Posted by Eugene Volokh:
Court Decision in the Apple Subpoena Case:

   The court has just [1]approved the subpoena against the service
   provider in the Apple v. Does case, which involves trade secrets that
   were leaked to and then posted on some blogs.

   The judge did not deal with any possible subpoenas against the
   bloggers. He thus didn't decide whether bloggers are entitled to be
   treated the same as other journalists, but concluded that in any event
   the subpoena against the service provider -- which the service
   provider isn't contesting -- is constitutionally permissible.

   The judge did, however, signal that he isn't fond of third parties
   posting illegally leaked trade secret, analogizing them to "fences" of
   stolen information. I have argued that the First Amendment bars
   imposing trade secret liability on third parties, such as newspapers
   or Web sites, see [2]pp. 739-48 of this article, but it sounds like
   the judge disagrees.

References

   1. http://eff.org/Censorship/Apple_v_Does/20050311_apple_decision.pdf
   2. http://www1.law.ucla.edu/~volokh/speechip.pdf

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to