Talk:Apple v. Does

List of external links

The following are links to ongoing news and commentary to help us keep a track of ongoing events. Many may be suitable for inclusion in the article. March 14, 2005 http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111057284957077375,00.html?mod=yahoo_hs&ru=yahoo http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39128658,00.htm http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050314/ap_on_hi_te/apple_secrets http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/14/teen_reporter_pays_price_for_apple_coverage/ March 12, 2005 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/12/technology/12blog.html?ex=1268370000&en=489d1c61da3cfe4c&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/12/BUGCIBOAPJ1.DTL http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0503120107mar12,1,6846543.story?coll=chi-techtopheds-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050312/80/fe6sy.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1436140,00.html http://www.courant.com/business/hc-applesecrets.artmar12,0,5577766.story?coll=hc-headlines-business http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050312-4695.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/12/apple_reveal_sources/ http://www.podcastingnews.com/archives/2005/03/apple_wins_trad.html http://news.ft.com/cms/s/178c9d36-929d-11d9-bca5-00000e2511c8.html http://www.betanews.com/article/Apple_Wins_Sites_Must_Reveal_Sources/1110596278 http://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/03/apples_trade_se.html http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5611908.html http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050311/apple_secrets_13.html http://news.com.com/Judge+Apple+can+pursue+fan+site+sources/2100-1047_3-5611285.html?part=rss&tag=5611309&subj=news http://www.macobserver.com/article/2005/03/11.8.shtml http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/columnists/business_update/11113465.htm http://www.forbes.com/markets/2005/03/11/cx_ab_0311video3.html?partner=yahoo&referrer= http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=auNPkJcQ0NPE http://www.forbes.com/video/?video_url=http://www.forbes.com/video/Friday/031105F3&id=f3&title=Video%3A+Judge+Sides+With+Apple+In+Lawsuit&partner=yahoo&referrer= http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050311/tc_afp/usinternetjustice http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/11/applecourt/index.php http://news.com.com/Apple+lawsuit+A+case+of+sour+grapes/2010-1047_3-5611497.html March 11, 2005 "Apple Wins Trade Secrets Legal Dispute". Associated Press, 11 March 2005. Retrieved 11 March 2005. "Apple wins round in lawsuit against fan sites". CNET News.com, 11 March 2005. Retrieved 11 March 2005. "Apple should think differently about blogger suits". Open letter by Mike Langberg, 11 March 2005. Retrieved 11 March 2005. March 10, 2005 "Apple sues Web site operators -- but will it make a difference?". detnews.com, 10 March 2005. Retrieved 11 March 2005. "Yes, they're still journalists". MercuryNews.com, 10 March 2005. Retrieved 11 March 2005. "Apple Lawsuit Challenges Legitimacy of Website Journalism". tomshardware.com, 10 March 2005. Retrieved 11 March 2005. March 9, 2005 "Apple v. ThinkSecret : confidentiality of sources must be respected". Reporters Without Borders, 9 March 2005. Retrieved 9 March 2005. "Apple's Lawsuits to Guard Its Secrets Leave Mac Faithful With Bitter Taste". latimes.com, 9 March 2005. Retrieved 9 March 2005. March 8, 2005 "Judge asked to dismiss lawsuit". SiliconValley.com, 8 March 2005. Retrieved 8 March 2005. "Think Secret: Dismiss Apple Lawsuit". BetaNews, 8 March 2005. Retrieved 8 March 2005. "Think Secret moves for dismissal of Apple suit". Macworld, 8 March 2005. Retrieved 8 March 2005. "SLAPP Fight Over Mac Rumors". Wired News, 8 March 2005. Retrieved 8 March 2005. "Apple wants online publishers to "Blog Different"". ITworld.com, 8 March 2005. Retrieved 8 March 2005. "Apple v Bloggers: a question of journalism". The Blog Herald, 8 March 2005. Retrieved 8 March 2005. March 7, 2005 "At a Suit's Core: Are Bloggers Reporters, Too?". The New York Times, 7 March 2005. Retrieved 7 March 2005. "Apple goes to the source". CNET News.com, 7 March 2005. Retrieved 7 March 2005. "Frosh Sued by Apple Fires Back". The Havard Crimson Online, 7 March 2005. Retrieved 7 March 2005. "Harvard 'Old Boy Network' Could Help Apple Web-Site Operator". TechWeb, 7 March 2005. Retrieved 7 March 2005. March 6, 2005 "Ruling raises interesting point concerning the revised nature of journalism". morons.org, 6 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. "So, why should any blogger still write about Apple?". Mac Net Journal, 6 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. "Really dumb move, Apple". p2pnet.net, 6 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. "The end of the free press?". molly.com, 6 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. "Introducing the Apple-free speech movement". molly.com, 6 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. March 5, 2005 "Is Apple The New Microsoft?". Forbes.com, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple faces Blogger boycott: judges ruling threat to free blog speech". The Blog Herald, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "The rexblog (you won't believe this) is boycotting Apple". Rexblog.com, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple's shame continues". Donata Communications, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "I hope Apple fails". Paul Thurrott's Internet Nexus, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "What Makes a Journalist? Thoughts on Apple and Think Secret". MP3newswire.net, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Illegitimate Members of the Press". Axinar's, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Dear Apple: tend your own house". p2pnet.net, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Free speech case opens Apple tries to track source of leak of new design on Web Saturday". SF Gate, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Freedom of speech at core of Apple suit". SanDiego.com, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple case rouses argument over bloggers' right". Xinhuanet.com, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple confronts three bloggers before judge". MercuryNews.com, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. (username: noone@nospam.com password: nospam) "Online writers ask for press rights in Apple case". HollywoodReporter.com, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. "Bloggers not protected by Constitution, says Apple". EarthTimes.org, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. "No Ruling Issued Yet in Apple Case". Kansas City Infozine, 5 March 2005. Retrieved 6 March 2005. March 4, 2005 "Ruling on Fate of Protective Order in Trade Secret Case Due Next Week". The Mac Observer, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Think Secret files motion to have Apple lawsuit dismissed". Think Secret, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple Beats Bloggers in Court Battle". Newsfactor Network, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "'Blogger fear' in Apple leak case". BBC News, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple seeks blogger records in information leak case". SF Gate, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Judge Makes Tentative Ruling Against Sites in Apple Case". eWeek, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple wins first round of 'secret' war". The Register, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple Wins Victory in Blogger Dispute". CIO Today, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Tentative ruling favors Apple in blog case". CNET News.com, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Judge tells news sites to give up the goods to Apple". Ars Technica, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple, online pubs square off in court". Macworld, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple Wins Initial Ruling Against 3 News Web Sites (UPDATE)". The Mac Observer, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Judge delays decision on Apple trade secrets case". CNET News.com, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Bloggers Can't Shield Sources". internetnews.com, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple Suit Pits Web Reporters, Protections". The New York Times, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Judge Delays Decision on Mac Rumor Sites". eWeek, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "No Ruling Issued Yet in Apple Case". EFF, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Your honor, I didn't catch his name, but he was wearing a black turtleneck". SiliconValley.com, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "No ruling has been issued on Apple subpoenas?". DrunkenBlog, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Apple stop the madness!". Geek Central News, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. "Judge Finds For Apple in ThinkSecret Case". Slashdot, 4 March 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. January 28, 2005 "Bloggers As Journalists: Why We Fight Apple's Subpoenas". EFF, 28 January 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005. January 10, 2005 "Apple Can't Strongarm Bloggers". EFF, 10 January 2005. Retrieved 5 March 2005.

Difference between "John Doe" suit and lawsuit against Think Secret

Although these lawsuits are separate they are very much related and in my opinion we should keep them both in this article, at least for now. We just need to be clear about the difference. Also we may need to change the title of the page as "Apple v. Does" refers specifically to Apple's case against ThinkSecret, Appleinsider and PowerPage in regard to Asteroid (the codename for an as-yet-unreleased firewire audio interface product). [1] —Christiaan 13:07, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've moved the section on the anti-slapp motion to the correction section - it was mixed up with the Apple Vs Does case. I'd recommend totally seperating Apple Vs dePlume and Apple Vs Does, and I'll try to do this later on. Ianbetteridge 15:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

NPOV?

"All parties concerned have publicly told Apple to go forth and multiply."

Does not seem very neutral to me. 199.244.214.30 18:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Apple v. Does latest info.

I don't really have the time to do this, but Ars just did a nice report of the Apple v. Does lawsuit and the latest decision that was handed down. If someone could incorporate it into the article it would be very helpful. [2] Also, adding a nice summary with the updated information here would be a good addition as well. Paul^C/_T+ 06:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

I think it would be beneficial to define some legal terms to make it easier to comprehend. Nicole.young1 (talk) 05:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Apple v. Does. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://75.102.3.20/old/content/2006/05/6933.ars
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thinksecret.com/filings/antislappmemorandum.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thinksecret.com/news/antislapp.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.drunkenblog.com/drunkenblog-archives/000473.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.drunkenblog.com/drunkenblog-archives/000374.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://blog.ziffdavis.com/rothenberg/archive/2005/03/06/6137.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/11110787.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050319020745/http://www.businessweek.com:80/technology/content/mar2005/tc20050317_3647_tc120.htm to http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2005/tc20050317_3647_tc120.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)