Apple’s move to issue subpoenas to PowerPage and Apple Insider brings up the thorny issue of applying the first amendment right to online publications aka blogs.蘋果的舉動發出了傳票powerpage和蘋果內幕帶來了棘手的問題，運用第一修正案的權利，在線出版物又名博客。 Either way this will be a ground-breaking ruling to look forward to.無論哪種方式，這將是一個具有突破性意義的裁決期待。

Happily the subpoenas have already been challenged.快樂傳票已經受到了挑戰。
Apple’s subpoenas challenged in court | CNET News.com蘋果的傳票，向法院提出質疑|接受CNET news.com

Lawyers for news Web sites targeted by Apple Computer asked a California court on Monday to block subpoenas seeking to identify who leaked information about unreleased products.律師為新聞網站的目標，蘋果電腦公司詢問，一家加利福尼亞州的法院對週一座傳票，設法找出誰洩露的資料，未產品。

Personally I think that they have put their best foot forward so far.我個人認為他們有把他們最好的徒步前進至今。 The question boils down to first amendement right of blogger nothing more or less.問題歸結為第一amendement權的Blogger沒有更多或更少。

The subpoenas should not be permitted because Internet journalists deserve the full protection of the First Amendment that their traditional brethren have long enjoyed, the lawyers said in a brief filed in Santa Clara Superior Court.傳票不應該允許，因為互聯網的記者，值得充分保護第一修正案，其傳統的兄弟早已享有的，律師說，在一份簡短的存檔在Santa Clara高級法院。

These writers “cannot be compelled to disclose the source of any information procured in connection with their journalistic endeavors, nor any unpublished information obtained,” the brief says.這些作家“不能強迫透露來源的任何資料，在採購方面，與他們的新聞事業，也沒有任何未公佈的資料， ”簡短的說。 “The reporter’s privilege applies to online publication and print publication equally.” The brief was prepared by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and two local law firms. “記者的特權適用於在線出版和印刷出版，同樣”簡短的準備，由電子疆界基金會和兩名當地律師事務所。

Well said!說得好！

I think Apple is taking a risky path in alienating the blog community.我認為，蘋果正在採取冒險的路徑在疏遠博客社區。 It would be interesting to see their cost-benefit-analysis.這將是令人感興趣的看到他們的成本效益分析。 Is Apple trying the shock-and-awe approach tried previously unsuccessfully by the military and是蘋果試圖衝擊和敬畏的做法，嘗試以前沒有成功，由軍事和 RIAA論述 ? ？

What are your thoughts?什麼是您的想法呢？