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.
Criminal Investigation of Lost Next-Generation iPhone Spurred by Apple Requests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you trust the clear language of the California Penal Code, which says that any item worth more than $100 must be returned to the owner or turned in to police?
Two choices. Neither was chosen here. Theft was committed. Do not pass Go.
R.E.A.C.T. Some suggest they're doing this in some misguided way for apple. I wonder if they were sitting their waiting for the phone to ring and sprung into action with the chance to do a job.
Arriving at Jason's house noticing he wasn't home they played Paper, Scissors, Rock, to see who would kick the door in.
Arriving at Jason's house noticing he wasn't home they played Paper, Scissors, Rock, to see who would kick the door in.
Frankly, that's a good step. If the seizure was not legal, then the police won't be in any more trouble if they stop to clear up the legal issues. If the seizure WAS legal, then it's not going to hamper the investigation, as the pertinent evidence is the computer itself---which isn't going anywhere.
According to Gizmodo, Steve Jobs while sleep walking gave them then phone, and this is all a mistake. It's true. My cousins friend told me that talks to Woz everyday.
It's getting deep in here. I would like real story and I suspect it is going to take a some legal action to reveal At least something that is non bias..
Google for "theft law in california".
485. One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him
knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who
appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another
person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just
efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is
guilty of theft.
"Appropriates such property to the use of another person not entitled thereto" matches quite precisely what has happened. The finder contacted Apple, but he did not "make reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him" by contacting Apple customer services who didn't have a clue what was happening. You'd need a very, very good lawyer to make this not count as theft.
Gizmodo would be guilty of receiving stolen goods. For that it is necessary that Gizmodo _knew_ that the goods were stolen. But that is quite clearly the case since they know that a random person cannot be legally in possession of a prototype iPhone.
Patents don't come into play. If there are any Apple patents in the iPhone, Apple must have gone to the patent office and registered the patents and everyone and their dog can visit a website and download the contents of those patents. Knowledge about a patent is intentionally open to everyone. Actually _using_ a patent requires a license from the patent holder.
I think the theft is not the major thing. But because the phone was stolen, it was illegal to open it and look inside and discover trade secrets in that way. You have the right to go to the nearest Apple Store, buy an iPhone, take it apart (because it is yours) and post on the Internet what you find. You don't have the right to do that with a stolen phone.
See above: "Just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him". He called AppleCare and said "I've got your iPhone and it doesn't work". AppleCare gets about 100 calls every day that say exactly that: "I've got your iPhone and it doesn't work". How is the person he talked to supposed to know that he is talking about lost property?
My company owns maybe half a dozen iPads, each with a sticker "property of XYZ" on the back. If you called our customer services and said "I've found an iPad, and it has a sticker "property of your company" on the back", they would likely figure out what to do. They would know what you are talking about because we don't sell iPads. If you call AppleCare about an iPhone, they have thousands of people calling about an iPhone. Let me just suggest that it was not in the finder's interest to make himself understood clearly. He may have "contacted" Apple, but he certainly didn't make "just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him". All he needed to do is put the phone in an envelope and send it to Apple.
I'm glad you have the inside info and know what really happened.
Many of us don't trust gizmodo's explanation (we think it was actually stolen) and want to see the results of the criminal investigation before claiming who is at fault.
It's beating a dead horse, I know, but the thing is that under California LAW, even if the item was found, you're REQUIRED to turn it in to the police if it's worth more than $100 and you can't locate the owner[1]. It became stolen once the person who found it sold it to Gizmodo rather than turning it in to the police.
[1] From §2080.1 of the California Civil Code:
2080.1. Delivery to police or sheriff; affidavit; charges
(a) If the owner is unknown or has not claimed the property, the person saving or finding the property shall, if the property is of the value of one hundred dollars ($100) or more, within a reasonable time turn the property over to the police department of the city or city and county, if found therein, or to the sheriff's department of the county if found outside of city limits, and shall make an affidavit, stating when and where he or she found or saved the property, particularly describing it. If the property was saved, the affidavit shall state:
(1) From what and how it was saved.
(2) Whether the owner of the property is known to the affiant.
(3) That the affiant has not secreted, withheld, or disposed of any part of the property.
(b) The police department or the sheriff's department shall notify the owner, if his or her identity is reasonably ascertainable, that it possesses the property and where it may be claimed. The police department or sheriff's department may require payment by the owner of a reasonable charge to defray costs of storage and care of the property.
Apparently a lot of people on here never left their phone anywhere, or left anything behind. Especially after a few drinks.
I guess this only happens to a few of us... and Gary.
I hope you're joking because if you're not, it saddens me that you think that way with your lack of reasoning. If I were to call any company with more than 20 employees and ask "did one of your employees happen to lose xyz" the answer is going to be either "no" or more likely "I don't know". Apple probably has at least 500 people working at that facility.
Actually, no. I have never left a $5,000 top secret prototype phone my company said I'm responsible for in a bar before.
Send Gizmodo
to The Phantom Zone and charge Apple with destroying Hometree. There: solved. Next case.
to The Phantom Zone and charge Apple with destroying Hometree. There: solved. Next case.
Customer service doesn't work like that. Representatives leave memos and a return number with any concerns you have for the company, and you are given a ticket number for your call. Apple most likely denied owning or not owning the device.
Number 1, the prototype was in a case to conceal it. Someone had to break into the case to find out what it really was. Number 2, show me a store where I can go pay $200 and be given a prototype iPhone. I'd gladly go pick one up for fun.
Looks like they found the finder of the iPhone!
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2010/04/26/daily36.html
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2010/04/26/daily36.html
So typical
As is the case with any story about Apple the postings are totally predictable. Those who hate Apple always take the side of the opposing entity, which in this case is Gizmodo. Those who like Apple always see it Apple's way.
And as with any story or report there are always three sides to it, one party's side, the other party's side, and the truth. Point is we don't know what happened. Gizmodo is the one saying the phone was "found". We haven't heard from the guy who (lost it, left it, planted it, had it stolen, whatever). We haven't heard from the guy who (found it, stole it, sold it) either.
It will all come out in the wash someday. That's why the police are investigating it.
As is the case with any story about Apple the postings are totally predictable. Those who hate Apple always take the side of the opposing entity, which in this case is Gizmodo. Those who like Apple always see it Apple's way.
And as with any story or report there are always three sides to it, one party's side, the other party's side, and the truth. Point is we don't know what happened. Gizmodo is the one saying the phone was "found". We haven't heard from the guy who (lost it, left it, planted it, had it stolen, whatever). We haven't heard from the guy who (found it, stole it, sold it) either.
It will all come out in the wash someday. That's why the police are investigating it.
Would you like to know what an honest persons reasonable attempt would be?
If I opened up that 3G case and found that phone inside, I would have driven it over to the Apple campus, asked for someone important and given it back.
If I opened up that 3G case and found that phone inside, I would have driven it over to the Apple campus, asked for someone important and given it back.
I wonder what if anything they'll find on the computers anyway. Jason thought they may be coming and left that message for them on the computer (lawyers email).
I'm just trying to add new comments to the thread. lol.
I'm amazed that some on here think by repeating their views that the other person will change their mind and agree after the 100th post or something.
I'm just trying to add new comments to the thread. lol.
I'm amazed that some on here think by repeating their views that the other person will change their mind and agree after the 100th post or something.