Legal WTF?
-
Over on CrunchNotes they have a nice nasty gram from Apple's lawyers. There are two WTFs about it ... one, sending a cease and desist for linking (hello ... don't they have an intro to the web in law schools these days). But the big WTF is the disclaimer at the bottom:
... If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information ...
You may not read!! WTF? The genie is out of the f'ing bottle. If you really really really don't want anyone reading the notes you pass to forlorn fanboys, then maybe just maybe you should put that bit of verbage at the beginning of the email.
-
@ybred said:
Over on CrunchNotes they have a nice nasty gram from Apple's lawyers. There are two WTFs about it ... one, sending a cease and desist for linking (hello ... don't they have an intro to the web in law schools these days). But the big WTF is the disclaimer at the bottom:
... If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information ...
You may not read!! WTF? The genie is out of the f'ing bottle. If you really really really don't want anyone reading the notes you pass to forlorn fanboys, then maybe just maybe you should put that bit of verbage at the beginning of the email.
I don't think this disclaimer is enforceable anywhere in the world.
-
You dont get it.
This is not a dumpster into which you can dump anything you want.
It is a series of tubes and hell, it is illegal to connect your tube to my tube.
-
@ybred said:
Over on CrunchNotes they have a nice nasty gram from Apple's lawyers. There are two WTFs about it ... one, sending a cease and desist for linking (hello ... don't they have an intro to the web in law schools these days). But the big WTF is the disclaimer at the bottom:
... If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information ...
You may not read!! WTF? The genie is out of the f'ing bottle. If you really really really don't want anyone reading the notes you pass to forlorn fanboys, then maybe just maybe you should put that bit of verbage at the beginning of the email.
Did you even read it? Breaking confidentiality and leaking examples of unreleased software != linking.
"
We represent Apple Computer, Inc. (”Apple”). It has come to our attention that your website, at http://crunchgear.com/2006/08/28/how-expose-works-with-spaces-in-mac-os-x-leopard/,
is posting a video demonstrating certain features of Apple’s new
operating system, Mac OS X 10.5 (aka “Leopard”). While we appreciate
your interest in Leopard, it has not yet been released to the public.
The software demonstrated in the video must therefore be running on a
pre-release developer’s build of OS X 10.5. All such builds have been
distributed to developers under strict terms of confidentiality that
prohibit the dissemination of screenshots or other displays of the
software. The builds are also copyrighted by Apple, and U.S. copyright
law explicitly prohibits unauthorized displays of copyrighted works."
-
10 points to the person that can point out the most legal and logical flaws in Apple's arguement! You can bet there's quite a lot of them!
-
@jesirose said:
@ybred said:
Over on CrunchNotes they have a nice nasty gram from Apple's lawyers. There are two WTFs about it ... one, sending a cease and desist for linking (hello ... don't they have an intro to the web in law schools these days). But the big WTF is the disclaimer at the bottom:
... If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information ...ME: Hey, I wonder if it's safe to remove the goggles yet.... Hmm ..... I may not read... damn! Damn, damn, damn! Now I gotta get my brain blanked AGAIN!!!
@jesirose said:
Did you even read it? Breaking confidentiality and leaking examples of unreleased software != linking.
" We represent Apple Computer, Inc. (”Apple”). It has come to our attention that your website, at http://crunchgear.com/2006/08/28/how-expose-works-with-spaces-in-mac-os-x-leopard/, is posting a video demonstrating certain features of Apple’s new operating system, Mac OS X 10.5 (aka “Leopard”). While we appreciate your interest in Leopard, it has not yet been released to the public. The software demonstrated in the video must therefore be running on a pre-release developer’s build of OS X 10.5. All such builds have been distributed to developers under strict terms of confidentiality that prohibit the dissemination of screenshots or other displays of the software. The builds are also copyrighted by Apple, and U.S. copyright law explicitly prohibits unauthorized displays of copyrighted works."It does look like it was a breach of copyright. It looks like they actually had the thing embedded on the site, not just linked, so Apple's in the right here. A bit petty, though, considering you can get the same thing from Apple.
The only WTF I can see here is the bit about me having to read the info to find out that I may not read the info.......
-
If Apple didn't produce the video in question (which appears to be the
case, although I can't be certain since it's been removed...) how can
they possibly claim copyright on it? If I produce a demonstration video
of how to delete a file in Windows XP, do Microsoft own the
copyright on my video? I think not. Of course if it turns out that the
video was produced by apple, the above doesn't apply.
Still, gotta love the catch 21 situation there. How can you know that
it doesn't apply to you without reading it first, in which case you've
broken their air-tight legal (HAH!) claim that you can't read it. I'm
also unaware that telepathy (knowing the sender's intended recipient)
is now officially accepted as both existing, and mandatory!
Still, what can you expect from the lawyers of a company that employ
illegal labour in 3rd world countries to produce their over-rated kit?
-
@kuroshin said:
It is a series of tubes and hell, it is illegal to connect your tube to my tube.
Well, in some of the red states it is, but those laws get overturned all the time.
-
It's just Apple stamping out fires after a breach of an NDA. Of course they really only needed to send this letter to YouTube since that's where the content actually resides. Some (i.e. most) people haven't yet figured out that where you see data and where it lives are not necessarily the same thing... =/
Embedding the video is only an offense in so far as the video was a product of a breach. A lot of these letters really don't mean much. They're just written with a harsh tone to scare people into compliance.
@RayS said:I If I produce a demonstration video
of how to delete a file in Windows XP, do Microsoft own the
copyright on my video?
In this case the contract between Apple and the producer of the video says that yes, Apple does in fact own the copyright to the video.
