Apple sues former employee for leaks

[Cmaier]

 

[MEJHarrison]

I'm no lawyer, I don't play one on TV and can't imaging ever pretending to be one. So armed with my complete lack of knowledge and the mere four pages I managed to work through, it would seem Mr. Aude is pretty screwed here. He did his dirty work on his work phone supplied by Apple. They seem to have screenshots of incriminating texts. He even confessed some of his sins. I think it's a good day not to be Mr. Aude.

I should enjoy the law. There does seem to be a lot of numbers involved. Like section 25 on line 4 of page 7. I think the part I don't like is the inability to use simple English. Stop with the words from the 1600's, let the Latin shit go and just say what you mean in a way the average person can understand.

 

[Citysnaps]

Whoa... Greater than 11,400 texts. He was a busy guy.

 

[MEJHarrison]

All joking aside, it was fascinating to skim through all that.

 

[dada_dave]

I'm no lawyer, I don't play one on TV and can't imaging ever pretending to be one. So armed with my complete lack of knowledge and the mere four pages I managed to work through, it would seem Mr. Aude is pretty screwed here. He did his dirty work on his work phone supplied by Apple. They seem to have screenshots of incriminating texts. He even confessed some of his sins. I think it's a good day not to be Mr. Aude.

I should enjoy the law. There does seem to be a lot of numbers involved. Like section 25 on line 4 of page 7. I think the part I don't like is the inability to use simple English. Stop with the words from the 1600's, let the Latin shit go and just say what you mean in a way the average person can understand.

While no doubt there are those who enjoy the obfuscation for the common man - acting as high priests of the law - there is a more prosaic explanation for legalese: precision. It’s the same reason as in science or any technical field to use Latin or to create jargon. Common English words can have a vast variety of meanings, both denotation and especially connotation. Jargon (and adopted Latin) though has one meaning as defined by tradition of the trade*. Since conveying exactly what you want is so vital in legal matters, lawyers use it, overuse it, and yes abuse it with confusing the hell out of the rest of us is a nice bonus.

*well hopefully anyway: this can and often does go wrong. Overloading jargon or especially mathematical variables for different purposes in different contexts never mind different fields can make for hilarious miscommunications even within a field, between sub-fields, and of course amongst wildly different fields. Since it sounds like you’re also in a technical field, I’m sure you’ve seen this.

 

[Cmaier]

While no doubt there are those who enjoy the obfuscation for the common man - acting as high priests of the law - there is a more prosaic explanation for legalese: precision. It’s the same reason as in science or any technical field to use Latin or to create jargon. Common English words can have a vast variety of meanings, both denotation and especially connotation. Jargon (and adopted Latin) though has one meaning as defined by tradition of the trade*. Since conveying exactly what you want is so vital in legal matters, lawyers use it, overuse it, and yes abuse it with confusing the hell out of the rest of us is a nice bonus.

*well hopefully anyway: this can and often does go wrong. Overloading jargon or especially mathematical variables for different purposes in different contexts never mind different fields can make for hilarious miscommunications even within a field, between sub-fields, and of course amongst wildly different fields. Since it sounds like you’re also in a technical field, I’m sure you’ve seen this.

This.

A second thing to keep in mind is “common law” and “precedent.” We use the words we use because, over the course of centuries, courts have blessed certain terminology. When parties enter into a contract, if they use certain words and phrases that have already been tested and interpreted in courts, everyone can be sure what the contract means. If you try to do something new and “simple,” you run the risk that in some future lawsuit, your new terminology will be interpreted in a way you had not intended. When you use the same phrases that have been used in thousands of prior lawsuits, courts will interpret them the same way as in those prior lawsuits.

When you are drafting a legal complaint you are using certain phrases for the same reason (because those words have been found to be useful in avoiding motions to dismiss, for example).

 

[MEJHarrison]

While no doubt there are those who enjoy the obfuscation for the common man - acting as high priests of the law - there is a more prosaic explanation for legalese: precision. It’s the same reason as in science or any technical field to use Latin or to create jargon. Common English words can have a vast variety of meanings, both denotation and especially connotation. Jargon (and adopted Latin) though has one meaning as defined by tradition of the trade*. Since conveying exactly what you want is so vital in legal matters, lawyers use it, overuse it, and yes abuse it with confusing the hell out of the rest of us is a nice bonus.

I sort of get it. I presume there's at least some reason for doing things the way they do. I think I grasp the using it part and was poking fun at the overusing it part.

*well hopefully anyway: this can and often does go wrong. Overloading jargon or especially mathematical variables for different purposes in different contexts never mind different fields can make for hilarious miscommunications even within a field, between sub-fields, and of course amongst wildly different fields. Since it sounds like you’re also in a technical field, I’m sure you’ve seen this.

Yeah, I'm a web developer. Been doing it for decades.

 

[dada_dave]

You know in some ways with this and the previous leaker I don’t want to be too harsh as the uncomfortable reality is that I am a consumer of rumors and leaks about Apple. So I suppose this industry exists in part to satiate my curiosity (although Apple made the point he was also fed competition) in the same way tabloids exist for people who are into celebrities. But at the same time … what the fuck are these people thinking? Plus discussing this stuff is just a fun hobby, people like @leman digging through patents or supply chain analysis would probably be enough. I mean I’ll admit Apple’s trademarked secrecy is probably overboard to some extent. They probably could and maybe should provide more information and previews and roadmaps, especially for professional products, but … these leakers are just doing it for the ego and my sympathy is very limited. I am curious which App he was so dead against that he leaked to kill it. I suppose it’s easy enough to look up but my curiosity isn’t overriding my laziness.

 

[Cmaier]

You know in some ways with this and the previous leaker I don’t want to be too harsh as the uncomfortable reality is that I am a consumer of rumors and leaks about Apple. So I suppose this industry exists in part to satiate my curiosity (although Apple made the point he was also fed competition) in the same way tabloids exist for people who are into celebrities. But at the same time … what the fuck are these people thinking? Plus discussing this stuff is just a fun hobby, people like @leman digging through patents or supply chain analysis would probably be enough. I mean I’ll admit Apple’s trademarked secrecy is probably overboard to some extent. They probably could and maybe should provide more information and previews and roadmaps, especially for professional products, but … these leakers are just doing it for the ego and my sympathy is very limited. I am curious which App he was so dead against that he leaked to kill it. I suppose it’s easy enough to look up but my curiosity isn’t overriding my laziness.

The app was apparently the journal app