Apple Ends Anti-Blogger Legal Effort

An anonymous reader writes "Apple has decided not to appeal the decision against it in it in its case against the product-information leaking bloggers. News.com discusses the ramifications of this decision, which may make future online journalists bolder in their actions." From the article: "Court documents show the company's investigators interviewed 29 employees who had access to a key confidential document — but Apple did not examine them under oath or examine their computers. That's one reason, the appeals court said, to grant the online journalists the protective order they requested. 'Apple has failed to establish that it adequately pursued other possible means to identify the source of the information in question,' the judges said."

Re:NEW APPLE SPECS...

[gg3po]

dont matter, It will still not be as good as my home built computer running *nix. :P *ducks*

OS X is *nix. [apple.com]

Re:Precedent?

[SpeedyBandito]

Just a quick note - this ruling has nothing to do with ThinkSecret. The article is referring to a separate suit dealing with AppleInsider. The ThinkSecret case is still very much alive.

They knew Apple couldn't win...

[Anonymous Coward]

As big a control freak as Steve Jobs is, he would have continued to pursue the matter despite it being a first amendment issue. But I bet Apple lawyers told him it was a lost cause. Just goes to show you that Apple can be just as evil as Microsoft.

Re:Apple Likely Knew/Knows Who Spilled The Beans

[Paradise Pete]

"A popular folk etymology for spill the beans [randomhouse.com] claims that in ancient Greece, applicants for membership in secret societies were voted upon by having the existing members drop beans into an opaque pottery jar.... It's an engaging tale, and beans were in fact once used as ballots, but since the phrase is American and was not seen until 1919, neither the story nor the jar holds water."