Think Secret's Nick dePlume Revealed 621
Nick dePlume has a name, after all. Apple filed a lawsuit against the pseudonymous founder and editor of Think Secret, who correctly predicted two just-announced Apple products and has been the subject of several cease-and-desist letters from Apple in the past; dePlume's identity has now been revealed. Reader willibeast writes "The Harvard Crimson reports that 'Apple Computer, Inc. is suing a Harvard undergraduate who runs a popular Mac information website for disclosing details about unreleased Apple products, including two unveiled at this week's Macworld conference. Nineteen-year-old Nicholas M. Ciarelli '08, known on the internet as Nick dePlume, has run the site, thinksecret.com, since age 13.'"
Bad timing (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Bad timing (Score:2, Funny)
Never stopped the RIAA.
Unless that's what you're implying by sarcasm.
Is Apple Serious? (Score:5, Funny)
Who knows? Maybe he'll get another insider tip reassuring him that Jobs was quoted as saying "Just pull a lawsuit stunt to scare the shit of this kid, bwahahaha."
Re:Is Apple Serious? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is Apple Serious? (Score:2)
Are they suing him for posting it or suing him for information on the tipster? With the former, I don't think they have much of a case. Perhaps they do with the latter.
Re:Is Apple Serious? (Score:3, Informative)
Apple's case might not be nice, but it does have merit.
Re:Is Apple Serious? (Score:3, Informative)
Did he obtain them illegally. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is Apple Serious? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You don't have a cite, do you? (Score:3, Informative)
Ahh, yes, semantics. I guess it's only to be expected that a conversation about law would fall to it. We can go that route, if you like. In legalese it is considered a "breach", correct. But simply put, "illegal" is used quite broadly in common parlance and, as I understand it, doesn't fit perfectly with any of the more specifically honed legal jargon.
Since you can't provide a legal cite
For someone so hung up on
Re:Is Apple Serious? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Waitaminute... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whether pre-announcing a product is to a company's advantage largely depends on that company's position in the marketplace. Microsoft now pre-announces products because doing so tends to "freeze the market", because companies will often hold off on buying an existing third-party product that Microsoft will be shipping "real soon now". Microsoft often uses pre-announcements as a form of FUD to solidify their market position.
A company in Apple's position has a different calculation to make. Certain pre-announcements are just going to tell companies with greater resources (like Microsoft) what innovations they should start copying.
Companies that aren't the market leader will often play their cards close to the vest, just so their bigger competitors don't figure out a strategy to beat their hand. When Microsoft was a small shop, they weren't crowing from the rooftops about Windows 1.0 months before it was released. It wouldn't have been to their advantage, because they didn't have the dominance they do now. Things have changed.
Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:3, Interesting)
---------------
The Governor of Utah has been sued by news organizations [wired.com] for deleting his email. Apparently, he deletes all of his email after three days. The news organizations say that he is destroying public records. The legal issue is really whether email is a document or a transient conversation like a telephone call. This, o
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:3, Informative)
By your interpretation, anyone who has ever deleted an email or failed to archive instant messages has some jail time in their future.
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:4, Insightful)
There are ways to not keep records on that kind of thing.. and i'd hope he's set up that way.
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's his choice, just as a number of currently imprisoned investigative journalists chose to go to prison rather than reveal their sources. But they still went to prison.
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:5, Insightful)
The core problem is that any information your employee tells me is free for me to use. Social engineering has to be thwarted by educating Apple's employees just like some government employees. If you divulge secret information owned by the government you go to jail; you divulge company secrets you get fired or if you have an agreement to work for the company it could have a damages clause forcing you to pay compensations. Case closed
"I employ the same legal newsgathering practices used by any other journalist," he wrote. "I talk to sources of information, investigate tips, follow up on leads, and corroborate details. I believe these practices are reflected in Think Secret's track record."
Based on the little evidence I have been given, I see no legal stance from Apple that will hold up in court.
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple spent the money on the 1st round of this suit because it may lead to the insider who released the info. I expect that it might have been released by someone in marketing that knows that a trade show is a nasty place to release new stuff because the only ones watching are your loyal customers. Preaching to the choir doesn't bring in converts and their new products purpose is just that. This leak got many more people to watch the announcements and that will help Apples Sales.
Re:But did Apple get what they needed? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sorry for the failure to properly articulate my point. I was referring to Apple's corporate phone logs, if the particular tipster was dumb enough to call from work (which many of them are - I forget the company, but a while back a guy was calling the NY Times from his office and was caught at it)
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:3, Interesting)
We have this guy who is now *famous* for leaking trade secrets and you think he's going to get a job?
Sure.
Dave
Re:Why Nick and not the informant? (Score:3, Interesting)
Clever name... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Clever name... (Score:2, Insightful)
cute.
-dynamo
Re:Clever name... (Score:3, Funny)
Unfortunately for Nick, I already have a patent on self-referential false names.
Step 3, here I come!
NDA (Score:5, Funny)
Oh wait.
Re:NDA - Bzzzt (Score:5, Informative)
""California is one of approximately 44 or 45 states that have adopted [the] Uniform Trade Secrets Act. That statute makes it wrongful to acquire or publish without authorization information you know or have a reasonable basis to know is a trade secret of another," Milgrim said."
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:NDA - Bzzzt (Score:5, Insightful)
i'll post my OWN trade secret to some guys mailing list and then I can sue him in the states? wtf you need patents for when you have such more powerful tool in your portfolio then, why bother patenting anything when you can just say that it's your trade secret and forbid anyone from talking about it?
someone 'published' the information to him - or are all the websites that reported on this quilty? would slashdot be quilty if i posted my own trade secrets on slashdot?
or maybe he'll just say that he pulled it out of his ass and say that "look, i've made so many predictions that at least once in 10 years i'm going to be right about something".
Re:NDA - Bzzzt (Score:5, Insightful)
If you divulge your own trade secret it is no longer a trade secret. If you divulge somebody else's trade secret you've broken the law. This entire situation is dependant on the assumption that the informant who sent the trade secret to Think Secret was not authorized to divulge the information. If that isn't the case, neither the informant nor Think Secret has done anything wrong. It would be pretty hard to prove either way...
Re:NDA - Bzzzt (Score:3)
still, if it was posted on their mailing list - insta publishing it , could think secret be responsible, even if they didn't publish the information(it was their informant directly)?
Re:NDA - Bzzzt (Score:5)
I suspect Apple may win their suit and be awarded $1 in damages. If Nick's smart enough to file a countersuit, he's liable to win and be awarded $1 in damages and attorney's fees.
Re:NDA - Bzzzt (Score:3, Informative)
California breaks this down by cause of action: if the plaintiff pursues a single frivolous cause of action, even if every other part of their lawsuit is sound, the defendant might be able to recover costs related to def
Re:NDA (Score:2)
do i think that happened?
No.
Do you or i know all the facts?
No.
Does apple have a case?
Possibly, so we should not be so quick to say "oh evil corp is trying to smother someone's free speech"
Let me ask you a question:
If an apple person is leaking this stuff for free (to nicks site) is it within the realm of possibility that this person could be br
Re:NDA (Score:2)
Apple evil? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Apple evil? (Score:2, Insightful)
In terms of products, they're probably just about the same. Microsoft have some good products, Apple have too. There's no reason to be religious about either products though, much less be religious about a company which exists merely to screw you over. In light of that, I think most people can admit that Apple are indeed being dicks.
Of course, there are lots of examples of other companies being dicks, too.
Re:Apple evil? (Score:2, Interesting)
Obviously a 13 year old wasn't working at Apple, in any capacity in which he'd have access to their trade secrets.
This kid didn't commit any offenses against Apple. He's being sued because of what his readers/informers said.
Apple are as ignorant, greedy, and willing to manipulate the courts as any other corporation.
HEY! Let's announce Apple secrets on Slashdot, and put an end to this nonsense once and for all.
Re:Apple evil? (Score:2)
Or any other human being, which is one area at least where corporations and persons seem to be the same.
Also, are you asserting that Apple is suing a thirteen year old? If so, I suggest that you re-read the article. Nick started Think Secret when he was thirteen, but has graduated high school now and is attending Harvard. He's an adult now, with adult rights and liabilities. Perhaps Apple has waited as long as it
Re:Apple evil? (Score:2)
Re:Apple evil? (Score:2)
Evil, big monopoly Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember when you and the Woz were just kids in a garage?
Apparently not...
Widely known (Score:5, Informative)
Aw, come on now. I was under the impression that Nick's identity has been widely known and documented over the years as Nick Ciarelli. After all, even in 2003, eweek [eweek.com] had stories co-authored by Nick Ciarelli and Matthew Rothenburg.
Re:Widely known (Score:3, Insightful)
Daringfireball also has a nice little article [daringfireball.net] covering this lawsuit and Nicks identity.
Re:Widely known (Score:5, Funny)
The apple path to success (Score:4, Funny)
Suing your own fans (Score:5, Funny)
"Usually you would want to sue your enemies and not your friends," said Gary Fine, a Northwestern professor of sociology and expert on rumors. "I can't think of an instance in which a corporation would sue its own fans. I haven't heard anything like this."
Hasn't this guy heard of the RIAA?
Re:Suing your own fans (Score:2)
Presumably Nick is buying Apple stuff and if nothing else providing free advertising. Nick is not stealing Apple hardware nor is committing copyright infringement, at least not in regard to the website (he is a student so...).
Re:Suing your own fans (Score:2)
Wow! (Score:2, Troll)
Way to go kid!
--
It works. [wired.com]
Free Flat Screens [freeflatscreens.com] | Free iPod Photo [freephotoipods.com]
Advantages in nanoseconds? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can see no case where disclosing information a week early would do irreperable harm to the company.
Sure, you could argue customers will hold off buying products if they know the next generation is around the corner, but I tell ya....you're an idiot to buy ANY Apple products directly before a MacWorld expo.
If you're going to buy, you buy directly after an upgrade. Or at least wait until the next expo comes around.
So far as the competition...sure, I suppose a Dell or an HP could counter the MacMini, or the iPod Shuffle or whatnot, but really.
I can't help but think Apple is suing over an issue of pride. They want to know who the leak is, so they're going after the person posting the information from the leak(s).
That being said: I hate lawsuits. Period.
Re:Advantages in nanoseconds? (Score:3, Interesting)
Everyone knows that if Microsoft finds out about a Mac OS X Tiger feature they will have a legion of flat-food-only-eating coders implement it in Longhorn within nanoseconds.
Re:Advantages in nanoseconds? (Score:2)
but that's for apple to decide, not for those who signed the NDA who leaked the insider info to thinksecret.
in this case, the "rumor" was so spot on that it was obviously a leak, not just a random (or even well thought out) guesses. someone who signed an NDA leaked this to ThinkSecret and ThinkSecret is soliciting such leaks. apple is asking ThinkSecret to tell them who leaked it. they are not suing
Re:Advantages in nanoseconds? (Score:2)
Actually, I did rather well doing exactly that. Apple dropped the price to clear out existing stock just before the keynote. I ordered, but it didn't ship before the keynote and so was upgraded (at no cost) to the latest model. I then sent it in for repairs a bit later. They lost it, and replaced it with the later model (which almost made up for being without it for 2 months). I am typing this on a PowerBook two generations mo
Re:Advantages in nanoseconds? (Score:3, Insightful)
I can see no case where disclosing information a week early would do irreperable harm to the company.
It's about their stock price, not so much about lost sales or competition or anything. Apple's stock price is driven as much by company performance as it is by people's expectations. If Jobs goes on stage and introduces a couple of unexpected products that are really cool then people get all excited, lots of good press and buzz comes up, Apple's share price goes up, and Apple gets lots of free marketing f
good move, Apple! (Score:2)
Maybe if Apple didn't encourage such a fanatical following, there would be an Apple information website.
Re:good move, Apple! (Score:2)
Lawsuit World (Score:3, Informative)
I hope they have some serious proof that he had access to confidential information under a non-disclosure agreement or something along these lines.
From the article : "The suit, filed on Tuesday in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California, 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."
At least they're not suing him for damage, but to obtain the source of the leak. I'm no lawyer : can a court order someone to reveal its sources?
Re:Lawsuit World (Score:2, Informative)
In some states, yes. In California, where I assume they're suing him, no. Google for the California Shield Law. It's pretty broad.
Re:Lawsuit World (Score:2)
Yes. That is why Judith Miller [usatoday.com] (New York Times) was fined and ordered to jail: for contempt in refusing to name sources to the federal grand jury investigating the Valeire Plame leak in October (the contempt charge is currently suspended while on appeal).
There is no true or guaranteed protection of sources where the law is concerned.
Re:Lawsuit World (Score:3, Informative)
More and more, the answer is yes. Federal court judge Ernest Torres recently convicted Jim Taricani of the Providence, RI NBC affiliate station of criminal contempt [turnto10.com] for refusing to name a source. The only reason he didn't send him to jail is that the reporter is a heart transplant recipient who would be endangered by that, so he sentenced him to six months' house arrest instead. Taricani broke no law. Welcome to the new USA.
From the article... (Score:2)
Wow! And does the New York Times or 20/20 generate revenue from print or television advertising?!
Re:From the article... (Score:2)
I'm a little stunned, but here's the "other" facts (Score:3, Interesting)
All of Think Secret's commentary seems to be negative spins on Apple and Apple financials.
I would not be surprised if we find out this guy's father was a fired Apple employee or someone involved in this reseller lawsuit [thinksecret.com]. Nick DePlume just seems to know this infomation to intimately.
There has to be some sort of bribery or maliciousness here, because I would consider Macrumors more of a premeir rumor site with MUCH wider base of followers and info providers.
Re:I'm a little stunned, but here's the "other" fa (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously though; if someone is going to feed you information you have the right to do what you wish to it. If Microsoft was in this position this website would be all over it; screaming about how a they are going after the little guy. But when Apple comes into the picture, they get some kind of nega
In Today's news (Score:5, Funny)
bzzz (Score:2, Interesting)
"Induced"?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
How did he induce these people to provide tips? It is not like a college undergrad is going to pay people off. Apple really contradicts themselves when later they blame the ability of people to place "anonymous" tips on his website. Doesn't sound like they are being "induced" but rather lured by the option to remain anonymous.
True, I think it is wrong that employees are violating their C.A.'s, but it is not Ciarelli's fault. Find the employees that do it, and fire them. Don't go after a kid that discovers where you leak...
Re:"Induced"?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
They go after the kid that discovers where you leak because the kid knows where you leak.
Isn't t
"Apple Computer": A Ridiculous LIberal Myth (Score:5, Funny)
This so-called "company" was founded by a pair of dope-smoking phone service thieves from Berkeley, a hotbed of Communist activity even today. "Apple Computer" supposedly went on to pioneer a graphical interface - actually developed by the good American patriots at Xerox - and develop its own hardware monopoly, just as its Communist creators would impose a state monopoly on all computer-using Americans.
For a short time, this Red front tried to infiltrate the American business community by facetiously engaging in free trade practices, but this only served to disillusion its enthralled socialist followers who complained about a supposed drop in quality. What they really couldn't stand, like all liberals, was choice and capitalism. They only returned to "Apple" when it returned to its old crypto-Stalinist practices.
"Apple Computer" is nothing more than a liberal-backed fifth column intended to subvert the American computer industry, and ultimately bankrupt good capitalist companies such as Microsoft and Intel. "Apple" isn't the only front group run by the International Communist Conspiracy. "Sun Microsystems" engages in similar monopolistic practices, trying to enforce a single hardware and software standard on all users, instead of the choices offered by Microsoft. Worst of all are the smaller Red fronts using the communist Linux operating system, with names like "Mandrake" (a French front, of course), and even really obvious ones like Red Hat! Linux is distributed under a Commie license that forces developers to give away the fruits of their labour, just as Marx ordered all good Communists to work as much as they could for a pittance in return in an illusory equal society.
All of these so-called companies are just fronts for Communists and liberal fellow-travellers. Remember, when you buy Apple or download Linux, you're supporting Communism. Good Americans support real freedom-loving businesses like Microsoft, SCO, and AMD.
Laugh at me now, remember me later when you're all forced to used slow computers with horrid, fruity interfaces foisted upon an enslaved public by the commissars who used to fester in American business under the liberal myth that they were an independent company that loved capitalism called Apple Computer.
Journalism 101 (Score:2, Interesting)
Normall, the penalty for failing to reveal your sources is usually a contempt charge and 6 months in jail.
But since he doesn't know his informants, does this
1) create a loophole or
2) exclude him from asserting his status as a journalist
I hate Jobs (Score:3, Insightful)
No offense, but this is the kind of kid/guy that you'd think Jobs would be hiring, not suing.
Why again does everyone see Jobs as some sort of geek pariah that *earned* his way to fame? He just rode on Wozniak's coattails!
Re:I hate Jobs (Score:3, Informative)
If it was the frequently heard story of some person doing a technological hack to do amazing things with a product I would agree. An engineer that shows remarkable talent and resourcefulness with a company product is valuable to that company.
All this guy has done is leak whatever he could get a hand on to the internet. He didn't dress it up or drive marketing for Apple above and beyond what is normal, simply
Not quite accurate? (Score:5, Informative)
anonymity is crucial (Score:2)
Nick dePlume's operation should be found to be protected free speech and any laws saying otherwise should be ruled unconstitutional.
Too much credit; He didn't "predict" anything. (Score:4)
Not only that, but Apple probably wouldn't be giving him such a hard time if he'd tell them who leaked the information to him.
Reading financial news sites gives me perspective (Score:4, Insightful)
In summary, the articles stated that the stock price of Apple ran up more than 7% in the days preceeding Mac World in anticipation of the leaked rumors of a $500 Mac and a flash iPod. Further, the stock dropped about 6% during the key note primarily because Apple sold "only" 4.5 million iPods. More than the 4 million many analysts predicted, but less than the 4.6 and 4.8 million other analysts had.
Now, if the share price of Apple can drop 6% because the wildly sucessful iPod "only" clobbered-the-shit (technical term) out of the competition versus some analysts estimating it would clobber-the-ever-lovin-shit, imagine what would have happened if Apple had NOT released the said rumored products.
Further, imagine how big the POSITIVE impact would have been if the Mac mini had remained a secret until Jobs' announcement.
It's all fun and games... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Money? (Score:2)
Re:Money? (Score:2)
Re:Huh?!@ (Score:2)
Re:Huh?!@ (Score:2)
The IIgs kinda/sorta TRIED to be a Mac... Good heavens it was an awful beast for programming graphics!
Big Brother Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Dear Apple... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to complain about what Apple is doing, restricting free speech is the wrong target. Apple is protecting itself, legally, forthrightly, and up front, according to the law.
Someone violated an NDA to tell Nick DePlume these 'trade secrets'.
Apple is trying to get out of Nick DePlume the identities of those who violated those NDAs.
To put it abstractly, Apple and a third party signed a contract. Said third party violated the contract without Apple's knowledge. Apple finds out about the violation from Nick DePlume. Apple then tries to find out from Nick DePlume who violated the contract.
If there is anything scummy in what Apple is doing, it's in not being gentler and more friendly towards 19 year old Nick, but that's not what you're complaining about.
Re:Dear Apple... (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it now? Where specifically in the First Amendment does it mention anything about journalists protecting sources? The First Amendment proscribes government interference with the freedom of the press - it does not give the press a magic pass to avoid any and all consequences of something they may report. According to your reasoning, if I publish your entire credit and medical history online, I should be able to do so without any fear of repercussions, and furthermore it would be your fault for not protecting your information better. Give me a break.
US law doesn't work like that (Score:3, Informative)
When you ask "where specifically does it say in the 1st amendment", you're asking where is the statutory law that says so-and-so, with the implication that if it's not in a statute, it's not law. That's how it works in, say, Germany or France, which are what's called "civil law countries", which means "the law" and "the statutes" are the same thing. But that'
Re:Anyone Remember Mike Rowe? (Score:3, Informative)
These are totally different cases.
Re:Anyone Remember Mike Rowe? (Score:2, Insightful)
"Microsoft" is a trademark. You are required to vigorously defend trademarks, or else you lose the right to use them. MSFT had no choice but to go after him.
Of course, slashdot stopped covering it when it settled. MSFT paid the kid for the domain name, and agreed to redirect all the traffic to the old site to his new one (MikeRoweForums.com IIRC).
In the end, everyone was happy, and MSFT weren't such a bunch of assholes after all (which of course, is not a happy
Re:Mac the knife (Score:2, Interesting)
Once upon a time (gather round kiddies) Mr Mouseketeer used to publish a hardcopy newsletter. It would appear infrequently, mailed from various locations, and usually poke fun at Apple during the days of King Steve I... Then one day I get this fat envelop from MrMouse. Inside was the usual newsletter along with a yamalka, a small piece of black plastic, some felt and the instructions on how to cut and glue this all together to make y
Re:Mac the knife (Score:2)
Re:Mac the knife (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, no. "A whole bunch" is a major overstatement.
Just saying ...
Matthew Rothenberg
Executive editor
Ziff Davis Internet
MacWEEK alum 1989-2000
Re:Mac the knife (Score:3, Funny)
LOL -- That's the first time I've seen my surname used as a punchline for Mac gay-bashing, but I have to admit that it's kind of pungent and snappy. (Like a sweaty jockstrap.)
Mulling T-shirt Possibilities,
Matthew Rothenberg
Executive editor
Ziff Davis Internet
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:2)
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:2)
Re:SUE! SUE! SUE!!!! (Score:2)
However, there is the matter of tuition, lab fees, books, housing (either on campus or off), food, etc. If the kid (or his parents) don't have cash, then he'd having to pay for those expenses either with scholarship money, student loans, or out of pocket. And, considering that Harvard's reputation, I don't think their Harvard's tuition is going to be cheap.
Note: I have not read Harvard's schedule of classes yet, but
Re:Are rumour sites "News Media"? (Score:3, Informative)
IANAL, but IIRC he's only under any obligation not to publish Apple's trade secrets if he obtained them while under some form of agreement with Apple to keep them confidential, or if he obtained them from someone who he at the time was or should have been aware was under such a confidentiality obligation. Note that Apple telling him the information is confidential and secret doesn't constitute his agreeing to keep it confidential, so legally Apple's warnings have only limited effect (basically they oblige h