News 

Terry Gross, a former counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation who is representing the site and its owner, 19-year old student Nick Ciarelli, claimed that Apple 'filed against ThinkSecret because they believed that they wouldn't have enough resources to fight this, and that they would cave and then that would set an example to other journalists who are not with any major media organisation.'

Apple filed the suit over stories published by ThinkSecret which detailed several of the products revealed at Macworld Expo in San Francisco, including an update to the iLife suite. In a statement, Apple said it had `filed a civil complaint against the owner of ThinkSecret.com and unnamed individuals who we believe stole Apple's trade secrets. We believe that ThinkSecret solicited information about unreleased Apple

ADVERTISEMENT

products from these individuals who violated their confidentiality agreements with Apple by providing details that were later posted on the internet. Apple's DNA is innovation, and the protection of our trade secrets is crucial to our success.'

However, both Ciarelli and Gross have claimed that the site was guilty of nothing more than good investigative journalism. 'The Supreme Court has said, "I'm sorry, you can't hold [journalists] liable. They aren't liable; you can go after the person who stole it but you can't go after the journalist"' said Gross.

The Apple suit, brought under California's stringent trade secrets law, alleges that ThinkSecret solicited information - an offence under the Act. However, Gross argued that this effectively barred journalists from giving sources anonymity, something which has been upheld by the Supreme Court. 'What did Nick do here to induce someone to do it? The only thing they say that he did to induce them was, one, that he was going to publish the information and, two, he promised some sources anonymity. That's the basis of journalism; that's how it works,` said Gross.

In response, Gross has filed for Apple's suit to be dismissed. 'I've told [Apple], "just dismiss this; this is meritless and you're going to lose, and we're going to file a motion that's going to seek to dismiss the entire lawsuit on First Amendment grounds,"' he said.