This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Difference between "John Doe" suit and lawsuit against Think Secret[edit]
Although these lawsuits are separate they are very much related and in my opinion we should keep them both in this article, at least for now. We just need to be clear about the difference. Also we may need to change the title of the page as "Apple v. Does" refers specifically to Apple's case against ThinkSecret, Appleinsider and PowerPage in regard to Asteroid (the codename for an as-yet-unreleased firewire audio interface product). [1] —Christiaan 13:07, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've moved the section on the anti-slapp motion to the correction section - it was mixed up with the Apple Vs Does case. I'd recommend totally seperating Apple Vs dePlume and Apple Vs Does, and I'll try to do this later on. Ianbetteridge 15:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have the time to do this, but Ars just did a nice report of the Apple v. Does lawsuit and the latest decision that was handed down. If someone could incorporate it into the article it would be very helpful. [2] Also, adding a nice summary with the updated information here would be a good addition as well. PaulC/T+ 06:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be beneficial to define some legal terms to make it easier to comprehend. Nicole.young1 (talk) 05:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Apple v. Does. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
