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.
Circumstances Surrounding Lost Next Gen iPhone Detailed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
feel bad
wow, that's amazing.
i hope he doesn't get fired for that. maybe i'm too nice, but if he has a wife and/or family, that would be such an awful way to have to start looking for a new job.
i hope someone gives him some slack.
wow, that's amazing.
i hope he doesn't get fired for that. maybe i'm too nice, but if he has a wife and/or family, that would be such an awful way to have to start looking for a new job.
i hope someone gives him some slack.
While this could very well be an authentic Apple iphone prototype, I doubt that this is what the final shipping version will look like. For all we know this prototype might be at least 3 months or older and may be far from representing the finished iphone.
I don't find it to surprising that an early prototype for the iphone was let out to roam in the wild. It's not like the iphone is a completely new product like the ipad. Does this guy still have a job. Is this a controlled leak? who knows.
I don't think Apple stands to loose much even if this was a controlled or unintentional leak. All the world has learned is that this may represent what a next generation iphone may look like and it has two cameras. We still know nothing about capabilities of the hardware without it being able to run.
I don't find it to surprising that an early prototype for the iphone was let out to roam in the wild. It's not like the iphone is a completely new product like the ipad. Does this guy still have a job. Is this a controlled leak? who knows.
I don't think Apple stands to loose much even if this was a controlled or unintentional leak. All the world has learned is that this may represent what a next generation iphone may look like and it has two cameras. We still know nothing about capabilities of the hardware without it being able to run.
that's the key question
If the guy, for some reason (angry at the company he works for, angry at a boss who doesn't respect him) left the phone and shared in the money paid for a website to see it, then it's a big deal. If he really did just leave it, and someone found it, it gets very sticky about if there is a crime and what crimes occurred. It's pretty gray and therefore perfect for a lawsuit.
If the guy, for some reason (angry at the company he works for, angry at a boss who doesn't respect him) left the phone and shared in the money paid for a website to see it, then it's a big deal. If he really did just leave it, and someone found it, it gets very sticky about if there is a crime and what crimes occurred. It's pretty gray and therefore perfect for a lawsuit.
What right did the dude who found it have to sell it? It's technically Apple's property. Apple probably could sue that dude pretty badly.
even if they were shady, the author could have taken a few photos, handed it back in to apple anonymously or leave it at the bar, and a couple of days later sell the photos on. you'd probably be relatively clean legally (although you'd be right to be very frightened about the cold hand of apple legal reaching in your direction).
this is just all really dodgy.
Oh boy more Apple employees, like we don't have enough of them here.
are you as well?
Depends on the country I guess, here in the States your going to need the millions just to keep your ass out of jail. Prosecutor love something like that, gives them big browny points with the voters.
Great way to get your Judge career started. And Home Land Security, oh what a orwell name would just love you for sure.
The law disagrees with you. This was not lost; it was "mislaid." Since we can gather that he set the iPhone down, and it didn't fall out of his pocket accidentally, he is still entitled to it. By law, the iPhone should have been turned in to the bar owner who has to keep it for a certain amount of time, at which time it is awarded to the owner of the establishment.
At no point does the law provide property rights to anyone in the bar other than the owner in this situation, meaning the iPhone was stolen, and Gizmodo intentionally purchased stolen goods.
It's completely illegal, and even if it weren't, completely unethical.
i've seen prototypes... and that thing doesn't look like a prototype to me.
if it wasn't purposefull then I feel bad for him and hope apple doesn't fire him b/c of it. At least its getting good press
what happened to that new feature in 3.0? FindMyPhone, yes Apple did set this up they would have got to that phone so fast it would make the guy who found it head spin. Yes this is BS
please remove the engineers name. That is not right of you to help oust him in public. It's bad journalism and unprofessional.
I think Steve should do a brief comedy bit at WWDC using this guy in it, to release the iPhone 4G, to show he has as much forgiveness as the SEC.
This just goes to show remote wipe does not solve the most critical problems. It is a futile grope to solve an already critical problem.
Rocketman
Prototypes need the "Mission: Impossible" device.
This just goes to show remote wipe does not solve the most critical problems. It is a futile grope to solve an already critical problem.
Rocketman
Prototypes need the "Mission: Impossible" device.
Actually, the guy who found it is the one who has the most to fear, and has not been named, for obvious reasons.
...which you're not allowed to do. You have a legal duty to return it to the owner if they ask for it back, and in some cases with lost property, you also have a legal duty in California to attempt to return it to the owner. Selling mislaid property is conversion, which is indeed stealing.
You can sell property that you've found only once you become its lawful owner (which takes time beyond the occurrence of certain events, depending on the type of property it is). If you sell before that point, you are civilly liable for damages.
That's not really accurate. "Finders, keepers" is not the law in California (or anywhere else in the US).
Gizmodo has no choice but to return the device to Apple if they demand it back, and Apple could easily have cause for legal action depending on the circumstances of the sale.
If you actually read the Gizmodo article you would know that the person who found it tried calling Apple and no one there took him seriously.
Even if true, abandoned property must be turned over to the police. If not claimed it can become the property of the finder. However that usually a 6 month wait. Until then the item was not his property and his sale of it was illegal.
One more comment
The more I think about this, and the comments I'm reading, this whole thing is like Roswell.
It's like an alien spacecraft crash, with alien autopsies.
If we found an alien, we'd dissect it and put it up on YouTube!
The more I think about this, and the comments I'm reading, this whole thing is like Roswell.
It's like an alien spacecraft crash, with alien autopsies.
If we found an alien, we'd dissect it and put it up on YouTube!
This isn't about a stolen phone. This is about the finder and Gizmodo knowingly selling and buying a piece of proprietary property, then exposing it on the internet. It is clearly a violation of the economic espionage act I posted previously. Gizmodo admits to guilt simply by posting it as Apple's secret property. It's not simple theft. Thieves don't usually get ten years for stealing a cell phone. So, ask yourself, given the law I mentioned and Apple's immense power, why did this ever get to the web? Its stinks of conspiracy. Gizmodo is in on it. Take a look at their website and the material they publish from these tech companies. Its just like the National Inquirer or US magazine. In those cases, celebrities need PR to stay relevant. Many of the articles you see in those rags are generated by the PR teams the celebrities hire. Do you really think Pamela and Tommy couldn't stop the open selling of their sex tape? They made millions both directly and indirectly from its distribution. Lawyers can stop anything from happening just by asking a judge for a little time. If Apple does nothing to Gizmodo, then we have our answer.
That's some ridiculous justification going on there. If someone from Citibank loses their phone, would he be calling up Citibank's head office and going through all the departments to find the owner? Ridiculous. Just hand it in to the staff at the bar where it was left and the owner will retrieve it.
The reason he's calling Apple head office is because he knows how valuable the thing was. My guess he was looking for a reward. Failing to get one, he justifies his greed further - ie, someone else would have just sold the stolen property anyway, so I thought I'd do it first.
This side of 'news' is just sad. There is no reason to name the employee, just because you have the info. Likewise, the means by which Gizmodo came to have this info is shady at best. Wouldn't it have been better to just pass on the story in favor of being honest?
I hope they get nailed for this.
I hope they get nailed for this.