|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Become
a Certified Search Management Professional. Enroll
Today Seating is limited! |
|
Tuesday, January 30, 2007 |
A California court made it clear to Apple that if the company wanted to find out who leaked details of an in-development product to bloggers, they'd actually have to do it legally. That lesson cost the company almost $700,000 in legal fee reimbursement.
Editor's Note: In an important case both establishing the legitimacy
of blogs as news sites and the protecting bloggers from being forced to disclose
sources, Apple Inc. was ordered to reimburse defendants for their legal fees.
How does this court ruling strike you? Let us know at WebProWorld.
This drama begins in 2004, when Mac fan sites AppleInsider and PowerPage reported
the technological details about a product codenamed "Asteroid."
Apple sought the identity of the sources who leaked the information by filing
suit against the bloggers, and subpoenaed their email records from email service
provider Nfox.com. The company claimed that the reports violated California's
trade secret laws.
A Santa Clara County court ordered Apple to pay the legal fees of their opponent this month, a development considered "a large moral victory for bloggers," according to Macnn.com.
The case brought up several important questions related to the status of the blogosphere: Do bloggers qualify as journalists? Can blogs be considered news sites? Does a private company have the right to suspend the protection of journalistic sources guaranteed by the First Amendment?
| Become
a Certified Search Management Professional. Enroll
Today Seating is limited! |
|
Though the court didn't actually qualify the bloggers as journalists, it was assumed that they were journalists for purposes of opinion, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who headed up the defense.
The EFF also convincingly maintained, based on the expert opinion of Professor Thomas Goldstein, former Dean of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and of the University of California at Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism, that AppleInsider and PowerPage qualified as legitimate online news sites:
The publishers, editors and authors connected with Power Page and Apple Insider are engaged in trade journalism, bringing news to hundreds of thousands of visitors per month.
Further, Apple was prevented from accessing the email records of the defendants under the federal Stored Communications Act, which forbids ESPs from disclosing the contents of customers' emails and other electronic communications to private parties.
Though Apple claimed it had a right to protect its trade secrets, the EFF responded that the case wasn't about business rights, but about the means by which Apple can seek evidence. Subpoenaing journalist sources is not an acceptable means of discovery.
EFF opposes Apple's discovery
because the confidentiality of the media's sources and unpublished information
are critical means for journalists of all stripes to acquire information and communicate
it to the public.
Because today's online journalists frequently depend on confidential sources to
gather material, their ability to promise confidentiality is essential to maintaining
the strength of independent media. Furthermore, the protections required by the
First Amendment are necessary regardless of whether the journalist uses a third
party for communications.
About
the Author:
Jason Lee Miller is a staff writer for WebProNews covering technology and business.
|
|
Google
Spikes YouTube Traffic
 By
David A. Utter
Staff Writer | WebProNews
The rich get richer when it comes to YouTube and its market share of visits to
entertainment sites tracked by Hitwise; thanks to Google including YouTube results
in Google Video searches, that market share of visits jumped by 18.5 percent.
Google's impact on websites presents a daily concern for the prudent site publisher. Am I indexed appropriately? Can my site be optimized better? Will I get all the Google-driven traffic I possibly can so I can profit handsomely and crush my adversaries under my heels?
It's a tough world, online business. YouTube became a success story with a relatively simple approach to letting people share and embed video content. Then along came Google with a $1.65 billion deal to acquire YouTube's presence and all the traffic it receives.
There has been plenty of speculation on Google and its intentions for video advertising. Since they purchased the biggest video playground on the Internet in the form of YouTube, it makes sense for them to use it as a testing bed.
About
the Author:
David A. Utter is a staff writer for WebProNews covering technology and business. |
|
To
Cloak or Not to Cloak
I hope you're all looking forward to the weekend as much as me. I've been puzzling
over the reason why some sites are ranked really well for apparently not doing
much SEO. Here's the problem - normally when I am researching for a new client
I consider all of the usual factors:
Copy (keyword density 5%), Meta-tags (keyword rich, short and sweet), links (relevant,
keywords in anchor text), sitemap (have one), Keywords in Heading tags (especially
h1) etc.
I take a look at what the sites ranking high are doing and how they're doing it.
I also consider the number of times a keyword is searched. If it's really highly
searched (500,000+) then it's going to take more time to get to the front page.
I try and manage my client's expectations where possible.
|
|
|
|
,
Inc. 2549 Richmond Rd. Lexington KY, 40509
