As I mentioned earlier, to get stock levels up in time for a late June early July launch, they have to start manufacturing in May. To begin manufacturing in May they have to start tooling the production lines in April. To tool the production lines in April they have to submit final designs in March. Tweaking anything fouls up the entire timeline.
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 Demands Prototype iPhone Back
- Thread starter CooKieMoNs7eR
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As I mentioned earlier, to get stock levels up in time for a late June early July launch, they have to start manufacturing in May. To begin manufacturing in May they have to start tooling the production lines in April. To tool the production lines in April they have to submit final designs in March. Tweaking anything fouls up the entire timeline.
legal issues
The legal issues are not not as clear cut as people are stating on the forum for both criminal liabilities and tort liabilities. Quiz, can anyone tell me why?
Hint: Criminal liabilities aside, please think back to your 1L torts and property classes. I think there's a case that can be made for both sides.
The legal issues are not not as clear cut as people are stating on the forum for both criminal liabilities and tort liabilities. Quiz, can anyone tell me why?
Hint: Criminal liabilities aside, please think back to your 1L torts and property classes. I think there's a case that can be made for both sides.
To some of us it isn't about Apple and a toy. We've all been in the position of "whoops, I forgot to lock my car door and someone took that as an invitation to steal my laptop" or something similar. Yeah, you should lock your car door, but the guy who steals your laptop (and the guy who bought it for 1/4 retail from someone on craigslist) both need the proverbial kick in the balls that is jail.
Anyone who is involved in creating anything for a living also isn't thrilled with the precedent of letting people get away with "industrial espionage" by any other name.
I want all of you to mentally delete these images. For all intensive purposes, there are only two models of iPhone that Apple sells at the moment, and from what we actually know(not from those gadget blog scum), there will only be these two phones. Apple doesn't need to update the fastest selling phone of the decade, with iPhone OS 4, you wont need new hardware.
This is not the droids (iphone) your looking for, move alone, move alone.
There is no proof that this is Apple's property. Period.
The letter has as much legal weight as if I wrote a letter saying I owned it.
Nice Question
You're right, but it's worded very similar to most legal letters. It's not a lawsuit, papers served, or a subpoena. It's way before anything like that would happen. Most of these letters begin as follows, "It has come to our attention..." It's standard. I agree that it's on the polite side, in that the writer offers to have it picked up!
Maybe having it picked up would establish that it was moved from the initial location (bar), to a place of business (Gizmodo), in that it could establish "possession" of some kind. But, as much as this bring to mind many legal angles, I would think that if Apple recovered the device, there wouldn't be more legal proceedings.
I have both written, and received Cease and Desist legal letters. None of them have EVER gone past the initial letter! The other party usually does what the letter says, and it's kind of over.
The $5,000 paid for the device is not good legally! But, I would guess that Apple would just want the device back. In fact, Apple STATED in their letter what they wanted...their device back. If, a month later, they start suing people, their initial letter could be used as evidence against further proceedings.
My guess it's:
1. Give the device back
2. Device goes back.
3. End of anything legal between Gizmodo and Apple.
Does Gray have legal grounds against Gizmodo, for releasing his name, especially if he's fired? It's in Gizmodo's best interest to insure that he is NOT terminated. I think that is where the legal damages could be most valid.
I am not trying to take any political stance here, so please don't take it too seriously!
You're right, but it's worded very similar to most legal letters. It's not a lawsuit, papers served, or a subpoena. It's way before anything like that would happen. Most of these letters begin as follows, "It has come to our attention..." It's standard. I agree that it's on the polite side, in that the writer offers to have it picked up!
Maybe having it picked up would establish that it was moved from the initial location (bar), to a place of business (Gizmodo), in that it could establish "possession" of some kind. But, as much as this bring to mind many legal angles, I would think that if Apple recovered the device, there wouldn't be more legal proceedings.
I have both written, and received Cease and Desist legal letters. None of them have EVER gone past the initial letter! The other party usually does what the letter says, and it's kind of over.
The $5,000 paid for the device is not good legally! But, I would guess that Apple would just want the device back. In fact, Apple STATED in their letter what they wanted...their device back. If, a month later, they start suing people, their initial letter could be used as evidence against further proceedings.
My guess it's:
1. Give the device back
2. Device goes back.
3. End of anything legal between Gizmodo and Apple.
Does Gray have legal grounds against Gizmodo, for releasing his name, especially if he's fired? It's in Gizmodo's best interest to insure that he is NOT terminated. I think that is where the legal damages could be most valid.
I am not trying to take any political stance here, so please don't take it too seriously!
If the leaker is still working at Apple, I am pretty sure that the whole thing is staged to get publicity
Ohh yes..
"Jobs:
Dead mr Gray Powell, We want to make some fancy marketing, and now that you work for us (apple) we want you to be the bad guy is this story.
We will intentionally leak a device and blame YOU for the leak, basiclly meaning that you will get a very hard time getting a new job with a possition like this ever again... ok?
And some site like gizmodo might post pictures of you and you will be all over the internet as the guy who leaked a prototype product and everyone will hate you... ok?
Gray Powell:
Sure!
Sounds fun!"
My take
Seems the original finder could have tried harder to return it, but I'm thinking Apple may be just glad to get it back before it fell into the hands of a competitor.
It's a certainty that Apple knew who lost the phone, so they didn't need Gizmodo to tell them. However, it somewhat spoils his ability to get another job entrusted with a super secret prototype.
Seems the original finder could have tried harder to return it, but I'm thinking Apple may be just glad to get it back before it fell into the hands of a competitor.
It's a certainty that Apple knew who lost the phone, so they didn't need Gizmodo to tell them. However, it somewhat spoils his ability to get another job entrusted with a super secret prototype.
Ok good thinking Mark.
To reiterate, you're saying because of diversity of jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1332), there may be a federal court issue in this case. How does federal court differ from state court in terms of civil cases........
That a good question, since Gizmodo is in the business of news, are they in some way protected. After all major newspapers put peoples names all the time so what exactly could be his recourse?
For example NY Times did not release the engineer name.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/technology/companies/20apple.html?ref=business
True
Yes, true! Any changes would ruin any timelines. We trademarked a product (non-tech) a few years ago, and any change we made along the way was catastrophic to our deadlines.
I was thinking about something more cosmetic (slightly more rounded edge here or there), or something that wouldn't affect the internal makeup of the product. I just thought that it would depend on how sensitive Apple is about a design being seen in some form, before it's release. I could see a scenario where someone might go back to the drawing board, just to make the released product be slightly different.
Yes, true! Any changes would ruin any timelines. We trademarked a product (non-tech) a few years ago, and any change we made along the way was catastrophic to our deadlines.
I was thinking about something more cosmetic (slightly more rounded edge here or there), or something that wouldn't affect the internal makeup of the product. I just thought that it would depend on how sensitive Apple is about a design being seen in some form, before it's release. I could see a scenario where someone might go back to the drawing board, just to make the released product be slightly different.
Hyperbole much???
This guy's future isn't "ruined".
He still has whatever degree he had, he still has whatever past work experience he had. He's not "ruined".
In the SF Bay area, he's very much ruined. The tech industry up there follows these sites. Sure, he can move to Los Angeles and try to get a job, but to say his career hasn't been significantly tarnished by Gizmodo is naïvete at its finest.
I believe Apple has been damaged by the actions of Gizmodo. Trade secrets were revealed that otherwise might not have been revealed without Gizmodo's teardown and extensive coverage of the phone. Apple is likely to lose sales because of the early reveal. It will be up to the court to determine how much of that is Gizmodo's fault. Certainly, some of the fault lies with the original person that took the phone.
I think Apple will sue, if for no other reason than to set a precedent and make other websites think twice before revealing trade secrets of a device that is in their possession illegally.
Mark
I think Apple will sue, if for no other reason than to set a precedent and make other websites think twice before revealing trade secrets of a device that is in their possession illegally.
Mark
True. What publication passed? I missed that part.
For all INTENTS and purposes (sorry...pet peeve...please forgive me
)<snip>
Really though, lighten up.
Its just an iPhoneHD. The guy isnt going to be hurting for work. Gizmodo did what it could do to best serve its audience, and Im pretty sure if the opportunity arose MacRumors would be engaged in the same practice.
AMEN!!
Yeah, I left mine in a cab. Whoever found it promptly turned it off after I attempted calling it. But for some reason this situation doesn't bother me. Perhaps because it's Apple's property and not the guys personal property. Apple isn't hurting over this like I was hurt.
You really need to get a clue. Apple's name all over an unreleased device is all the proof they need. A judge wouldn't even deliberate over that argument for a second. Not to mention the IMEI # being registered w/ AT&T on an Apple account.
Go read the article. The letter was sent at the request of Gizmodo based on advice from their lawyers. It's not that it carries legal weight, but it provided Gawker with the documentation they needed to CYA (and to prove to their readers that it's all real
)Every time I look at the picture reminds me of the Zune HD, not saying it is but the look of been less rounded makes me think of it.
http://cdn1.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/microsoft-zune-hd-11-r3media-527x500.jpg
I think you stated a very reasonable point. Tort law is based on the theory of no harm no foul. Since Apple got its device back, the only issue left to litigate is whether Apple should receive damages for an early and unintended release of its product. This issue can cut both ways, but I believe its probably not worth litigating unless solely to punish Gawker with an additional legal burden.
Wow... I didn't think this would turn into such a big thing. First of all, i have to eat my words and say it seems official. Secondly, I think the device looks a lot better in the pics Gizmodo took. For some reason the blurry ones made it seem more of a "slapped-together-in-someones-basement" sort of job. I likely wont be able to afford a new iPhone this time around as I am a university student, but I'm glad to see Apple has stepped up their hardware game (if this is the real deal).
I also apologize for a comment I made about being informational in another forum about this phone. guess I should eat some humble pie.
Lastly, do any of you think this will affect the release date? Or will Apple just pretend it didnt happen?
I also apologize for a comment I made about being informational in another forum about this phone. guess I should eat some humble pie.
Lastly, do any of you think this will affect the release date? Or will Apple just pretend it didnt happen?
Ok good thinking Mark.
To reiterate, you're saying because of diversity of jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1332), there may be a federal court issue in this case. How does federal court differ from state court in terms of civil cases........
18, U.S.C., 2314, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to transport, or to cause to be transported in interstate commerce, stolen property having a value of $5,000 or more.
There can be little doubt that a prototype iPhone would have a value of $5,000 or more. Particularly since that's how much Gizmodo paid!
They should have paid the guy $4,999!
Gizmodo KNEW the iPhone prototype didn't belong to the guy they purchased it from. They therefore transported stolen property (or caused it to be transported) across state lines.
Mark
Im sure someone already said this but im not reading 11 pages of posts. This thing is fugly, and i really hope the final product won't look like that, its horrific. i think its really funny how when everyone thought it was fake it was the ugliest thing in the world, but somehow now everyone loves it. If i recall, the design was called "totally un-apple". If Apple is going to let prototype iphones out of headquarters for testing, i highly highly doubt they would let it look like the final product. steve is probably having a field day right now, because he now knows fanboys will buy the next iphone no matter how ugly it is. wow, apple doesnt even need nice designs anymore to be popular, thats bad. and if this is the final product, for god's sake they couldnt make it at least a little bit shorter?? come on steve, cut the chin.
Overall, it feels like Apple is pretty confident. I think they know their competitors have no way to offer something that is close to resembling it before it is released. And that is before factoring the software side in. With the success of the iPad, I bet Apple is feeling pretty good right now. Maybe even good enough to forgive Gizmodo this time... I take that back... As soon as Apple gets the phone back they are going to crush Gizmodo! Let the saga continue... Apple has had so much to announce lately that even a leak this big doesn't really steal their thunder.
I wonder if there will be jokes along these lines from Steve or Tim at the call later.