Apple has sued 3 online journalists who published aricles about Apple technology. Articles filled with information that shouldn't really have been available for them.
However, Apple employees had leaked that information for them. Apple required these journalists to reveal their sources, but the journalists weren't ready to do that.
Apple went to Santa Clara County Superior Court and they managed to get to the result that said that "stolen property" isn't entitled to any protections.
The reporters weren't really happy with it, so they appealed. And so they should have. Now some large newspapers have decided to support their right not to disclose the sources. These newspapers are the largest newspapers in California - Los Angeles Times, Mercury News, San Francisco Chronicle and many others.
The Cheers magazine would definately join them. The sources for each journalist must be given the possibility to remain anonymous, if requested so. If a company (Apple in this case) is not happy with it, they can turn to the police and request help to identify the leak. If journalists were forced to reveal their sources, it would be a precendent and not many "anonymous" sources would ever trust the journalists again. Is that what we really want? Stories that wouldn't be written, just because the sources are afraid that they can't trust the journalists.
However, Apple employees had leaked that information for them. Apple required these journalists to reveal their sources, but the journalists weren't ready to do that.
Apple went to Santa Clara County Superior Court and they managed to get to the result that said that "stolen property" isn't entitled to any protections.
The reporters weren't really happy with it, so they appealed. And so they should have. Now some large newspapers have decided to support their right not to disclose the sources. These newspapers are the largest newspapers in California - Los Angeles Times, Mercury News, San Francisco Chronicle and many others.
The Cheers magazine would definately join them. The sources for each journalist must be given the possibility to remain anonymous, if requested so. If a company (Apple in this case) is not happy with it, they can turn to the police and request help to identify the leak. If journalists were forced to reveal their sources, it would be a precendent and not many "anonymous" sources would ever trust the journalists again. Is that what we really want? Stories that wouldn't be written, just because the sources are afraid that they can't trust the journalists.
|
Some of our content may be related to gambling.    |