4 ms·

i agree that gizmodo shouldn't have published the guy's name at all. though how it was reported etc is hardly surprising. this is exactly how journalism works.

i agree that gizmodo shouldn't have published the guy's name at all. though how it was reported etc is hardly surprising. this is exactly how journalism works. people are all hotheaded in this situation because it's an apple product that's been unveiled. i doubt gruber would be "offended" by a similar case for any other company's gadget.

iambvk 16y ago
Considering the fact that, a guy did suicide recently for the nature of Apple's secrecy, i think publishing his name is actually a better step by Gizmodo. We really don't know what would have Apple security team done to this guy if this issue didn't become to public eye, don't you think?
bad_user 16y ago
> this is exactly how journalism works No, this is "industrial espionage" through illegal methods, and it's only OK-ish to do if it serves some public good (justice). And no, this is not journalism, unless by that you mean intentionally breaking the law for your own profit. I really hope the person that stole that phone and Gizmodo are prosecuted for theft. Because of dicks like these we ended up with the current patent system.
- punchfire 16y ago
  all i think is that everyone is making a mountain out of a molehill in this situation. this is blown way out of proportion.
  - ynniv 16y ago
    Except reactions to Gizmodo publishing the name and photo of an innocent employee, who they then proceed to mock. The only rationale for doing so is to deflect some of the heat that they were getting in classic dick fashion. "Dude! We screwed up, but... look at this guy! Man he likes BEER!" Thats professionalism right there.
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      I read their comments regarding beer as attempts to rehabilitate that guy as an ordinary fellow who makes mistakes.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- tghw 16y ago
  Wow, guys picking up phones in bars led to the current patent system? There's a piece of history I never knew. There is no "industrial espionage" here. Industrial espionage would, at the very least, require Gizmodo to intend to steal the phone from the outset, which clearly isn't the case. As far as trade secrets go, Apple gives up all claim to them as soon as that phone leaves its campus. Gizmodo probably crossed some line in what it did and how it handled this story, but accusing a gadget site of industrial espionage is just ridiculous.
  - anigbrowl 16y ago
    Would you happen to know what statute governs this?
    - tghw 16y ago
      The trade secrets part is based on the Uniform Trade Secrets Act: The act defines a trade secret as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and ii) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. The auto industry has provided plenty of case law where car manufacturers tried suing people for photographing and reporting on new cars the companies were testing in public, almost all of which they lost because once the car was out in public, even with fake body work added (see http://www.worldcarfans.com/10803171807/vauxhall-reveal-the-secrets-of-camouflage http://www.worldcarfans.com/10803171807/vauxhall-reveal-the-...), it no longer met the second requirement of reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy.
      - cynicalkane 16y ago
        Field-testing a prototype phone that fits in your pocket isn't the same as driving a car all over the place! And it's not even clear whether the info on the new iPhone was obtained legally!
tlrobinson 16y ago
I wonder if publishing the guy's name is actually a good thing for him. It may put a little pressure on Apple to not fire him, knowing that it will inevitably be made public. Not that they ever care about our opinion of them...
- wisty 16y ago
  I'd rather be fired (quietly) than kept on but under the apprehension that I was only there for PR reasons.
  - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
    I'd rather have the option of still getting paid while I look for another job. :)
    - roc 16y ago
      And I'm sure that'll be a fun process, now that his name is forever synonymous with a single mistake, thanks to the power of Google.
tvon 16y ago
Gruber isn't an "any other company" pundit, he's an Apple pundit.
- tewks 16y ago
  The notion of a "company-specific pundit" strikes me as rather silly. "Cheerleader" seems more appropriate.
  - tvon 16y ago
    Why? You can specialize in one thing and still be critical. Gruber is clearly a fan of Apple (and other companies), but it's not as if he doesn't criticize them when he feels it is appropriate, e.g. he has been very critical of the App Store policies. Just because he doesn't criticize them when you feel it's appropriate doesn't reduce him to being a cheerleader.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]

iambvk 16y ago

Considering the fact that, a guy did suicide recently for the nature of Apple's secrecy, i think publishing his name is actually a better step by Gizmodo. We really don't know what would have Apple security team done to this guy if this issue didn't become to public eye, don't you think?

bad_user 16y ago

> this is exactly how journalism works No, this is "industrial espionage" through illegal methods, and it's only OK-ish to do if it serves some public good (justice). And no, this is not journalism, unless by that you mean intentionally breaking the law for your own profit. I really hope the person that stole that phone and Gizmodo are prosecuted for theft. Because of dicks like these we ended up with the current patent system.

punchfire 16y ago
all i think is that everyone is making a mountain out of a molehill in this situation. this is blown way out of proportion.
- ynniv 16y ago
  Except reactions to Gizmodo publishing the name and photo of an innocent employee, who they then proceed to mock. The only rationale for doing so is to deflect some of the heat that they were getting in classic dick fashion. "Dude! We screwed up, but... look at this guy! Man he likes BEER!" Thats professionalism right there.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    I read their comments regarding beer as attempts to rehabilitate that guy as an ordinary fellow who makes mistakes.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
tghw 16y ago
Wow, guys picking up phones in bars led to the current patent system? There's a piece of history I never knew. There is no "industrial espionage" here. Industrial espionage would, at the very least, require Gizmodo to intend to steal the phone from the outset, which clearly isn't the case. As far as trade secrets go, Apple gives up all claim to them as soon as that phone leaves its campus. Gizmodo probably crossed some line in what it did and how it handled this story, but accusing a gadget site of industrial espionage is just ridiculous.
- anigbrowl 16y ago
  Would you happen to know what statute governs this?
  - tghw 16y ago
    The trade secrets part is based on the Uniform Trade Secrets Act: The act defines a trade secret as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and ii) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. The auto industry has provided plenty of case law where car manufacturers tried suing people for photographing and reporting on new cars the companies were testing in public, almost all of which they lost because once the car was out in public, even with fake body work added (see http://www.worldcarfans.com/10803171807/vauxhall-reveal-the-secrets-of-camouflage http://www.worldcarfans.com/10803171807/vauxhall-reveal-the-...), it no longer met the second requirement of reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy.
    - cynicalkane 16y ago
      Field-testing a prototype phone that fits in your pocket isn't the same as driving a car all over the place! And it's not even clear whether the info on the new iPhone was obtained legally!

tlrobinson 16y ago

I wonder if publishing the guy's name is actually a good thing for him. It may put a little pressure on Apple to not fire him, knowing that it will inevitably be made public. Not that they ever care about our opinion of them...

wisty 16y ago
I'd rather be fired (quietly) than kept on but under the apprehension that I was only there for PR reasons.
- RyanMcGreal 16y ago
  I'd rather have the option of still getting paid while I look for another job. :)
  - roc 16y ago
    And I'm sure that'll be a fun process, now that his name is forever synonymous with a single mistake, thanks to the power of Google.

tvon 16y ago

Gruber isn't an "any other company" pundit, he's an Apple pundit.

tewks 16y ago
The notion of a "company-specific pundit" strikes me as rather silly. "Cheerleader" seems more appropriate.
- tvon 16y ago
  Why? You can specialize in one thing and still be critical. Gruber is clearly a fan of Apple (and other companies), but it's not as if he doesn't criticize them when he feels it is appropriate, e.g. he has been very critical of the App Store policies. Just because he doesn't criticize them when you feel it's appropriate doesn't reduce him to being a cheerleader.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]