Apple Fires Engineer After Daughter Posts iPhone X Exclusive Video

(gif from Brook's now pulled Viral video)

Brook Amelia Peterson went to visit her Dad at Apple's Campus where he was an Engineer, she made a video of her trip and of her fathers' iPhone X and posted it on Youtube, where it immediately went viral. Apple asked her to take down the video which she did, but they still fired her father.

She describes in a vlog that she or her father have no ill will towards Apple as they realize they violated company policy etc. However, someone should be mad at them.

The iPhone X may not be for sale yet, but it wasn't a secret. There are official videos from Apple detailing all the specs that came out WEEKS AGO. On top of that, there are dozens and dozens of videos online from reporters getting hands-on with the device, even officially reviewing its camera and other features just from a cursory examination at an event. 

I understand the need for corporate secrecy, but this wasn't a secret. She didn't show off anything that hadn't been seen. The only thing different in her video is that the phone belonged to someone, her dad, and wasn't tethered to a table with a six-inch cable. 

Here's a reposting of the video she made. 

Is there anything different in that video than in this iPhone X video released by Apple?

Heck yeah, there's a difference. The Apple video actually has images of the phone's internals. Go to the 1:13 mark. It shows all the cameras and sensors UNDER the bezel. It showcases ALL the new features. All this woman did was swipe up and down revealing menus and her father showed her an animated alien sticker. 

Again, I understand the need for corporate secrecy, but this wasn't a secret. Apple made the announcement on September 12th, 2017. A full six weeks before Brook released her hands-on" video. There has to be some sort of checks and balances in Apple's legal department, right? Someone needs to be the voice of reason this is not the same as leaving a prototype phone in a bar before it's been announced.

So the question remains, Is it still a violation of your contract if you release information about a product... when the product is public knowledge?