Apple Demands Prototype iPhone Back

[throttlemeister]

They admit to knowing the circumstances under which it was acquired. Those circumstances are theft in the State of California, no matter how you want to sugarcoat it. They paid $5,000 for property they knew was stolen. They committed a crime. Given the dollar amounts, it is a safe assumption the crime is a felony. It actually has nothing at all to do with it being the next generation iPhone. It could be a 3GS and it is still a crime.

Unless the sale happened in CA, no crime has been committed in CA by Gizmodo. So unless the state of NY has similar laws regarding finds, what exactly should they be charged with?

Now, the original finder might possibly be charged with theft and fencing stolen property, but that does not apply to Gizmodo.

 

[twilson]

Ever heard of the First Amendment?

Is that the one that protects your right to free speech from being prevented by the US GOVERNMENT?

 

[cjbryce]

I don't get why Apple is being so nice about the whole thing. Usually something as simple as a picture gets immediate cease & desist letters, yet showing video, picture, and describing features only gets a letter asking for the phone back? That just doesn't add up to me. Either this was a prototype that Apple has given up on and that's why they aren't too worried about it or it's some type of hoax. If it was the real thing it just seems as though Apple would have had these pictures and videos down within the hour.

I dunno if this is a phoney phone or the eventual production model.

Either way, I don't think for a second that this was an accident in any way. Just look at the publicity that Apple has received without spending very much money at all. One of the best marketing tricks for a long time.

This keeps the public interested again, diverts attention from potential problems with the iPad, and even trial markets the look of a possible contender perhaps. Brilliant strategy!

 

[twilson]

However, in this case, the goods are not stolen as the owner did indeed abandon the phone. Proof? Remote wipe. No way of tracing your iPhone. So it means you gave up on it.

That's a bit of a leap, isn't it?

The remote wipe was just to protect the data stored on the device, and nothing else. It certainly doesn't constitute abandonment of the device.

 

[dazzer21]

Genuine?

Is this genuine? As people have previously killed themselves over lost iPhone prototypes, I'd imagine that the LAST thing Apple are going to do is send a nice, polite letter asking for it back, such is the enormity of such a leak. After all, this could end up in the hands of someone at a rival manufacturer...

Cease and desist orders have been sent out by Apple for far less than this, and I'd expect the person currently holding the device to be chopped up and fed to the pigs within seconds of handing it back!!!

 

[kernkraft]

One out of your 3 sentences is correct. (Hint it is not numbered).



Finder keepers is not actually a concept that the laws of the state of Californa recognizes.



They admit to knowing the circumstances under which it was acquired. Those circumstances are theft in the State of California, no matter how you want to sugarcoat it. They paid $5,000 for property they knew was stolen. They committed a crime. Given the dollar amounts, it is a safe assumption the crime is a felony. It actually has nothing at all to do with it being the next generation iPhone. It could be a 3GS and it is still a crime.

You are pretty arrogant about other people's lack of legal knowledge, yet you don't sound convincing either. In fact I KNOW that you cannot be a lawyer.

On the side note, may I ask how you ever got to the assumption that the item was stolen in the first place?

I know nothing about US law in any states, but I spent two years in a British law school and I know that here, there is no theft without "intention to permanently depriving" the item. Case law extends that further, but here there was nothing that would make ANYBODY (or organisation) guilty of theft or being responsible for handling stolen goods in this occasion, I think. I also believe that most courts would agree with me.

If you really want justice, try the 'criminal damage' route, if there is anything to support that at all.

Is this genuine? As people have previously killed themselves over lost iPhone prototypes, I'd imagine that the LAST thing Apple are going to do is send a nice, polite letter asking for it back, such is the enormity of such a leak. After all, this could end up in the hands of someone at a rival manufacturer...

Cease and desist orders have been sent out by Apple for far less than this, and I'd expect the person currently holding the device to be chopped up and fed to the pigs within seconds of handing it back!!!

That was due to the intimidation from one of Apple's Chinese subcontractors/manufacturers. There was no evidence that Apple was responsible for the unacceptable practices.

Although, I can't remember an apology or a gesture of remorse either.

 

[Ed91]

"They're going to see it anyway, so who cares about how they get it?"

Really though, this has spoiled the wait for me. I'm pretty pissed off about the way Giz has gone about this, and I can see Apple souring relations - no event invites to Gizmodo etc.

They could have easily taken pics / vids, given the handset back to Apple, then released "hands-on" review closer / after the announcement of the device, or kept releasing small teasers to sustain hits. What they did was completely blow it. I actually hope Apple finds a way to screw them for this.

 

[ogee]

I know nothing about US law in any states, but I spent two years in a British law school and I know that here, there is no theft without "intention to permanently depriving" the item.

This is what I was thinking.

However, it could be argued that they did have intention to permanently deprive, as it could be reasonably expected that the they (or the original finder) knew it was lost property of Apple and they took no action to return tot he lawful owner.

Whats your opinion?

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Unless the sale happened in CA, no crime has been committed in CA by Gizmodo. So unless the state of NY has similar laws regarding finds, what exactly should they be charged with?

Now, the original finder might possibly be charged with theft and fencing stolen property, but that does not apply to Gizmodo.

WHaaaaaa? Knowingly purchasing stolen merchandise is a crime in all 50 states and Federally too. It's called "recieving stolen merchandise."

Ever heard of the First Amendment?

You might want to study it some time. You'll find it protects citizens from over burdensome government restriction via public law, not privately contracted ones.

 

[Padraig]

Is this genuine? As people have previously killed themselves over lost iPhone prototypes, I'd imagine that the LAST thing Apple are going to do is send a nice, polite letter asking for it back, such is the enormity of such a leak. After all, this could end up in the hands of someone at a rival manufacturer...

Cease and desist orders have been sent out by Apple for far less than this, and I'd expect the person currently holding the device to be chopped up and fed to the pigs within seconds of handing it back!!!

All that Gizmodo required was a formal request for the return of the phone, it wouldn't make any sense for Apple to refuse. As for a C&D order, it's pointless at this stage.

 

[marklin]

lost iphone in a bar????? GoOD marketing Apple, very very good marketing.

 

[tetravus]

I just hope the poor guy still has his job. Normally unintentional lapses like these can be forgiven; but this is Apple after all, and they're not know for being benevolent.

 

[SBlue1]

Don't know why Gizmodo wouldn't return it to it's rightful owner in the first place. Instead they wanted to be all "look what we have". Apple should sue the **** out of them for it too. This is a good example of it. Gizmodo should be held liable as well. That will teach them to this kind of **** again.

sue for what?? you are funny!

they did not steal the phone thing from that dude, he just left it. it's his fault.

and they thought just like everybody here its a fake chinese phone. so why not take a ton of pictures of it and tear it apart?

the did nothing illegal.

 

[slimjim40]

Gizmodo should tell jobs "not to worry"

 

[kernkraft]

WHaaaaaa? Knowingly purchasing stolen merchandise is a crime in all 50 states and Federally too. It's called "recieving stolen merchandise."

Again, is there anything to suggest that the item is stolen? In fact I think everybody's assumption would be that it cannot be stolen. Nobody is that stupid to steal it, THEN sell it to Gizmodo.


But you must have read posts that argued the same way. You read mine, at least. What was that Holiday Inn reference for that you edited out? Was that an insult?

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I just hope the poor guy still has his job. Normally unintentional lapses like these can be forgiven; but this is Apple after all, and they're not know for being benevolent.

Bwaaahahahah. You said "unintentional." Seriously this whole play was as unintentional as Harlem Globetrotters game. Sherlock Holmes this was not.

 

[rhcpsteve]

What I'd like to know is why is it that now that we have the majority of questions about the next iPhone hardware now answered because of this saga, that now everyone seems to be slagging off Gizmodo for the way they handled it? They gave us plenty to drool over, and it's this kind of leaked information that many people check Apple rumours sites daily hoping to see. And now that the cat's out of the bag basically, and everyone's now realised they don't have anything to look forward to apart from actually getting hold of one, they're all jumping on their high horses about ethics - is it stealing? isn't it? well in CA law X states this... I'm never visiting Gizmodo again.. etc..

90% of people stating such things would have given a toss about a day ago - they just wanted to see it!

I'd like to say thanks Gizmodo, this whole saga has been a welcome break from the regular WWDC unveiling !

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Again, is there anything to suggest that the item is stolen? In fact I think everybody's assumption would be that it cannot be stolen. Nobody is that stupid to steal it, THEN sell it to Gizmodo.

Let's review the facts. The iPhone was lost. Someone found it. At that point its not stolen, it's just lost. If the finder had turned it in to the police or Apple then no prob. But that isn't what happened. Someone found it, knew it did not belong to them and then sold it to someone they knew not to be the rightful owner. That is stealing.

Now for Gizmodo's part, it paid for something they knew did not belong to the owner for its own financial and publicity purposes. That is called "receiving stolen merchandise." Maybe this law does not exist in the UK, but it does in the U.S.

Now had Gizmodo been alturistic and bought the phone to return to Apple w/o publicity then that might be a defense, but that is not what happened.

 

[wizzerandchips]

WHaaaaaa? Knowingly purchasing stolen merchandise is a crime in all 50 states and Federally too. It's called "recieving stolen merchandise."



You might want to study it some time. You'll find it protects citizens from over burdensome government restriction via public law, not privately contracted ones.

how the **** can it be stolen if he has asked if its anyones, has witnesess to prove this, waited around to see if the owner would comeback. Apart from that did the guy who had it "STOLEN" go to police to say its been stolen ?. Handling stolen goods applies when the item has been stolen, and not found due to some muppet leaving it behind

 

[wizzerandchips]

news flash.

Gizmodo has just received and invitation by Steve Jobs to conduct the keynote at the WWDC, coz they know more about it than Steve does.

Wait for it. "we have made something amazing" now over to Director of Gizmodo to present the new iphone. in the meantime you can view the beheading of the guy that lost it, on YOUtube, view it from your new IPAD now! under the heading "boy I ****ed up"

 

[askipper]

I don't see why people are so angry at Gizmodo - they may have soured their relationship with Apple and that's hard luck on them.

In regards to how much they made - not as much as you think I would imagine - not based on my personal experience of adwords.

4,000,000 views - say 1% click through rate on ads (and that's been very generous) with 20c for each click through - $8000 tops in ad revenue I would imagine.

Anyway - my 2c worth - I like the new design and I like the new features and look forward to upgrading to the new version as I have an "old" 3G version that is really quite slow at times now - I couldn't bring myself to spend the £150 to upgrade to the 3GS since they brought out the 3.0 software anyway at the time.

Just bring it on already! I've been up for upgrade for months now and am holding off - hopefully they will release for sale immediately after their keynote etc etc

 

[SurfSpirit]

Do you believe in Santa?

Fantastic way for Apple to publicity iPhone, they say it's a prototype, they leek it, and people dream for the new iPhone, until then, Apple gets HUGE publicity and lot of costumers on HOLD, not buying other companies phones because of the lack of front camera, etc, because there's the new iPhone, even if not launched, it's "there", it will cost 1000$ or maybe 1400$ not yet on the market, but people saw the image so it must be soon... People don't buy the other company phones, because iPhone will be great...

Ya sure, but probably it still won't have flash, java, bluetooth sharing or free compact package video/voice client over 3g, because Apple and Mobile Companies just want big profits! That's why contract iphones are just rip off in features! You the client, just will never have control of your own device!

Do you want to make your private app to use on the iphone?
Oh, ya, you have to submit it to Apple first for consideration, talking about Big Brother, that's why 1984 won't be like 1984, they were right, it will be 2010!

 

[Carniphage]

Let's review the facts. The iPhone was lost. Someone found it. At that point its not stolen, it's just lost. If the finder had turned it in to the police or Apple then no prob. But that isn't what happened. Someone found it, knew it did not belong to them and then sold it to someone they knew not to be the rightful owner. That is stealing.

Let's re-review the facts.
The phone was lost. It has the legal status of a lost item.
The finder makes a reasonable attempt at returning it. Even gets a ticket number from Apple.

At that point, he is totally off the hook. It remains lost and is not stolen.

C.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

how the **** can it be stolen if he has asked if its anyones, has witnesess to prove this, waited around to see if the owner would comeback. Apart from that did the guy who had it "STOLEN" go to police to say its been stolen ?. Handling stolen goods applies when the item has been stolen, and not found due to some muppet leaving it behind

Let's re-review the facts.
The phone was lost. It has the legal status of a lost item.
The finder makes a reasonable attempt at returning it. Even gets a ticket number from Apple.

At that point, he is totally off the hook. It remains lost and is not stolen.

C.

Just because you see property lying around and no one claims it does not give you any legal right to pick it up and then claim ownership. That is not how property law works. Legally if you find property you must turn it in to the police and wait x amount of days according to the state statute or local code. If no one has claimed it after that period then, and only then does it become your legal property.

 

[sjo]

Let's review the facts. The iPhone was lost. Someone found it. At that point its not stolen, it's just lost. If the finder had turned it in to the police or Apple then no prob. But that isn't what happened. Someone found it, knew it did not belong to them and then sold it to someone they knew not to be the rightful owner. That is stealing.

The finder did try to return it to Apple. Apple didn't want to know anything about it until the headlines were all over Gizmodo. Only after that they reacted. If Apple is uncapable of getting message from whoever answers the phone there to who should handle the case then shame on Apple. Huge shame on Apple. Not the finder.