Net news source protected
Online news gatherers have the same rights as newspaper, television or radio reporters when it comes to keeping sources confidential, a three-justice panel ruled.
The judges overturned a trial court’s order that computer news websites PowerPage and AppleInsider had to tell Apple where they got "secret plans" in 2004 about a new device to make digital audio recording on Macintosh computers.
Apple, based in Sunnyvale, California, filed suit in San Jose against the website publishers, claiming new product information tantamount to trade secrets had been "misappropriated and disseminated."
Apple argued in court that the information could only have been leaked by someone who violated a confidentiality agreement with the company and that the website operators had to tell them who it was.
The appeals court disagreed with Apple and ordered that the websites be shielded from having to reveal where they got the information.
As technical and dry as the stories were, they amounted to news in today’s technology-oriented world, chief Justice Conrad Rushing in the decision.
"We can think of no workable test or principle that would distinguish ‘legitimate’ from ‘illegitimate’ news" the justices concluded.
Any attempt to do so would "imperil" the "rough-and-tumble" free press process endorsed by the First Amendment of the US Constitution, the decision explained.
Apple had options other than challenging constitutional powers of the press when it came to investigating the leak, according to the justices.
The company could question its workers, the jurists wrote.
"It is often impossible to predict with confidence which technology changes will affect individual and collective life dramatically, and which will come and go without lasting effects," Rushing wrote in the panel decision.
"The lawful acquisition of information necessary to anticipate and respond to such changes is the birthright of every human, formally enshrined for Americans in our state and federal constitutions."
The websites targeted by Apple "fully implicated that birthright," according to Rushing.
"Today’s decision is a victory for the rights of journalists, whether online or offline, and for the public at large," said Kurt Opsahl, an Electronic Frontier Foundation who championed the websites in court.
"The court has upheld the strong protections for the free flow of information to the press, and from the press to the public."
The judges also rejected a bid by Apple to get outside e-mail records it contended might help it track down the source of the leak.
"In addition to being a free-speech victory for every citizen reporter who uses the Internet to distribute news, today’s decision is a profound electronic privacy victory for everyone who uses email," said EFF attorney Kevin Bankston.
"The court correctly found that under federal law, civil litigants can’t subpoena your stored e-mail from your service provider."
INet-Bridge
Loading ...