legal news


Register | Forgot Password

O'Grady et al. v. Superior Court (Apple) Part I

O'Grady et al. v. Superior Court (Apple) Part I
06:14:2006

O'Grady et al


O'Grady et al. v. Superior Court (Apple)


Filed 5/26/06


 


 


 


CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION


 


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA


SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT







JASON O'GRADY et al.,


Petitioners,


      v.


THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY,


Respondent;


APPLE COMPUTER, INC.,


  Real Party in Interest.


          H028579


        (Santa Clara County


          Super. Ct. No. CV032178)


                      Apple Computer, Inc. (Apple), a manufacturer of computer hardware and software, brought this action alleging that persons unknown caused the wrongful publication on the World Wide Web of Apple's secret plans to release a device that would facilitate the creation of digital live sound recordings on Apple computers.  In an effort to identify the source of the disclosures, Apple sought and obtained authority to issue civil subpoenas to the publishers of the Web sites where the information appeared and to the email service provider for one of the publishers.  The publishers moved for a protective order to prevent any such discovery.  The trial court denied the motion on the ground that the publishers had involved themselves in the unlawful misappropriation of a trade secret.  We hold that this was error because (1) the subpoena to the email service provider cannot be enforced consistent with the plain terms of the federal Stored Communications Act (18  U.S.C. §§ 2701-2712); (2) any subpoenas seeking unpublished information from petitioners would be unenforceable through contempt proceedings in light of the California reporter's shield (Cal. Const., art. I, § 2, subd (b); Evid. Code, §  1070); and (3) discovery of petitioners' sources is also barred on this record by the conditional constitutional privilege against compulsory disclosure of confidential sources (see Mitchell v. Superior Court (1984) 37 Cal.3d 268 (Mitchell)).  Accordingly, we will issue a writ of mandate directing the trial court to grant the motion for a protective order.


Factual and Procedural Background


                      Petitioner Jason O'Grady declared below that he owns and operates â€





Description In action alleging that persons unknown caused wrongful publication of plaintiff's secret plans on the Internet, trial court's denial of protective orders sought by publishers of news Web sites where information appeared and e-mail provider for site after they had been subpoenaed was error because (1) the subpoena to the e-mail service provider cannot be enforced consistent with the plain terms of the federal Stored Communications Act; (2) any subpoenas seeking unpublished information from publishers would be unenforceable through contempt proceedings in light of the California reporter's shield; and (3) discovery of publishers' sources is also barred by the conditional constitutional privilege against compulsory disclosure of confidential sources.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale