Uh huh. I've wasted more hours of my time reading the facts...
Please note the title of my post.
I'm buying Apple's story about as much as I'm buying Gizmodo's
Funny how the facts keep changing...The courts will decided the alleged stories.
ML
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
Uh huh. I've wasted more hours of my time reading the facts...
Please note the title of my post.
I'm buying Apple's story about as much as I'm buying Gizmodo's
Funny how the facts keep changing...The courts will decided the alleged stories.
ML
It has never been part of the law. If I come to your house and take your stuff, do I now own 90% of it?
Seriously this whole issue has been discussed over and over and over again here so there are lots of strong relevant threads with a ton of information on it. I suggest checking them out. You will certainly be more enlightened on the core issues if you do.
I will bottom line it for you since you seem to be unclear.
If you find someone else's property you don't just get to keep it. That is stealing.
Uh huh. I've wasted more hours of my time reading the facts...
Please note the title of my post.
I'm buying Apple's story about as much as I'm buying Gizmodo's
The courts will decided the alleged stories.
ML
Apple hasn't said anything about the facts.
Just going by Gizmodo's own reported facts we know everyone involved is guilty of crimes.
By your statements, you clearly are ignorant of the issues at hand here.
Ah, yes... My mistake
Now, will Gizmodo take this to civil? Especially if they lose?
ML
Here's a dime; go call your mother and tell her you will never be a lawyer.
Exactly. Remember the iPhone thief lives about 20 minutes from Apple headquaters.
Ah, yes... My mistake
Now, will Gizmodo take this to civil? Especially if they lose?
ML
Please stop posting.
Gismodo is alleged to have violated several criminal statutes. This crime let Apple's competition know for certain what features the next iPhone 4G will and will have two months ahead of Apple's planned announcement. That means that the competition will have their products to compete with the 4G two months earlier than they would have. If that cost Apple even one percent of iPhone sales for those two months, that would be something like $10M in lost sales.
The police and DA realize that the press will scrutinize their every action on this case. They also realize that the Silicon Valley is full of people who appreciate the value of intellectual property. The police and DA must pursue intellectual property crimes if they want the continued support of their constituents.
The police and DA realize that the press will scrutinize their every action on this case. They also realize that the Silicon Valley is full of people who appreciate the value of intellectual property. The police and DA must pursue intellectual property crimes if they want the continued support of their constituents.
Hahahahahahaha.
Someone stole something from you and the police goes after you, and not the theif? What are you smoking?
Gizmodo has no interest in being sued by Apple. If their employees are guilty of criminal conversion and conspiracy, that will only bolster Apple's civil case. The damages could run into the tens of millions.Ah, yes... My mistake
Now, will Gizmodo take this to civil? Especially if they lose?
The only upside is that Gawker would have to go out of business and Gizmodo would no longer be polluting the internet with its brand of "journalism."
There's really no way this ends well for Gizmodo or its employees. Just ask a little company called Psystar.
That is incorrect. There are two separate laws that apply here, one criminal, the other civil. The criminal law requires a finder of lost property to try to return it, and says nothing about when or if the finder can acquire ownership of the property. The civil statute outlines a process whereby a finder may take the goods to the police department, file papers, and may eventually be given ownership of the property if the true owner can not be found.
Incidentally, the notion that the owner or lessee of real estate where property is lost has special rights, including, eventually, the right to own it if the owner can't be found, is part of the continental civil law which applies in most of Europe among other places, but it is not a part of the law of California.
Millions will be sold
I think Apple will have a very difficult time claiming they were harmed when they will likely sell millions of new model iPhones in the first few weeks after release.
If some people at Apple were telling Steve Jobs to "let it go" they obviously thought the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle, and a lawsuit would not gain them money. There was loss of secrecy that gave a heads up to competitors - and Apple spends money retaining that secrecy. However, unless you signed something to that effect, you are under no legal obligation to keep it secret. I think the Steve Jobs' anger is the big driver, though. They dropped the ball and Gizmodo picked it up and waved it to the crowd showing they recovered it.
This is a very interesting case and will test the law, no doubt.
I think Apple will have a very difficult time claiming they were harmed when they will likely sell millions of new model iPhones in the first few weeks after release.
If some people at Apple were telling Steve Jobs to "let it go" they obviously thought the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle, and a lawsuit would not gain them money. There was loss of secrecy that gave a heads up to competitors - and Apple spends money retaining that secrecy. However, unless you signed something to that effect, you are under no legal obligation to keep it secret. I think the Steve Jobs' anger is the big driver, though. They dropped the ball and Gizmodo picked it up and waved it to the crowd showing they recovered it.
This is a very interesting case and will test the law, no doubt.
There are sure a lot of morons on this forum. Whether he found it or slipped it out of his backpack, once he sold it it is a crime. Wasn't his to sell. And wasn't Giz's to buy. Too many immature people with no sense of right and wrong who are like the guy who sold the phone, who think that daddy will bail them out for their mistakes. Geez, people. There's right and wrong. Pretty simple. The fact that the kid is a young punk and Apple is a multi-billion dollar company has zilch to do with it. He knew exactly what he was doing and thought he was smart enough that nothing would happen. The roommate who called the police showed her intelligence and maturity.
Wheres the Gizmodo team... can't see them updating their website reflecting this story
Because they are under a criminal investigation, they can no longer post any more information. But surely they will post links to other articles written about it though.
Did anybody else find it sort of weird that Steve brought that up when I believe the question asked was something along the lines of where will Apple be in 5 or 10 years? Steve brought up the Gizmodo thing again. Seemed like a somewhat disjointed answer given the question.
Seemed he should have left it out at that point and just answered the question.
That is STILL in DEBATE. Unless you have undeniable proof stop speculating.
If you had stolen it would you say "yes I took it out of his bag" or "Someone found it on the floor and passed it to me"?
It will be very, very easy for Apple to show actual harm that resulted from this criminal enterprise.
Considering how much has already been spent and how this police force is just specially only for that area and does not care if this happen in any other part of california, they have no recourse, money is tight so they have to show there is a good reason for having and wasting all this money.
I did not say journalists. Wink wink.
In this matter though, most if not all articles linked by Giz is from legit publications.