Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple sent me two iPhones by mistake
- Thread starter DayOfChaos
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
S
syd430
Guest
You're right, a set of keys that doesn't belong to you is not the same thing as that person then getting in the car and driving it, instead of returning the keys.
And an iphone still sealed in a box that doesn't belong to you, is not the same thing as the OP opening up the box, then activating it and firing up Angry Birds, instead of returning the iphone.
They take your CC for a reason, there is fine print in there saying that if you somehow acquire extra devices over what you have you will be charged for the full price of the device, this already happened to my friend but it took like a month to charge him. No point to this argument it's considered theft because you are keeping a device you didn't pay for. If a company you work for pays you double your wage on accident and you spend it that's theft and they will prosecute you it's a well known fact.
According to your analogy, as long as he doesn't open it or do anything with it, he's in the clear. He didn't steal the keys - didn't try to return them either but we're not talking about that are we?
Your analogy is questionable.
S
syd430
Guest
I like how you didn't say anything about the second, more relevant example I gave.
Actually, i did say "and return the phone".
MOD NOTE
We have spent a considerable amount of time trying to clean this therad up a bit.
Please can we refrain from the arguing and bickering. Please review the Rules for Appropriate Debate before posting.
We have spent a considerable amount of time trying to clean this therad up a bit.
Please can we refrain from the arguing and bickering. Please review the Rules for Appropriate Debate before posting.
S
syd430
Guest
I posted a similar example where the bank accidently wired someone 70k, and the receipted served jail time for spending it.
If you read through this thread though, it turns out that probably two-thirds of everone here would also spend the money, claiming it was there right to because "the bank is a multi-billion dollar corporation" and so they are allowed to because the clerk made a mistake.
----------
Ask this guy what happened to him when he received $70k from the bank when sitting at his home checking his internet banking and away from the "public domain":
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/23/joseph-bucci-wells-fargo_n_1540549.html
I guess he just needed you to represent him in court so you could tell the judge that it's not theft because he checked his account balance away from the public domain.
Nobody is a good person nowadays,why dont you be one ?
Contact to Apple
orrrrrrr
Contact with meeee
Contact to Apple
orrrrrrr
Contact with meeee
He's not benefiting off of someone. He's not benefitting off of even a small business.
He's benefiting off the most valuable company in the world.
The moral decision is not to return it, it's to give it to someone that would appreciate it.
Considering that the courts treat the 2 types of cases very differently, it may help if you stop comparing them directly.
None of the analogies are helping, because the other posters do not have a basis in understanding them, either. An analogy or metaphor is only useful if it is more familiar to the audience than the actual subject matter. When it is equally familiar, you are just wasting bandwidth.
S
syd430
Guest
Sometimes I'm ashamed at how far societal standards have fallen. No one is perfect, and we all clearly have our own character flaws. But this one is a no-brainer that should NOT have required the OP to seek advice from anonymous posters on a public forum. I'm quite certain we would all (rightfully) call out any company or person who attempted to take advantage of an honest mistake WE made. Just because Apple is a large and successful company doesn't mean they deserve anything less than what we'd demand/expect were the situation reversed.
S
syd430
Guest
I'd love to see a small business develop something like an iphone and then still have enough economies of scale to be able to sell it to you for $600, instead of a couple of hundred thousand dollars, if at all.
This probably also applies to virtually ever other possession that you take for granted in your house in some form or another.
It might surprise you, but there's a reason why some forms of enterprise need size and capacity.
No, the moral thing to do would be return it to it's rightful owner. He didn't end up paying for it, and therefor it rightfully belongs to Apple.
Couldn't have said it any better.
Why do people keep making baffling comparisons to situations where someone is in possession of something that belonged to another person (stolen cars, misplaced hats)? It's not relevant. He didn't find an iPhone lying on the ground somewhere... that'd be a vastly different situation.
S
syd430
Guest
It belongs to Apple.
Apple is a collection of shareholders.
Shareholders are people.
to repeat what i said earlier
lets put the obvious lack of morals and honor you most are showing aside and talk facts.
please all you people who are arguing. Lets take a few minutes and google and read (i know i know its hard) "unjust enrichment in the USA" (it doesnt only have to do with contracts.. )
please google passive theft...(no it doesnt always have to pertain to cable and other services)
if the he is enriched unjustly..and does not contact the owner then its passive theft...
im sure we can draw pictures for those who cant comprehend.
// end of thread //
lets put the obvious lack of morals and honor you most are showing aside and talk facts.
please all you people who are arguing. Lets take a few minutes and google and read (i know i know its hard) "unjust enrichment in the USA" (it doesnt only have to do with contracts.. )
please google passive theft...(no it doesnt always have to pertain to cable and other services)
if the he is enriched unjustly..and does not contact the owner then its passive theft...
im sure we can draw pictures for those who cant comprehend.
// end of thread //
Again, we agree. Though just for clarification, 'you', referenced in bold, is referring to the group of people on the side of keeping it/selling it/profiting from Apple's mistake, not the singular 'you', referring to the OP.
So just because this is a mistake made by the most valuable company in the world means that your moral compass should be thrown out the door? That doesn't make it right either, and that is also the problem right there.
I understand your premise, which is to pay it forward. But paying it forward with equipment that doesn't belong to you is still theft. And in essence, that would make the situation worse, because now a third party, who isn't privy to how the person who gave them the product received that product, would also be out, and possibly implicated in the same theft.
Now.. if the OP, after getting hold of Apple, was told by Apple, "our fault and mistake. But congratulations, keep it", then he could do what you are saying and pay it forward without any loss of integrity. That would be right. Doing it without Apple's knowledge would be wrong.
That is the difference between your logic, as well as the logic of "sticking it to the man", and doing the right thing.
BL.
if they cant find it in the system yeah..maybe
i was sent two ipad 3s.
Preordered one.. day before release.. still said "processing" apple said must be and error..lets over night you one.. you'll get it a few days after release date.. Launch day comes.. wahooo my original ipad comes in.. then two days later my replacement came in. They sent me a box/label to mail it back.
This made me laugh so hard.
The amount of immorality prevalent in major corporations like Apple doesn't bother you, but when a person suggests keeping a phone that was mistakenly sent, you say that we should be ashamed? It would be comical if it weren't so sad. You really need to think twice about your priorities.
EDIT: Also, those of you quoting the law as the arbiter in all decisions are equally as misguided. Have you never once broken a law? Jaywalked across a street, perhaps? Because the amount of harm inflicted on society by jaywalking across a street is probably more than the harm inflicted on Apple by keeping a second iPhone that wasn't paid for.
smh
its nothing about the infliction caused to the ginormous corp of apple.
two wrongs dont make a right.. simple as that..
either you have honor.. or you dont.
Either you have honor or you don't? Sounds a lot like George W. Bush saying "Either you're with us, or against us".
If I were to give a second iPhone I received for free to a person too poor to afford an iPhone, would I match your personal definition of honor?
- Status