Apple v. Does

Apple v. Does (O'Grady v. Superior Court (Apple))
California Court of Appeal, 6th District
Court	California Courts of Appeal
Full case name	O'Grady v. Superior Court (Apple)
Decided	May 26, 2006 (2006-05-26)
Citations	O'Grady v. Superior Court, 139 Cal.App. 4th 1423, 44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 72, modified by O'Grady v. Superior Court, 140 Cal.App. 4th 675b, 2006.
Case history
Appealed from	Santa Clara County Superior Court, case CV032178; Hon. James P. Kleinberg
Subsequent actions	O'Grady v. Superior Court, 140 Cal.App. 4th 675b, 2006.
Holding
Trial court reversed; motion for a protective order must be granted
Case opinions
Decision by	Rushing, P.J.

Apple v. Does (O'Grady v. Superior Court) was a high-profile legal proceeding in United States of America notable for bringing into question the breadth of the shield law protecting journalists from being forced to reveal their sources, and whether that law applied to online news journalists writing about corporate trade secrets. The case was also notable for the large collection of amici curiae who joined in the matter.

The case began after several online news journals published articles concerning unreleased Apple products. Apple issued subpoenas seeking the identity of the source who leaked the information, information Apple considered a trade secret. The online news journals then sought judicial orders to protect their sources. The matter was heard by a trial judge who ruled in Apple's favor; that ruling was then appealed by the defendant online journalists.

The appellate court held that trade secrets do not, by themselves, categorically transcend freedom of the press, that there is no relevant legal distinction between journalistic blogging online and traditional print journalism with regard to the shield law, and that Apple's attempt to subpoena the email service provider of one of the journals was a violation of the U.S. federal law known as the Stored Communications Act.^[1]