• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
Apple

Bankruptcy judge challenges Apple’s penchant for secrecy

By
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Down Arrow Button Icon
October 15, 2014, 7:55 PM ET

After keeping nearly a dozen lawyers in expensive suits cooling their heels for an hour outside his Springfield, Mass., courtroom, Judge Henry Boroff moved briskly to the heart of what mattered to Apple: 13 provisions in its contract with GT Advanced Technologies (GTAT) — provisions that GT claims are so “oppressive and burdensome” that they sent the company into bankruptcy.

Apple insists that the terms of the contract are too sensitive to be released to the public, and it wants them kept under seal. Judge Boroff might have been more receptive to that argument if he hadn’t read the documents in question.

He told Apple’s attorneys Wednesday that he was “having some trouble” finding any trade secrets or commercial interests in them that would justify a blanket seal.

“I’m seeing what looks incredibly like a construction suit, where a homeowner says to the contractor, ‘It didn’t come out the way I wanted to,’ and the contractor says, ‘Well, it would have come out that way if you hadn’t changed the specifications.’

“I’ve got a stack of documents a foot high,” he added. “It can’t all be under seal.”

Judge Boroff gave Apple until Monday to list — by page and line — the sections that could hurt the company.

“I want to give Apple the protection it deserves,” he said, “but not more than it deserves.”

The other items on the court’s agenda were adjourned until 10 am Tuesday — including a motion to unseal that was filed by Dow Jones on behalf of the Wall Street Journal.

Adding to the complexity of the case is the sheer number of interested parties. An address list of GT’s creditors, filed with the court last week, runs for 225 pages. Some of bigger creditors formed a committee overnight and hired their own team of lawyers.

One nugget of information about GT’s Mesa, Ariz., operations did come out at Wednesday’s abbreviated hearing. A lawyer representing the company asked permission to slow the GT’s cash “burn rate” by not starting any more sapphire boules. The raw materials are expensive, he said, and there are already “about 1,000 machines” in Mesa growing sapphire.

See also: Apple’s got a mess on its hands in Mesa, Arizona

Follow Philip Elmer-DeWitt on Twitter at @philiped. Read his Apple (AAPL) coverage at fortune.com/ped or subscribe via his RSS feed.

About the Author
By Philip Elmer-DeWitt
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.