if you don't co-operate we'll sue you" or 'Door #3': "We are all adults here, cooperate and we assure you we won't sue all your users but we can't tell you what might happen to the uploaders".
How about the front door? You don't have to answer anybody's questions for any reason. In order for you to "co-operate" they need 2 other things:
1. An officer of the law holding a warrant
2. Your lawyer present.
This is a classic case of citizens giving up thier rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Even the Canadian has rights on foreign American soil. These guys just gave up all those rights, did the Apple lawyers and police officers jobs for them, and now they are getting sued!
Setting a Precedent for Click-Through Licencing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Not that I'm endorsing what he's done, but he's wasting a golden opportunity to turn this into a question of the validity of click-through licencing.
p
Pictures leaked (Score:2)
Unsympathetic (Score:3)
It's hard to be sympathetic for this guy. He signed an NDA, didn't read it, then did something incredibly stupid, and is getting sued for it. He even admits it -- but seems to think it's unfair that he should have to face the consequences of his actions. Why should we care, exactly?
This isn't Big Brother, this isn't Evil Corporate America, this is someone explicitly and knowingly entering into a contract and then flagrantly violating it. That he didn't read the NDA, or apply the tinyiest inkling of common sense, makes that his fault, and no one elses.
What does he think the appropriate resolution should be, exactly? Getting a cookie?
Ethics (Score:3, Interesting)
We'll Just See... (Score:3, Interesting)
...how Apple plays this one.
Was the kid a bit naive? Sure. I'm occasionally on invitation-only torrents in the Mac, and multi-platform, scenes, and the trackers are adamant about people NOT distributing the torrent files, themselves, on other trackers. Always lots of warnings regarding "Don't share torrents, outside." So, I give the kid the benefit of the doubt regarding his belief that the buggy beta would stay 'inside' somewhat. He made, as Nixon put it, 'an error in judgment', no question of that.
I also believe that the real asshole in this situation was the 'paid-up' ADC Member who had the 'seed' of Tiger, in the first place, and 'gave' it to the kid with the freebie ADC account. (Trust me, the 'free' ADC accounts never see 'seeds' of an OS. Period.) He's the one who should be taken to the cleaners, not the kids.
Apple Computer is also made up of 'smart' people, with history and experience. And they should know, (as well as most of us here) that 'good' people do 'bad' things, and smart people are capable of doing the stupidest things.
I did some freelance work in the Securities industry (as an investment analyst for a small group of fellows), and one of the truisms in Markets and market interventions is this: The mechanisms put in place after a crisis, stock crash, etc, are never sufficient to prevent the next shock, and what is more, the mechanisms, themselves, almost invariably guarantee that the next 'event' will be far worse than the one that precipitated the intervention, and its so-called 'protection'. We'll just see... the ball is in Apple's court... for the time being.
Re:Tigerz (Score:2)
Re:How do I get a copy? (Score:2)
All he did was sign up for a free ADC account and he got tiger?
No. A paying member of the ADC programme sent him a copy (well, actually sent him a key that allowed him to download it) in violation of that members ADC agreement.
Are paid ADC members allowed to give out a key to other ADC members?
ADC members are not allowed to give out download keys to anyone other than others in the same organization (which probably means "same employer" - I suspect that being a member of the "Apple Warez Kollektiv
Re:Hhhmmmm, Steve Jobs played The Grinch this year (Score:3, Informative)