Think Secret posted an article speculating on new Apple iMac computer.  Apple sued alleging disclosure of trade secrets.  News.com pointed out that the suit had the effect of confirming the rumors. Daring Fireball analyzes Apple’s prior behavior with regard to leaks and opines that Apple has brought a weak suit against Think Secret in order to identify the source of the leaks (who likely violated a NDA), as this site has been a source of potentially damaging incorrect information in the past.

FindLaw article on trade secret protection here.

In July of 2002 I posted a piece entitled “The Trademark Implications of Spoofing Music Downloads – Self-Tarnshment?” regarding the (alleged) practice of the music industry and its representatives to upload defective and mis-labeled audio files. The implied purpose was to degrade the quality of the libraries of music files on peer to peer networks such as Kazaa.  I commented at the time that, however noble the motivation of fighting copyright infringement, the intentional distribution of a defective and/or fraudulently marked product by the trademark owner or authorized licensee (remembering that the artist’s name is often a trademark licensed to the record company), was, to put in mildly, unusual.  

With the disclaimer that maybe every fact in this PC World article is wrong, the record industry may have outdone itself.  A company named Overpeer that may or may not be hired by the record companies to do so, is allegedly uploading mis-labeled music files that contain adware and browser-hijackers. 

Commentary here, here, and here.

 

Craigslist has an unconventional approach to investing in its ‘brand’: it doesn’t do anything.  “We never even use that word internally,” Mr. Buckmaster [Craigslist’s CEO] said.  “We do zero advertising.  We don’t have a logo.  Now we’re told that we have the strongest brand ever for a company our size.”

from “Rebels With A Cause, and a Business Plan,” NY Times.

Via Heise Online, a report of a French decision awarding the domain name AFP.INFO to Agence France Press, from a German entity that alleged that it registered the name to provide information regarding ‘Agentur fur Privatschulen’ (Agency for Private Schools).  In view of the interesting jurisdictional issues, is anyone aware of an English translation of the French appellate decision?

An amazing blow-by-blow log of a software company going after an infringer (via Slashdot).
A couple of my initial reactions to this story:
1.  This is why IP lawyers need to be forensic scientists;
2.  This is why IP lawyers go after ‘middlemen’ such as ISPs;
3.  This is why anonymity on the ‘selling’ side is against public policy.  The way to resolve the privacy vs. consumer debate in arenas such as whois is to create commercial zones on the Web.  If you want to sell, do so from a ‘.cert” and say who you are.