Is Gawker's "Apple Tablet Scavenger Hunt" Illegal?

theodp writes "Not too surprisingly, Apple was not amused by Valleywag's announcement of an Apple Tablet Scavenger Hunt, which offered cash prizes ranging from 10K-100K for info about the much-anticipated new Apple device. The promo prompted a threatening cease-and-desist letter from Apple's lawyers, which Valleywag deemed the most concrete evidence yet that there may indeed be a tablet in the works. But is the Scavenger Hunt really illegal, as the attorney claimed? The jury's still out, but Slate concludes Apple's got a pretty good case, although it notes that Valleywag's unconventional Scavenger Hunt 'stunt' may not really be all that different from 'reporting' practiced by mainstream publications like the WSJ."

It's in the wording, I think....

[mark-t]

""We encourage you to stay within the bounds of the law", they say. The problem, I think, is that "encourage" isn't enough.

If they had actually _required_ that submissions be obtained within the bounds of the law, there's nothing Apple could have remotely done to them about this, even if they don't happen to like it.

controlled leak

[fran6gagne]

Now that their controlled leaks (reference [slashdot.org]) has created too much hype, Apple is leaking in their pants and fear that the thing will go too far. If would be Apple, I would say Good luck to Gawker and thanks for all the free publicity.

Re:Who Cares

[Sir_Lewk]

I completely agree. Personally I'm getting sick of all of these apple tablet articles that seem to get posted at least once every 5 hours.

Re:It's in the wording, I think....

[Otterley]

I'm not even sure that matters. It's like saying "go rob a bank, but make sure you do it legally."

Re:It's in the wording, I think....

[Rich0]

Yup, if they're smart they'd have just put a checkbox on the submission form:

"By checking this box you declare that you are not barred by law from sharing this photo."

If they later get complaints to the contrary they can of course take the photo back down (after taking the proper time to investigate the complaint and ensure that it is legitimate). After all, how could they tell that the photo was posted illegally?

How is this different ...

[thephydes]

.... to car magazines paying a bounty for pix of yet to be released models?

slashvertising

[bjourne]

Get used to it. It is exactly the same kind of campaign /. ran the six months before (and two years after, too) the iPhone came out. They are getting paid to feature articles about Apple products. It is the only way to explain why there have been hundreds of iPhone articles and about one (1) about N900 which is a phone that kicks iPhone's butt in every possible way. With free software to boot. I guess it keeps the bills payed.

Re:I'll claim the prize

[phantomfive]

Why does Steve Jobs hate netbooks? This article [gizmodo.com] seems to indicate he is open to the idea.

Gawker websites

[thetoadwarrior]

Personally, it's my opinion that Gawker sites aren't real news sites and they rely on controversial things, like this to get people looking at their sites. For instance, looking at Kotaku reveals that it's mainly just a bunch of low grade crap that you used to find on someone's Geocities site. The stuff of real substance can be found elsewhere on a site like Edge Online and you don't have to sift through the crap that's padding out the site to get you looking at more ads.

They really are just paparazzi "journalists" and we don't really need their type plaguing the technology sector. It would be nice if they went away.

Re:Who Cares

[Lars T.]

This isn't about the Apple tablet - this story is about an PR gimmick for Valleywag. They don't expect to get any entries - they expect to get page hits.

Re:Copyright is not the issue

[maxume]

Are you sure?

I would point you at the part where it says "on any copyright, any rights of privacy or publicity of any person, or any other right of any third party" and then to the part right after that where it says "you have the right to grant any and all rights and licenses granted to Gawker Media herein, including but not limited to all necessary rights under copyright, free and clear of any claims or encumbrances", which is pretty clearly not limited to copyright.

Given that I quoted the last half of it back to you, I have to assume that you didn't read it very closely before you posted.

Re:slashvertising

[daveime]

No, probably just the fact that a limited number of tech-minded people buy the N900, whereas millions of idiots tend to buy expensive shiny crap. Apple is the bling of the tech world.

So there's a problem with the MMS, how long before someone codes a solution to fix it ? Yes, because with the N900, you are *allowed* to do things with the kernel without having to seek Steve Job's permission first. Kind of laughable you'll attack a missing feature on another phone, when iPhone users had to wait for version N even to get a video recorder or GPS that actually worked.

Face it, the ONLY innovation Apple has is that they design good user interfaces for morons who need to mash the screen with their fingers rather than use an accurate stylus. Apart from that, there is NO innovation in the iPhone ... they play follow-the-leader after Nokia, Samsung, Sony Eriksson by 6 to 12 months, AND charge their users twice the price for the priviledge.

Anyhow, based on your logic, a Big Mac must better quality than a Fillet Mignon with Blue Cheese Sauce, simply based on number of units sold, right ? You want fries with that, dumbass ?

Re:slashvertising

[Anonymous Coward]

Even more damning is how slashdot did not cover the appstore .ipa's being cracked.