Apple Sics Lawyers on SomethingAwful 512
bheer writes "Apple has sent a threatening letter to SomethingAwful about a post in its forums that describes how to fix the overheating in some MacBook Pros by applying thermal paste properly, according to a post on Gizmodo. The post includes a brief excerpt from Apple's Service Source Manual which Apple wants removed. Gizmodo continues: 'the real problem [is] that the image shows the extremely sloppy manufacturing process that is causing the MacBook Pro to run at temperatures as high as a 95 degrees Celcius under full load.'"
Actually... (Score:3, Insightful)
No, that's not the "real problem". Apple goes after anyone, anywhere, that ever posts or reproduces anything from their service manuals, which it considers proprietary, in whole or in part. It doesn't matter what circumstances in which this was posted: Apple would have gone after them, regardless.
Also, the service manual doesn't represent the "manufacturing process". It represents service instructions for service technicians.
However, all of that aside, Apple applies a stunningly ridiculous and inappropriate amount of thermal paste to the CPU and GPU in the MacBook Pro. It apparently does this both in the manufacturing process and the service process - the description and pictures of about ten times the amount of thermal paste than should actually be applied in the service manual only underscores the magnitude of the mistake. For those who might not be aware, thermal paste is not a case of "the more, the better": after a point, it fails to transfer heat, and the heat gets dissipated in an uncontrolled and unintended - and potentially damaging - way. And that's what's happening in the MacBook Pro. When a proper amount of thermal paste is applied, the MacBook Pro runs MUCH cooler, with heat actually transferring to the heatpipe, and the fans turning on when necessary, resulting in a massive drop in operating temperature (not to mention feeling like you're using a small campfire on your lap).
Inevitable Apple bashing aside, I'm actually quite surprised that, given its attention to detail, no one at Apple in any of its product design, engineering, manufacturing, or service operations, nor anyone at Asustek (the contractor that manufactures the MacBook Pro), realized that this is an utterly stupid amount of paste to be applying. I'm just dumbfounded that this made it through whatever QA is in place (and, again, Apple bashing and first revision products aside, keep in mind that Apple has the BEST QA and least need for service across the entire industry, consistently, and has for years, according to consumer reporting and tracking organizations like Consumer Reports).
In any case, Apple also hasn't commented or acknowledged this because it NEVER does so until there is a fix in place (or when it knows a specific fix is already in the pipeline). And yes, it is a "simple" fix, but as anyone who understands a complicated manufacturing process knows, it can take a while to implement any change.
In any event, because (regardless of what anyone may or may not say) Apple is the best in terms of responding to and remedying these kinds of problems when compared to other vendors[1], I have no doubt this will be resolved. I do hope Apple provides a free process for current owners to have this problem resolved at any Apple service facility.
[1] In other words, if anyone is going to say "Apple sucks" on this front, 1.) anyone can come up with service or product nightmare anecdotes from any vendor, and 2.) all other vendors are worse in all categories, if you accept Consumer Reports' rating processes.
Re:Actually... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Actually... (Score:3, Interesting)
All you can really conclude is that Asustek has poor quality controls, regardless of the brand under contract.
Re:Actually... (Score:3, Informative)
Actually no, Asustek is contracted to make the consumer notebooks. The high end varieties are made by Quanta.
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
fair use (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesn't matter what Apple considers them, they should be published copyrighted material and governed by the rules that apply to such materials. As such, posting a one page excerpt out of a manual that must be several hundred pages ought to be considered "fair use", in particular given the purpose that it's being posted for.
No, TFA is right: Apple wants this information removed for the sole reason that it embarrasses them. Verbal acrobatics like "considers them proprietary" are just an attempt to hide that fact. In the end, Apple had two choices: tolerate it or send in their legal team, and they have chose the latter.
Apple is the best in terms of responding to and remedying these kinds of problems when compared to other vendors
Actually, when you look at surveys and analyses of service quality, Apple is in the top, but they are not always the best. My own experience with their service on a top-of-the-line Powerbook has been that they are trying, but that it may take them several tries to fix it.
Fair use? (Score:5, Insightful)
Once again, people are ascribing to malice something that's more easily explained by stupidity. And in situations like this, corporations are profoundly stupid. Apple clearly has a policy that to hassle people who "steal" their IP. The only way to implement such a policy is to assign some low-ranking dweeb to cruise the web and look for this "stolen" IP. When he sees it, he fires off a C&D letter. He does not have the discretion to say "Oh, I should give them a pass, that's probably fair use."
You've obviously never worked in any private organization bigger than a little league team. If you had, you'd know that Apple, and all enterprises like it, have thousands of discretion-free low-level dweebs like the one just described. Ascribing some deeper purpose to such people is silly.
Re:Fair use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fair use? (Score:3)
If you had, you'd know that Apple, and all enterprises like it, have thousands of discretion-free low-level dweebs like the one just described. Ascribing some deeper purpose to such people is silly.
Perhaps there is a deeper purpose, and perhaps not. If they DO allow a discretion-free low-level dweeb to fire off legal documents like that, they are terribly negligent and deserve whatever bad publicity it generates (at least). At the very least, the low-level dweeb's findings should be screened by a parale
Re:Fair use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:fair use (Score:5, Informative)
As Linuxmop pointed out below, the entire manual is here (and now it's on my hard drive). If it was a trade secret, it isn't any more.
http://www.repairyourmac.com/macbook-pro.pdf [repairyourmac.com]
Re:fair use (Score:4, Informative)
Really? Where? I see it neither in TFA, nor in the manual linked to in this /. comment [slashdot.org].
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm suprised the laptops didn't outright fail due to the heat.
If anyone is interested, here is what the parent poster is talking about:
http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/7541/lol1qe.jp
Re:Wow (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Actually... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, they're going after a site with Mother Teresa with a Broken Finger and Pizza the Hut on the front page. The one that reviewed the Vore [somethingawful.com] RPG (NSFW... RNSFW), and has a running section called The Horrors of Porn [somethingawful.com] (NSF...NM). Going after them is a lot like shouting at a woodpecker to stop bashing their skulls into a tree, especially with the Legal Threats [somethingawful.com] section so prominently featured on the front page.
Don't get me wrong, I love Something Awful. They're one of the few sites that believe in truth in advertising. I just wouldn't expect them to respond to legal threats in anything other than a deragatory comedy fashion. I expect a review soon that gives Apple's threatening legal letter a score of -48. Worst Legal Threat Letter Ever.
Actually, technically, they're going after the forums [wikipedia.org]. 'cause those people on the forums really listen.
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
Re:Actually... (Score:2, Interesting)
Luckily law is easier to understand than engineering (but harder to get into due to their unions^H^H^H^H^H^H bar associations). Any properly managed company can keep its lawyers in check easily enough. Sounds like Apple has some management issues.
Of course, the easiest place to point whenever you talk about management issues an
Re:Actually... (Score:5, Funny)
After all, it wasn't engineers that ran HP into the ground.
Re:Actually... (Score:3, Insightful)
Amen brother. And when HP was soaring it was because the managers were originally engineers. When the managers got replaced by "career managers" who had no engineering experience, the company sunk into the abyss like a stone. HP was reknowned for engineering and without engineers at the helm, the company floundered.
Similarly when Jobs (who isn't an engineer but clearly has natural talent for design) was running Apple it soared. When a "care
Re:Actually... (Score:5, Insightful)
I have never seen a company run into the ground by technical staff. I only wish I could say the same about managers. They frequently take about as much time analyzing a problem to underand the solution, as you have with this story about Apple. As is common with Slashdot stories, there's not information here to arrive at any objective conclusion.
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
While I agree that what Apple is doing is protecting its copyrighted material, I think your statement is untrue. If this was in the New York Times instead of Something Awful, I think Apple would bite its tongue.
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
Apple sucks.
I'm just itching for some troll modding, so here goes.
Apple used to have it's manufacturing here in the US. Not just their manufacturing, their design, marketing, the whole shebangs.
What has happened to apple, like what has happened to a lot of companies is they've outsourced. Yes, the big evil globalization. The large corporate excuse to use underpaid labor in other countries, the excuse to dump tons of enviromen
Re:Actually... (Score:5, Interesting)
When everything Apple happened mostly in Cupertino, if Steve Jobs got a whim that something needed to be changed right that second, he could just take a golf cart over to the other campus, bark out some orders and probably %80 of them could understand the mans english.
Now he has to make a call to someone else. That person takes his orders to "make a plexiglass window with cool LED's" and translates them to "Blossoming lotus spreads its petals for the bees inside" That bad translation gets out to the manufacturing floor where %2 of the people *might* understand steves direct order and totally fuck it up. The other %98 percent say "That's a fucked up translation" and goes about building the machine like all the other machines being ordered on the line.
Finally, it takes a week or two for the first production run machines to arrive. QA back at ASUS realizes there's a %30 failure rate, but figure they'll take their chances on RMA's and refurbs. Apple just gets the cream of the crop machines to look at before the entire production run starts shipping.
The new machines are in stores, people are buying them not realizing %30 of them are ticking time bombs waiting to fail. Some do, folks get pissed off and return them.
There is some value in having your manufacturing 2 blocks away from your office. You have very tight nit control over quality, and changes to the assembly line can be done on a daily basis.
Finally, the reason i'm making this argument, this used to be part of the price of buying an apple. Apples used to be made to very high standards, at least compared to screwdriver shop PC's. I'm still a PC fan, you can't beat the satisfaction of "rolling your own" and saving a buck or two in the process, but that was never apples market. Apples market has always been "I just want to plug it in and it works" You can't have that guarantee with the shoddy overseas craftsmanship happening now.
Re:Actually... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Actually... (Score:5, Informative)
Astroturf much?
Take your own picture (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Take your own picture (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Take your own picture (Score:2)
Apple goes after people posting service manuals (Score:4, Interesting)
Karma whore (Score:5, Informative)
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?s
Lowtax's response:
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?t
Posted anonymously to avoid accusations of karma whoring
End of thread (Score:5, Informative)
Apple is acting like Apple always does... like an asshole. They are caught out in a fairly major QA problem and trying to lawyer their way around it. Same as every other large company. Mac fanbois will of course totally defend their noble defense of their 'intellectual property' even though this case is a textbook example of fair use. The fanbois will also 'like totally defend the quality of Apple hardware against that Dell crap.' And while they have cause for that in general it will stink of slavish devotion because of just how busted Apple is on this case.
That 'bout cover everything?
Re:End of thread (Score:2, Informative)
You preemptive ad hominem aside, Apple is not trying to delete the thread, just remove an image from one of their service manuals. How is posting sections of a service manual fair use? Service providers and others who are given access to those manuals sign an agreement that they will not do the very thing that was done.
Re:End of thread (Score:2)
How is posting sections of a service manual fair use?
It's being used to criticise Apple's manufacturing process.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:End of thread (Score:2)
Fair Use (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_un
I'm not really sure how to address your second point. It's either irrelevant, or Apple should be claiming SA divulged Trade Secrets.
Re:End of thread (Score:2)
Apple is not trying to delete the thread, just remove an image from one of their service manuals. How is posting sections of a service manual fair use?
According to the definition of fair use in US law [wikipedia.org] it potentially falls under fair use if it is "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research", with a certain amount of fuzziness regarding the actual details with regard
sounds like a job for... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.somethingawful.com/legal/ [somethingawful.com]
The problem is... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The problem is... (Score:5, Funny)
So does Slashdot [imageshack.us].
Apple Shmapple (Score:3, Insightful)
What I'm trying to say is I'm sick of trivial apple stories all the time.
Thermal paste (Score:4, Funny)
Yep, Apple fucked up this one.
Actually, no (Score:5, Informative)
Thermal grease is ONLY to smooth out imperfections in the surface. While it has reasonable temperature conductivity properties, it's still a lot worse than a straight metal-to-metal connection, partially due to the lack of electrical conductivity (and therefore, lower overall metal density). When spread appropriately, you should still see the surface of the thing you are coating, along with spots of the grease where the original topography fell below the base surface line (however slightly). Coat both surfaces like this, and you're golden.
Really, what you want is a tiny, tiny drop spread around by a squeegee-like straight edge, like a plastic credit card. Put a little too much on, and your temperatures will rise. Put as much on as it appears in the picture, and your temperatures will be through the roof.
nope. (Score:5, Insightful)
But there is nothing wrong with putting more on as long as you apply sufficient pressure to squeeze the extra out. And that is what Apple's picture shows. A thin film in the thermal interface area and big globs around the interface area.
The film on the interface area is slightly thick, but it's not so thick that it would cause significant problems. It's not any thicker than the film that I saw on my NVidia 6800 Ultra or 7800GT when I removed the heatsinks to replace them with other cooling solutions.
And as to the lawyers thing, Apple just said to remove the link. It is illegal in this country to link to copyrighted material, not just to host it. Otherwise, bittorrent trackers would be legal, right?
This story is way out of control lately. I'm glad people are getting the message that putting a lot of TIM (thermal interface material, also known as heat sink goop) on is unnecessary. Maybe next time around they could actually learn enough about cooling to know what to look for in a picture of others' work.
Additionally, note that electrical conductivity is not an important characteristic of TIM. In fact, it is typically electrically non-conductive so that if you have a little spread out onto nearby circuits (say, the multiplier resistors on top of an Athlon) it won't short stuff out. TIM only has to conduct heat. It does it better than air (which is what would otherwise fill a void space), and that's about it. That's why you use as little as possible.
Honestly this is all a mountain out of a molehill. All someone had to do was post a picture of their own laptop and not use Apple's copyright restricted info and this wouldn't have even happened.
First revs? whats with Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, about the first rev thing: why is it only Apple with these problems? you never hear anyone say "dont buy that Dell/HP/Lenovo, its a rev A, wait for the QC issues to be fixed in the rev b"
I thought that these problems werer because they were the only mass-PPC hardware vendor, but that is now de-bunked -- and on that note, no one at Intel evaluated a finidhed laptop?? God knows, as much as Apple throws the I-word around, you would think it is a partnership!
Re:First revs? whats with Apple (Score:2)
Gad, I *love* irony.
Re:First revs? whats with Apple (Score:4, Funny)
well, from the sounds of it if you've got a MBP, those hands'd be pretty damned hot. Hotter than any electronics should ever be
Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
Dell Inspiron 6400/E1505 Service Manual [dell.com]
Couldn't they just provide a link to the Apple manuals online?
Not the issue (Score:5, Insightful)
Link with Pic (Score:3, Informative)
I am confused.. (Score:5, Funny)
Apple Splatters! (Score:4, Funny)
*stands on soap box* Apparently, their voice command program which requires the ESC key to toggle the microphone interferes with any vim commands that require you to escape back into command mode when you are using Darwin, Apple's version of xterm.
Come and get me you lawyer bastards!!!!
PS: Macs are ghey, eat babies, and kill kittens!
Uh-oh... (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm.. (Score:3, Funny)
Have they? (Score:3, Informative)
Have they? [andrewescobar.com]
Lowtax 2, Apple 0 (Score:5, Insightful)
Well Rich is sure to make the most of the free publicity; the stupidty demonstrated by Apple lawyers is the kind of material on which he thrives. Apple is dealing with someone who has built his career on the art of savage ridicule. If you want to be mercilessly mocked on the World Wide Web then have a laywer send a letter to Lowtax.
So Apple's clownboat lawyers have just spawned a wave of Anti-Apple publicity. What might have been confined to SomethingAwful has now propagated to Gizmodo and Slashdot and will spread from there. And the lawyers have not only spread bad publicity about Apple, they are generating more of it themselves: Not only has Apple screwed up with heat sink grease, Apple has screwed up AND their lawyers are trying to cover it up. Apple would benefit from keeping a tighter reign on its lawyers; because they see only the legal aspects of any issue, they are prone to do great harm to Apple's public image in pursuit of insignificant legal points.
No one cares. (Score:3, Insightful)
So Apple's clownboat lawyers have just spawned a wave of Anti-Apple publicity.
Only on Slashdot. Only amongst the /. crowd that has nothing better to do than follow every Apple story. Wake me up when this is being repeated every half-hour on CNN Headline News.
It's not being repeated every half-hour on CNN headline news? Guess what? Apple's lawyers won--in the real world, those fancy degrees were a lot better than your random geek postings after all.
Apple's legal department uses Microsoft Entourage (Score:5, Funny)
The really interesting thing is that the Apple legal department uses Microsoft Entourage as an e-mail client. Lowtax posted the headers in his response (posted above by someone else).
Received: from mail-out3.apple.com (mail-out3.apple.com [17.254.13.22])
by mx3.somethingawful.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E4981B523C
for webmaster@somethingawful.com; Tue, 2 May 2006 21:38:35 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from relay8.apple.com (relay8.apple.com [17.128.113.38])
by mail-out3.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k432cUP8027258
for webmaster@somethingawful.com; Tue, 2 May 2006 19:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [17.193.14.216] (unknown [17.193.14.216])
by relay8.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with ESMTP id 5CB7E17B;
Tue, 2 May 2006 19:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.3.060209
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 19:38:28 -0700
Subject: Urgent Legal Notice from Apple Computer
From: Copyright Agent copyrightagent@apple.com
To: webmaster@somethingawful.com
Message-ID: C07D65B4.1430E%copyrightagent@apple.com
Thread-Topic: Urgent Legal Notice from Apple Computer
It's Fair Use, for Christ's Sake! (Score:3, Informative)
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
---
Do I really need to walk Apple through the factors to prove to them that this is fair use? It's pretty damn clear! Ok, fine, I'll do it anyway.
Preamble) Seems to me it qualifies as criticism, comment, and teaching.
1) This isn't commercial. They aren't reselling your manual. This is an "educational purpose." Get over yourselves.
2) It's a technical manual. There are two types of copyrighted works: 1) factual and 2) creative. This is in the first category. That means less protection for you, Apple.
3) It's only one little picture. The amount is minimal.
4) There is no effect. People still have to buy the manual if they want the manual.
Hey, SomethingAwful wins on all four elements! STFU Apple.
*I am not a lawyer. But I can read a statute.
Re:It's Fair Use, for Christ's Sake! (Score:3, Informative)
106 lists the things that the owner of a copyright has the right to do (lists the exclusive rights). 106A additionally adds that if the copyrighted thing is a painting / photgraph (a "work of visual art") then the author can insist that his name be attached to the painting / photograph when copies are made.
107, as I quoted earlier, say that even though you have those exclusive rights, there are exceptions for "fair
Not just one page (Score:5, Informative)
I have mod points, but I couldn't find anyone pointing this out to mod up. The post [somethingawful.com] includes a link to the entire service manual. Apple's complaint is NOT about the single page showing the thermal grease, it's about the posting of a PDF of their copyrighted service manual in its entirety. Now, they're still threatening the wrong person, since the file is hosted somewhere else, but there is real infringement going on.
Heretics (Score:5, Funny)
Praise Jobs the Enlightener, the Finder,
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
They're reproducing a copyrighted image for the purpose of reporting on and criticizing the company that produced the image. This is the exact sort of thing fair use is supposed to exist for in the first place. If fair use doesn't exist to prevent copyright owners from allowing people to exerpt those copyrighted materials in order to respond to them, then why do we even have it?
Consumer protection and intelectual property (Score:5, Insightful)
Is that a violation of intelectual property law, is there not an exception for portecting public safty?
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a small apple shareholder, I request that the company become less litigation happy. It's souring relations with the wrong crowds which could have otherwise been attracted to it's product. Pardon the pun, but stop being sour apples:(
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.applerepairmanuals.com/ [applerepairmanuals.com]
(I'm not a Mac person, so I don't know.)
But I agree with the GP, offering snippets of anything isn't copyright infringement, newspapers, critics and reviewers have long offered small sections of movies, articles for discussion purposes. Educators also rely on this (quoting) to provide a piece of relevant information to their students.
There are boundaries to this, but a "snippet" isn't it.
Re:Why is this news? (Score:3, Informative)
Site Temporarily Unavailable
We apologize for the inconvenience. Please contact the webmaster/ tech support immediately to have them rectify this.
error id: "bad_httpd_conf"
I think that says a lot right there.
Re:Why is this news? (Score:4, Insightful)
>Apple service manuals are private information. If you don't believe me, try to order
>one.
Put it in another context. If their manual could be used to demonstrate that the company had discriminatory labor practices, or if they were aiding an enemy of the US, it would be acceptable to make that information public because the public need to know this information supersedes any protection that may be reserved under copyright law.
A less extreme context would be, if the manual illustrated a defect that made the product physically dangerous to the user. The scenario in the article is NOT terribly distant from that, and the line does not have to be drawn close to "this defect may cause the unit to catch fire."
The public interest of this disclosure is more important than any case the company can make for its suppression.
The only exception would be, for instance, if it turned out that this is not the actual service manual that is used in the field. Then it is misinformation and the company has a right to not be falsely represented in the media.
If it's an accurate criticism, the company has very little that they can actually ask a court to order.
There is no lawsuit on this, and there won't be one. Nothing to see here.
Re:Why is this news? (Score:4, Insightful)
But then it wouldn't be copyright infringement, it would be libel.
Re:Why is this news? (Score:3, Interesting)
a) Apple is not breaking any laws
b) The heating issue is not causing any systems to catch fire nor is anyone claiming that it will
c) It is not disclosing any other public danger
Re:Why is this news? (Score:4, Insightful)
They did not redistribute the whole manual. They used a snippet of the manual in an article. This is fair use under copyright law. Because this is fair use, Apple has insufficient legal positioning to request the photo's removal. As such, they're attempting to intimidate Something Awful. That's why this article gets face time.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:4, Interesting)
In theory, they are illegally using one existing monopoly (the printing of apple service manuals) to gain an unfair advantage in another market (repair and other service on apple computers)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
From the opinion of Justice Story in Folsom v. Marsh, as reported in Wikipedia's Fair Use entry [wikipedia.org]: In other words, what this judgment states is that a work is considered fair use if its intent is to provide commentary or criticism. In the case of the Apple service manual, it is clearly a critique of Apple's mishandling of the processor in the first place. The author of the post is clearly making the logical case that Apple is doing a poor job by posting the damning evidence of the service manual, and making the logical case that had they not screwed it up in the first place, you wouldn't have had to repair the thermal paste. I don't know what could be more of a case of valid critique than this.
As such, it seems pretty obvious to me that Apple is trying to prevent the criticism of whatever shoddy computer building practices it might have, rather than trying to protect its copyright.
IANALBIKHTSWRIFOMFF. (I am not a lawyer but I know how to see what's right in front of my fucking face)
can't cite Folsom v. Marsh (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
Whoever leaked that document to somethingawful broke the law.
Out of interest, what law is that they're breaking? I understand that "trade secrets" have some measure of legal protection, but I don't think merely claiming something is "confidential" automatically makes it a trade secret. Failing that, seems to me the worst anyone disseminating this "confidential" information could be accused of is contract violation. Which is not "breaking the law", it's breaking a contract.
Unless you're saying the law they're breaking is copyright infringement, in which case a fair use claim could certainly be argued and your first sentence is invalidated.
Unless there's something else? I thought the only IP with any measure of protection was patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets...
Unless you listen to SCO, of course :)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, inducing someone to break a contract is a tort.
Benefiting from someone's decision to break a contract, in general, is neither illegal nor a tort. If someone who signed an agreement with Apple regarding the service manual submitted the picture to SA to contribute to the discussion, that someone may have breached a contract and become liable, but SA is likely not. To be liable, in general, SA would have had to
1. have knowledge of that contractual
Re:Why is this news? (Score:3, Interesting)
So, the best course of action for me would be to anonymously spread this information as far and wide as I possibly can, aft
It has *EVERYTHING* to do with fair use (Score:5, Interesting)
Wrong, it has *EVERYTHING* to do with fair use, as evidenced by the letter from Apple:
By playing the copyright card, Apple themselves are making this about copyright, and thus (by definition) fair use is a factor.
Note that NOWHERE in the letter that Apple sent, do they mention trade secrets (which is what you believe is going on here.)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:4, Insightful)
Um. They didn't receive anything. One of the forum members linked to a picture on his own hosting. SomethingAwful doesn't have a copy of anything.
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:3, Informative)
Too much thermal goo is one of the more common assembly errors I've seen, all because of a misunderstanding of its purpose. Too many people think, "the more, the better" and it's just not so. The best thermal bond is metal to metal, but there are gaps between the metal surfaces that don't conduct well if they are fi
Re:Why is this news? (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, please site the laws that were broken. A NDA is not a law binding document. By breaking it, you are only breaking a contractual agreement with said party. SomethingAweful, as many have noted, only linked to the document in question. The "offending" document was hosted from an outside site. Linking is not punishable (see Microsoft vs. Ticketmaster) or else companies l
Re:mmm lets see here.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:mmm lets see here.. (Score:2)
'How to fix your overheating Mac' is a pretty big straw to grab. One could just as easily say that the Apple fanboys are being too defensive about it. Apple should have let this one be.
Entire service manual (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:mmm lets see here.. (Score:3, Informative)
Unauthorized reprint of at most a single page from a manual.
A take down notice due to valid infringement?
17 U.S.C. 107 [cornell.edu]
Please discuss with reference to your legal education and bar admissions.
Re:mmm lets see here.. (Score:3, Insightful)
The sec. 107 balancing test is so lopsided in these facts that it is a virtual certainty that this is not copyright infringement, but an example of non-commercial fair use.
I was simply curious whether you had any qualifications to state otherwise. Obviously, you do not.
Re:Hot cooler good, cool cooler bad (Score:2)
My ThinkPad has a vent on the left side that, when obstructed, will nuke anything in its path... the rest of it stays pretty cool unless you're playing a game or something.
Re:Hot cooler good, cool cooler bad (Score:2)
Still, the computer in question is not designed to cool itself entirely through case-air contact. It has two internal fans which move air over the internal heatsink. If the internal heatsink is working better, the case will
Re:it's not even correct info (Score:2, Insightful)
defense of copyright, not "suing everyone" (Score:4, Insightful)
They're not "suing anyone they don't like", they're defending copyrighted material or protecting trademarks- and they are famous for doing so, since long before Jobs was re-hired. Shockingly they HAVE to, or said copyright/trademarks are diluted. If I start using the logo of GrooWanderer, Inc and you know about it but do nothing- and then BigCompany Inc comes along and does it, your case against BigCompany Inc is severely diluted because -I- did it and you didn't seem to care.
Many look at lawsuits as something like the death penalty or a nuclear first-strike. They're not. It is a civil matter taken before authority for resolution. A cease-and-desist is a PRELIMINARY step (MANY steps before a lawsuit) saying "That ain't cool. Do something about it, or we'll have to take it to the courts." The language is written to be clear and unambiguous- and hence valid in court later when the judge says, "Okay, so...did you let them know they were violating your copyright?", you can say "Absolutely and in no uncertain terms." It's not written to impress 15 year old internet commentators.
This isn't about "embarassing photos", and comparing Apple to a genuine cult is a severe dilution of the term "cult"- dangerously so. It is about protecting copyrighted material that is provided exclusively to internal Apple staff and employees of Apple Certified Resellers. I agree that it'd be great if such material were available free, but Apple has made a business decision to leverage "Apple Certified Reseller" qualifications, so they don't want any old Joe Shmoe having access to those manuals. That's their perrogative and their right.
If you don't like it- that's just too bad; don't buy Apple products, speak your mind to your representatives, run for office, whatever you like to try and change the law, or move to a small island with Richard Stallman and enjoy sharing you "copylefted" works- but otherwise, you sound like a guy in court because he punched someone in the face, angry because he doesn't believe in a law against punching people in the face.
I use Apple products (typing this on a Macbook, my 4th powerbook, oops, I mean laptop, oops, I mean "portable.") I have a linux box sitting under an Xserve in the basement. My firewall runs a FreeBSD based distribution. I have a machine under my desk that runs win2k and Ubuntu occasionally, though less-so now that emulation and virtualization work decently on the macbook.
I recognized the strengths of various platforms a decade ago. When someone asks me "should I get a Mac", my answer is a question- "what do you do with your computer?" When they ask "should I install Linux", I judge their experience level and factor that heavily into my answer, because Linux still isn't remotely ready for prime-time desktop use by people who just want their computer to work. I hate Apple fanboys (to paraphrase the author of the "Apple Product Cycle"- I'd love to go to Macworld some time, but strongly suspect I'd end up starting a brawl).
However, my new hatred is for "Appleworms"; people who spout "I hate apple" followed by some moderately insane rambling. If you've got a legitimate beef, fine- and I have a bunch for Apple. Otherwise, for god sakes, please shut up. Anyone remotely intelligent sees you spouting your "opinion" for attention. I've seen people call Apple computer/iPod owners "sheep". Complain about or "cite" a never-ending stream of problems that don't exist (my favorite: "you can't resize the dock, it takes up a chunk of your screen!") Heard people laugh at Apple's single-digit market share and describe it as a "failure" (ignoring the billion dollars in cash reserves, sales on the uptake, stock that consistently meets or exceeds analyst expectations- or the fact that Apple's market valu
Re: "I hate Apple fanboys" (Score:5, Insightful)
Talk about sheer mindless stupidity.
Re:Apple is rotten (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple is rotten (Score:2)
All it's doing is decreasing your dividend by a small amount, in exchange for absolutely no benefit.
Re:Thermal grease info? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I've lost all respect for Apple. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure they do. Ever heard of the BSA?
Re:I've lost all respect for Apple. (Score:3, Interesting)
Nobody reading your post actually believes you own an iBook. This isn't even a good troll. Yes, this action by Apple is irritating and stupid, but saying it is tantamount to subverting the first amendment and the constitution is hyperbole to say the least. There is some real subverting going on against the constitution these days and I suggest you place