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.
Authorities Begin Evidence Examination in Gizmodo iPhone Case
- Thread starter Mark Booth
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"We will sue anyone who tries to figure out what we're up to" doesn't really sound like a proper core valueeven if Apple has every right to do that.
How does this apply to this situation? Apple is going after someone who broke the law. These were some very serious laws broken too. Not just legally but morally as well. Buying a stolen prototype iphone, using extortion against Apple, and theft of the iphone. Those are the 3 main allegations made against the person who found the phone and gizmodo.
never was
Just that it's a possibility
You're obligated to make a reasonable attempt at returning it without damaging it or gaining from possessing it.
Doesn't matter as far as the crimes go. It might have some sway in a civil case.
Gizmodo heard enough of the story to know that it could be considered stolen goods if they paid for access/possession and they did it anyway. Maybe they didn't know the laws, but that isn't a defense in criminal court.
I was trying to be nice,but yea.
I gave up on nice about... Oh, half a second after giz named the guy who lost it for no reason whatsoever. And went into full string em up mode when the blackmail letter came to light. That and the depressing number of people that see nothing wrong with selling something that's not yours and destroying evidence.
It helps to temper your depression if you remember that many of the people posting in these forums might be 7-12 years old. You know, the "finders keepers, losers weepers" believers.
Mark
What I find most amusing is Gizmodo's stance that they employ journalists. Nobody on Gawker's staff is a journalist, nor should they refer to themselves as such.
The police would be remiss in their duty not to, but you can bet Gizmodo's lawyers WILL subpoena such records, if they exist. They'd be dumb not to attempt to grab information from Apple.
Sure, it's a well known fact; then it should also be well known that Apple safe guards this critically sensitive information how? Well, not so much.
Which information out there? They remotely disabled the phone, they should at least have been able to, I don't know, call it, text it, lock it with a message "return for fabulous prizes", and perhaps maybe, track it. Calling it would've been the smart thing to do.
ML
We should also let them know that stepping on a crack won't break their mother's back. Spare them years of anxiety.
They won't subpoena for any records because there is no legal standing to do so.
Really this is a moot point because its not apples responsibility to get the phone back. The person who found it is obligated by law to attempt to give it back and he didnt. Based on what we know, the person who found the phone wouldnt have returned it to Apple whether they asked for it or not. And trying to find a phone that has been stolen is not as easy as hitting a button at Apple HQ and proof they see where in the world it is. You are basing your opinions on t.v. shows, the real world and technology does not work like this.
This.
To refer to these gossipmongers and "bloggers" as journalists is to do a disservice to a proud professional tradition.
Throw the book at the hacks.
Yes is is depressing.Right and wrong are now defined on the fly depending on how you feel at the moment with too many people.
One recognition from a reasonable person is enough for meWell done!!!
I admire your effort,but I'm not sure you'll be comprehended!
The first sentence of paragraph one, conflicts with the "speculation" of the first sentence of paragraph 2, stating that I believe that this is not corporate espionage. I suppose I should have said "presumptions", but then it would be presumptuous of me to assume they are speculative in the first place. So instead, I'll digress and thank you for taking the time to proof of concept my early morning ramblings.
In response to another posters comment of: "So because there are murderers, let's forget about the thieves?"
No way, but I sure hope that resources are being allocated appropriately to the severity of the crimes. 2 months worth of someones time over a redesigned phone is, well a lot of time and resources. Dare we never ask this same question to parents of a missing child, or a family with a murdered son or daughter.
Steve Jobs has a right to be very pissed, and I don't blame him for wanting to nail their bodily parts to a board if found guilty. I also saw the videos Chen posted and they were deplorable. But I honestly didn't give a damn about the iPhone being shown because nobody really knew for sure if it was or was not an iPhone, with all of the knock-offs these days. I "assumed" it could be authentic, but didn't care either way to be honest.
I'm just saying that it's for the courts to decide. I have to admit, it really is scary reading the posts here at times, you'd think that people were already convicted without due process- I find this about as disturbing as the level of precedence given to a lost "or" stolen re-designed iPhone.
Interesting thing that probably should occur: during the discovery phase, Apple might find themselves having their records scoured as well...
Imagine for a moment that they subpoena Steve's phone records, emails, and such... then they have one of these Masters looking for information about the prototype phone... You can betcha that Gizmodo's lawyers are going to go after Apple as well...
What if they find that Steve knew full well that his employee was wandering in "the wild" with this secret prototype, in fact, Steve authorizes people to do this... this employee most certainly is going to be a witness (bet he's being coached right now), and he relates that he was drunk off his ass and honestly has no idea whatsoever what he was doing with the very secret phone that night (the speculation that Steve is now trying to discredit FINDING the phone as "could have been taken from his bag" is ... smoke and mirros)...
So. Guy "finds" the phone. That's going to be his story, and he even tries to return it according to the stories. Did Employee or Apple attempt to use location services to get it back? Did E/A attempt to call phone or do ANYTHING positive to get the phone back?
Now, Guy could have tried a bit harder, but according to the stories, he had the phone for OVER 3 weeks, before Gizmodo got wind of it. That's a fair bit of time for Apple to have tried to locate it. By that point it had been remotely torched, so it's pretty much an unfriendly brick. Most of us have lives, and wouldn't be trying hard to find the owner. Apple certainly didn't seem too concerned from what we've heard.
Then Gizmodo gets their mitts on it. Paying for it? Er, they REALLY should have kept that on the down-low, but ultimately, that's how news hounds get their data - they pay for it. Perhaps they even suggested they'd find the owner and give it back
Then it gets funky ;> Then the Apple Secret Police go door to door. The Rapid Response task force has as a board member ... APPLE - yay! Conflict of interest much? Nahhhhhhhhhh.
So, I think we're just going to have to wait until Apple^H^H^H^H^HCourts decide...
Re: "finders keepers" and "possession is 9/10ths of the law" - doesn't this come down to us from common law practices? if one makes a reasonable attempt to return goods and find owners, after some (usually long) default period, the property is no longer theirs, but yours. as well, during the period, reasonable (but not extraordinary) care must be taken to keep the property in good shape and usually any costs associated with this must be paid by the owner upon claim... unless the costs are too high, and then there's default conversion. something like that - i only play a lawyer on court tv
ML
I am not sure you could have got more facts wrong about this case if you intentionally tried.
Edumacate yourself. There are hundreds of pages of discussion on this topic here covering it from all angles. Spend a couple days reading it. Be your own special master!
Better than being the Paul Pierce of the digital world, crying and needing to be carried out in a wheelchair
Apple will be called as witness saying they had stolen property. They are now party (victim even)... Though there is concern of bias, possibly even conspiracy, and ill will... One email from Steve saying "I don't care if the idiot lost it, we'll say it's stolen, I hate Gizmodo, get them!"
We shall see...
ML
The blame the victim angle rarely works,and that's just what you are advocating.
"Hell!Dressed like that,she was asking to get raped!"
Wow, no. Just: no.
Apple isn't a party to the criminal case.
What you're speculating about might take place in a civil suit. But even then the judge would limit the scope of the inquiry to the damages Apple suffered due to Gawker Media's alleged criminal conduct.
This implies that Apple is somehow able to go above the law, which numerous people who are actually following this story can tell you is not happening.