Apple, Think Secret settle lawsuit
PRESS RELEASE: Apple and Think Secret have settled their lawsuit, reaching an agreement that results in a positive solution for both sides. As part of the confidential settlement, no sources were revealed and Think Secret will no longer be published.
Context & Ripple Effects
This closes a two-year legal fight between Apple and Harvard student Nick Ciarelli's Think Secret, which had published pre-launch product leaks Apple wanted stopped. The settlement is confidential, but its terms are legible from the outcome: no sources were revealed, and Think Secret stops publishing entirely — a trade Ciarelli discusses in a same-day interview with Wired's Epicenter.
The shape is familiar for Apple: it ended its dispute with Creative in August 2006 through a broad, largely undisclosed settlement, and this deal follows the same template of removing an adversary without setting public precedent. Reaction split along predictable lines — TechCrunch and Techdirt framed it as Apple killing a critic, while Ars Technica reported the EFF calling the shutdown 'for the best' given the personal legal exposure Ciarelli faced.
First-order effects
- Think Secret ceases publication immediately, removing one of the most reliable channels for pre-announcement Apple product leaks just weeks before Macworld.
- Ciarelli exits with his sources unnamed and his personal liability resolved — the confidential structure means neither side can be compelled to disclose what was traded.
Second-order effects
- Other Apple rumor sites now face the same calculus Ciarelli did: publish leaked product details and risk a suit they cannot afford, or self-censor — a choice the EFF's qualified blessing makes harder to dismiss as pure capitulation.
- Apple gains leverage over future leakers by demonstrating that litigation can end a publication even when the target is a student with limited resources, raising the expected cost of running a leaks-focused outlet.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds — Creative in 2006, Think Secret in 2007 — Apple's default dispute strategy is the confidential settlement that eliminates the adversary rather than the public ruling that tests legal doctrine, leaving the underlying question of reporter's privilege for leak sources unresolved.
- Independent enthusiast press covering Apple consolidates toward outlets backed by larger organizations, because solo publishers bear asymmetric personal risk when a company chooses to litigate rather than ignore speculation.
The trend: Apple is normalizing confidential settlements that silence individual critics and information sources instead of litigating to precedent, shifting the burden of leak journalism onto whoever can absorb the legal risk.