The document seems to indicate otherwise. But let's let the justice system work it out.
He's right about one thing...orange jumpsuits are totally out this season.
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.
Details of Lost Next-Generation iPhone Saga Revealed in Search Warrant Affidavit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He's right about one thing...orange jumpsuits are totally out this season.
Great and who is going to pay if the culprits go to jail..... Yup the taxpayers.
Oh we should stop enforcing the law then,too damn expensive.
This is going to be funny when they make the movie
John is not really big media. He has a show on comedy central. Your theory would make most conspiracy theorists blush.
I am sure that is what Hogan is thinking about. I think he has done enough damage to his own reputation to spend a lot of time trying to sue others for it. His own statements indicate he committed a crime under California law, he would have to pay cash up front to get a lawyer to take on a libel case.
Maybe she's just not a criminal. For instance, I'm not a criminal and, because I have no common interest with criminals and prefer not to be a victim of their crime, I snitch on them as often as possible.
"Don't snitch" is propaganda created by criminals for the benefit of criminals. If you buy into it, you're either a criminal or a sucker.
Meanwhile, the black eye that all of this is giving Apple in the public perception has turned to that nice purple that good bruises have. As more details come out, the greens and yellows of serious bruises will start to appear.
Thanks to Jon Stewart, a large number of people think that "Apple broke down someone's door because of a lost phone".
Thank you, Jon Stewart.
Gray is innocent
Mistakes happen. Gray or any other engineer field testing the iphone could, God forbid, get in a car accident and get unconscious, for example, and have their iphone right there for someone to snatch it... That does not mean that anyone who sees it can take it or sell it.
Sucks for them that did take it.
Mistakes happen. Gray or any other engineer field testing the iphone could, God forbid, get in a car accident and get unconscious, for example, and have their iphone right there for someone to snatch it... That does not mean that anyone who sees it can take it or sell it.
Sucks for them that did take it.
Exactly. I GUARANTEE you that Apple would have paid him, likely a similar amount that Gizmodo paid, to ensure he returned it safely and for him to sign a NDA to make sure he doesn't sell any photos or tell anyone about its features.
Seriously, he would have gotten money out of it by doing the right thing, and Apple would have forced him to keep quiet about it. But now he blew it, the police probably seized any money he might have made from Gizmodo, and now he has to pay money out of his own pocket for legal defense and possibly might even be charged with a felony.
It pays to do the right thing, more than doing the wrong thing.
iPhone competitors
Besides the millions lost of people waiting for the new iphone because of the leaked photos... Now Apple´s main competitor (every other cellphone maker) have had a wide margin of time to get to the drawing board and try to duplicate the new iphones features and styling.
Besides the millions lost of people waiting for the new iphone because of the leaked photos... Now Apple´s main competitor (every other cellphone maker) have had a wide margin of time to get to the drawing board and try to duplicate the new iphones features and styling.
Hogan reportedly said, "Sucks for him. He lost his phone. Shouldn't have lost his phone."
Hogan then turns to roommate hey have you seen my phone? It was just here?
But what else did All these people suspect? That the police wouldn't care they bought stolen goods? Also I don't think this was a payed from just Jason Chen, I understand he makes good money but 8,500 dollars and a bonus if it is released by Apple. Also this guy "Hogan" seems to know a lot about Apple to sell the phone for 8,500.00 but why didn't he shop and tell MSNBC that for 20,000 they can have it. This guy got ripped off you are holding a un-announced never before seen Apple Prototype. Still sounds staged.
You have a good point.
Apple should send devices to test in teams of two enginners. I would still chain the device to their most valuable body members.
The Media Eats Its Own!
Hey, it was the Media that demanded the information be unsealed and unedited.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/05/gizmodo-warrant/*
There is no honor among thieves.
Oh yeah, Jason Shao Chen's date of birth is 02/16/1981 and his drivers license number is CDL B8607050
He and his wife, Dixie Xue, own the townhouse they live in. It is located at 40726 Greystone Terrace in the city of Freemont, in Alameda County CA 94538
Wow, Gizmodo might be on to something, it is fun to reveal secrets!
Many, many personal details of the people involved in that document. They could have at least taken care to redact some of it
Hey, it was the Media that demanded the information be unsealed and unedited.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/05/gizmodo-warrant/*
There is no honor among thieves.
Oh yeah, Jason Shao Chen's date of birth is 02/16/1981 and his drivers license number is CDL B8607050
He and his wife, Dixie Xue, own the townhouse they live in. It is located at 40726 Greystone Terrace in the city of Freemont, in Alameda County CA 94538
Wow, Gizmodo might be on to something, it is fun to reveal secrets!
Since you mentioned, here it goes. Politics aside, most would agree that bush is to dum to know what an iPhone is. Ask SNL folks...
The funny thing with this comment is that Apple's competitors haven't been copying the styling of the existing iPhone models.
Also, no software functionality was revealed as the phone had been remote locked. Steve revealed more in the technology preview event a couple of months ago.
Gizmodo did a piss-poor job in their teardown of the device; their ham-fisted handling apparently damaged the device yet they didn't even bother removing the EMI shielding to unveil what chips were underneath. That's borderline incompetence from an outfit that claims to be "The Gadget Blog."
Finally, none of the hardware components were out of line with the more intelligent predictions.
So you've been reduced to cheering on anti-Apple misinformation. How sad.
Prepare to be disappointed as media coverage increasingly aligns with the facts in this case, which are simply too hilarious to pass up. As Gruber said, the idiots who stole the phone and tried to cover it up are like characters in a Coen brothers film. Pure comedy gold.
No, the moral is if you see an unattended iPhone prototype, assume that Apple is the owner and return it to them without being a greedy douchewad.
Or, on advice of counsel, they did not want to reveal trade secrets by showing the chips.
Note that we only now know that it's an A4 CPU because of the Vietnamese phone.
I think he/she meant why would anyone take a prototype off campus, knowing it may not be the best idea. Thus getting drunk and losing it was the end result after all. And in most likely it should not have been out anyway. That would be my guess considering the high level of security of Apple.
No, I'm cheering someone who is pointing out corporate misbehaviour. Lots of people here are expressing their disappointment with what Apple is doing on this and a number of other fronts - Jon Stewart is just saying the same thing to a larger audience.
Not true. The part number was visible in the gizmodo photos. Doesn't exactly match iPad a4, but very close, so people assumed it was an a4.
If that were the case, then their counsel failed to indicate that their purchase of the prototype unit from Hogan was a violation of California law. Actually, it appears that their counsel failed them numerous times. Plus, note cmaier's comment above.
Plus, they could have lifted the EMI shielding and blacked out the chip identification text in the photos (that's actually the more typical practice).
Let's face it. Occam's Razor would indicate that Gizmodo did not consult with counsel before publishing their findings.