Finder of Lost Next-Generation iPhone Identified

[Bilbo63]

The guy clearly had not clue it was confidential.

And the fact that this is "confidential" or not is the same thing by the law. Do you expect someone who finds a 4yo Motorola phone in a bar to go in prison ?

Okay any idiot that asks to be paid $5,000 for a mobile phone KNOWS he has something special. Who the heck are you kidding? Hogan knew freaking well this was no ordinary phone! Like Gizmodo is going to pay $5000 for something that they could go buy at any Apple Store.

I read somewhere that Hogan actually hoped for a bidding war between Engadget and Gizmodo. He apparently was hoping to get $10,000. Poor guy the best he could do was $5000 because Engadget had good lawyers who told them not to touch this with a ten foot pole.

Even if he didn't know it was confidential, he certainly knew that it wasn't HIS. Also, I don't expect or want the kid to go to prison. he does however need to be accountable.

 

[Anuba]

I wonder how many of you would change your tune.
I wonder how many of you would admit changing your tune.

Hard to tell. It's hard to tell in general which posters are more concerned about the law and which ones are simply frothing at the mouth and demanding satisfaction because a frat boy and a geeky blogger gave mighty Apple an atomic wedgie.

Outside the Mac community the tune is radically different, but out there it's hard to tell which ones are neutral and which ones loathe Apple – the latter are of course triumphant over the perceived karmic justice exacted upon Apple's fascistoid secrecy.

There is some crosstalk between the internet lawyers and the brand loyalists/detractors in these two camps as well. Whereas the internet lawyers outside the Mac community approach it in a more controlled manner, going "Yeah, this looks like a case of theft I'm afraid. The actions taken by Apple and the authorities are all in order", the internet lawyers in the Machead camp have to restrain themselves (some to no avail) from going "This THIEF is going to FRY for the HEINOUS crime he committed, he is rotten to the BONE and so is Gawker and frankly everyone who opposes me."

Is there an element of hypocrisy? Duhhhhhh yes, because I cannot believe that even the most law obiding would get this worked up every time a phone is found and not returned, it's probably happened 50 times in the US alone while I've been writing this. An outsider reading these comments would think that a gruesome murder has been committed. Is it just me or do Americans get more worked up over property-related crimes than child abuse, rape and murder? Is it some old settler DNA rearing its ugly head in a "shoot'n' trespassers" type of way?

 

[glitch44]

Imagine this.

One of Microsoft's prototypes goes missing. They track it to someones home and then send "representatives" over to ask to do a search in order to retrieve.

I wonder how many of you would change your tune.
I wonder how many of you would admit changing your tune.

You're making far too many assumptions. First of all, the only one who claims Apple stopped by and asked to do a search is the roommate of they guy who is being scrutinized by the police. Not only that, but in a big game "telephone" (no pun intended) the Apple guys may have been misunderstood by the roommate or the roommate may have been misunderstood by the reporter. The apple engineers could've said any of these statements:

"We need to talk. Can we come in?"
"We were wondering if we could retrieve the phone?"
"May we come in and wait for your roommate to return?"

And suddenly those statements become "Apple sent a team over to search my place!"

 

[marcfogel]

You're making far too many assumptions. First of all, the only one who claims Apple stopped by and asked to do a search is the roommate of they guy who is being scrutinized by the police. Not only that, but in a big game "telephone" (no pun intended) the Apple guys may have been misunderstood by the roommate or the roommate may have been misunderstood by the reporter. The apple engineers could've said any of these statements:

"We need to talk. Can we come in?"
"We were wondering if we could retrieve the phone?"
"May we come in and wait for your roommate to return?"

And suddenly those statements become "Apple sent a team over to search my place!"

Agreed. Time will tell though!

 

[iigsie]

Thief is a strong word, and should be taken as such.

Mistake, poor judgement, brain fart ok. Thief-no.

Thief by definition. I don't think he's stupid, but calling Apple's tech support certainly is.

I still find his side of the story a bit hard to believe - a trendy looking 21 year old doesn't know when he's not got a current iPhone in his hands? Oh come on!

Certainly he shouldn't go to jail, maybe a fine and some community service or whatever the US calls it.

 

[Penguissimo]

Where did you see that there were a name on the iPhone ?

If you could point me to the article, because I don't remember seeing that there was the name of the engineer somewhere on the phone.

All of the reporting on this—including the original Gizmodo article—has indicated that Hogan checked Facebook on the phone before it was wiped, which is how Gizmodo got Powell's name.

 

[pdjudd]

Agreed. Time will tell though!

Right, but until we have improved evidence that contradicts prior sources we should not be using hyperbolic statements that nobody can back up with facts. Lets keep using the descriptions that citable sources like the OP use instead of going out and saying that the Apple ghestapo threatened the finders roommate after bursting in demanding to search the place.

Toning down the rhetoric really helps keeping things in perspective and keeps known information accurate. Other wise people are going to start accusing people of things that never happened at all even with contradictory evidence and nobody is going to clear things up in a thread that can explode to 40 pages in a couple of hours.

 

[Anuba]

"We need to talk. Can we come in?"

And if they had been allowed inside, what other next step could there possibly be other than something resembling a search? It's not like they could call "here, phoney phoney" and the iPhone would come running to them. They would have to look around for it somehow. If they had no intention of looking around for it, it wasn't necessary to come inside, they could've done that business at the doorstep (Could you get the phone for us pretty please?)

If they wanted to talk, but weren't allowed inside, then why not do the talking at the door if talking was so important that they took the trouble of going there just for that? Or why not just call, seeing as they must be familiar with these contraptions called phones if they went there to retrieve one?

Instead, they did a 180 because they weren't allowed inside, meaning that not being allowed inside was a dealbreaker. And it wouldn't be a dealbreaker if they only wanted to talk or ask for the phone. I'm quite sure the doorstep wasn't a public square with too many ears around.

 

[cmaier]

Where did you see that there were a name on the iPhone ?

If you could point me to the article, because I don't remember seeing that there was the name of the engineer somewhere on the phone.

How do you think that Gizmodo found the name of the engineer so that they could publish it and ruin his life? It was "on the phone," if only in Facebook (and perhaps other indications as well).

And it wouldn't be a dealbreaker if they only wanted to talk.

The guy they wanted to talk to was not at home. We have only the word of a guy with a penal interest in lying that Apple even asked to come inside.

 

[VenusianSky]

My questions to this matter are:

1) If I recall correctly in the original statement, this person attempted to turn the phone over to the bar and they refused. I never heard of a bar/restaurant that did not have a lost-and-found or would refuse to take a lost item. Is this true about the bar?
2) I never heard of a Police Dept that does not have a lost-and-found. Why was the phone not turned in there?

IMO, not enough effort was made to return the phone to its proper owner.

 

[Cartaphilus]

Where did you see that there were a name on the iPhone ?

If you could point me to the article, because I don't remember seeing that there was the name of the engineer somewhere on the phone.

Anyway, everyone knows the guy won't go to prison. The damage has already been done and Apple will probably be more secretive next time with their prototypes, which is a good thing. This publicity-stunt related to this iPhone is a good thing for Apple, but the guy going to prison because of this won't be a good one though. Trust me, Apple PR guys will tell to drop charges.

Sorry I wasn't clear; I was referring to the hypothetical four year-old Motorola. I'm trying to understand your views. If someone finds a phone on a barstool, and he can easily identify the owner--by looking at an attached business card for example--and if instead of contacting the owner, he goes and sells it for whatever he can get, say $10, what do you say should happen to him, at a maximum. Assume he has a rap sheet as long as your arm; what should the maximum penalty, if any, be for doing this?

 

[tigres]

Thief by definition. I don't think he's stupid, but calling Apple's tech support certainly is.

I still find his side of the story a bit hard to believe - a trendy looking 21 year old doesn't know when he's not got a current iPhone in his hands? Oh come on!

Certainly he shouldn't go to jail, maybe a fine and some community service or whatever the US calls it.

Yeah, that post of mine really got some peeps flustered To further clarify, (and not changing position), I do not condone at all what he is ACCUSED/RUMORED to have done.

Be that as it may, this story is an unfolding one. We all know that things on the surface are not always what they seem. I just think throwing him in front of the firing squad may be.. well a bit premature.

Funny note to self: Not too long ago; many (including myself) were salivating on this so called "strategic leak" of 's new precious- look back at the posts. I personally never believed it to be Apples intent. Anyway, it went from leak to paying, to who done it, to put him in jail... blah blah....

Honestly, nobody can say who did what, when, how, why or for whom with 100% certainty; so try as we might it's just hearsay- nothing more. Lastly, Gizmodo's article tells one side of the story.

He said/She said, He did/He didn't

Ever play the telephone game in school?

 

[pdjudd]

My questions to this matter are:

1) If I recall correctly in the original statement, this person attempted to turn the phone over to the bar and they refused. I never heard of a bar/restaurant that did not have a lost-and-found or would refuse to take a lost item. Is this true about the bar?

That's because it never happened. The only person that ever contacted the Hause was Gray Powell. Hogan never contacted anybody related to the owner - an associate allegedly offered to contact Applecare, but we don't know if that ever took place.

 

[karlwig]

Ignorance is no excuse is the eyes of the law.

HAHAHA.

Im sorry, but this reminded me of this good old American series, COPS.

"This criminal is trying to escape!"
*Drives car out on freeway*
"But no matter how hard you try..."
*Cop cars getting closer*
"...you cannot espace..."
*Cops shoot tires, car crashes and some crackhead is wounded*
"... the mighty hand of the LAW."

Cut to commercial, then reprise of events with even faster editing:

"This CRIMINAL thought he could run away"
*Vroooom, lots of fast cuts of car accelerating*
"But the next time he tries to move..."
*PANG PANG PANG, zoom in of pictures of crashing car we already saw"
"... he will be restricted by the iron bars..."
*Louder music, police pulling man out of wreck while 10 others point shotguns at him*
"... of JAIL!!!!"
*Music goes berserk*

WOOOOHOOO HELL YEAH!!!

 

[Anuba]

My questions to this matter are:

1) If I recall correctly in the original statement, this person attempted to turn the phone over to the bar and they refused. I never heard of a bar/restaurant that did not have a lost-and-found or would refuse to take a lost item. Is this true about the bar?

No. His story goes that someone approached him with the phone and said "is this yours?", to which he replied "no" and was told "maybe it's your friend's, better hold on to it then" (his friend was in the bathroom). He did not try to give it to bar personnel.

That's his story, and while possibly biased or even fabricated it's the only first-hand account in circulation for the time being. Dismiss it and we have nothing to discuss except hypotheticals.

2) I never heard of a Police Dept that does not have a lost-and-found. Why was the phone not turned in there?

Nobody but the finder knows why. Maybe he didn't want to, maybe he didn't know (you'd be surprised how many people are completely clueless about such matters, I mean some can't even pinpoint their own country on a world map, why would they know how the law works?)

 

[gnasher729]

I completely agree. This clown TOOK this property (the phone) from someone else's property (the bar). If it was found on his property, that would be a little different, but even then you have a responsibility to turn it back in.

Actually, in California law it doesn't matter whether the phone was lost in a bar or on the street. That's different from other countries; in Germany, a phone dropped somewhere in a bar wouldn't actually be "lost" in a legal sense, it would be legally in the possession of the bar owner, and taking it out of the bar would on its own count as theft. But not in California.

I said it was the "nicer" thing to do. I would have considered that a "nicer" way to get of that jam, if I was Hogan. Whether Apple actually did it to be nice is another story. I am quite sure they likely weren't. He did after all have their stolen property and they were likely pissed.

At that point it wasn't stolen property yet. For all we/Apple knew at that point, Hogan could have been sitting there trying to find a way to return the phone. It's only by selling the phone that Hogan proved he was not trying to return it, which made it theft. And obviously if you found something, the owner actually turns up at your door, and you don't return it right then, that would also be theft.

Apple sent security guards to try to intimidate and retrieve their item. Could you imagine if something happened to these guys while in the house. This was an extremely stupid move on Apple's part.

Apple should have called the police as soon as the item was discovered missing. Why did they wait?

There is plenty of "stink" to go around in this case.

That post is completely lacking of any common sense. First, Apple couldn't really call the police because they didn't know at that point that the phone is stolen. Picking up a lost phone isn't theft, picking up and not returning it _eventually_ becomes theft. So Apple could send anyone around, no need for intimidation. If the owner of a found item knocks at your door, you either return the item, or your actions (picking it up and not returning it) turn it into theft. So there is no need to send security unless you suspect the finder might be violent; you send anyone and if that person doesn't come back with the phone, _then_ you can call the police.

 

[cmaier]

My questions to this matter are:

1) If I recall correctly in the original statement, this person attempted to turn the phone over to the bar and they refused. I never heard of a bar/restaurant that did not have a lost-and-found or would refuse to take a lost item. Is this true about the bar?

Didn't happen.

 

[soundbwoy]

Still not sure how this is causing any monetary damages to Apple at all.

They should be paying this guy for all the publicity that is now going around for what would have been the first anti-climactic iPhone release.

Don't be foolish, Gizmodo just gave all of Apples competitors it's trade secrets of this new upcoming device. How would you feel after working on something ground breaking just to have a bunch of dueche bags tear it apart for everyone to see and copy.

That statement is so ridiculous.

 

[Bytor65]

And if they had been allowed inside, what other next step could there possibly be other than something resembling a search? .

Note that this account is completely sourced from someone "on the inside" as it were:

“Someone came to [the finder's] house and knocked on his door,” the source told Wired.com, speaking on condition of anonymity because the case is under investigation by the police. A roommate answered, but wouldn’t let them in.

Everything that "source" says is a completely one sided series of defenses and trying to paint the seller/middleman as innocent good guys. The source here is either a future defendant or friend of the same.

I have no legal expertise, but I doubt our slacker will end up with anything other than a slap on the wrist.

But IMO he is nothing more than an opportunistic thief. Who took something that wasn't his, perhaps thinking free iPhone to play with and quickly figuring out a higher value was involved, so the hunt started for the best "fence".

There is ZERO innocent behavior here:

Starting with taking it away from the bar in the first place. This alone strikes me as wrong. Some rationalize this one, but to me he is clearly a guy looking to personally profit from someones loss from the beginning.

Next if you can somehow rationalize taking it as doing the right thing. He did not leave contact information. WTF? Any argument about doing the right thing, falls apart here.

He never called the bar, to check if someone was looking for it.

Next he did not return it to either the person who left it, Apple, nor the Police. The Police was an easy one. No excuse at all unless this is someone looking to profit.

Finally there were the calls around to tech media with veiled payout requests.

IMO at the very least he should be fined the amount he profited from his sale of property that didn't belong to him after lifting it and making no honest effort to do the right thing.

 

[Anuba]

Note that this account is completely sourced from someone "on the inside" as it were

Yeah yeah yeah but it's the only account available at the moment. Here's the flowchart:

1. Take the account for what it is and speculate around it. Go to A.

2. Dismiss any and all accounts from biased sources. Go to B.

A. Keep talking.

B. Stop talking, since there's absolutely nothing to talk about – second and third hand accounts from biased sources is the only available information. Should these be dismissed, the only option is to start with a blank page and hypothesize an entirely different story even more fabricated than the accounts will ever be.

 

[Bilbo63]

My questions to this matter are:

1) If I recall correctly in the original statement, this person attempted to turn the phone over to the bar and they refused. I never heard of a bar/restaurant that did not have a lost-and-found or would refuse to take a lost item. Is this true about the bar?
2) I never heard of a Police Dept that does not have a lost-and-found. Why was the phone not turned in there?

IMO, not enough effort was made to return the phone to its proper owner.

According to (if I am not mistaken) John Gruber of daringfireball.com, the staff of the bar have been interviewed. Mr. Hogan did not attempt to leave the phone with them, did not say he found a phone or at the very least leave them his information in case the phone's rightful owner came back looking for it. Which, according the bar staff, the engineer did "franticly".

It's pretty clear that at best Mr. Hogan figured that he found himself an iPhone and planned to keep it. He quickly realized or had someone who knew, point out to him that this was no ordinary iPhone. Now it's really worth something and he tried to parlay it into as much cash as he could.

No reasonable attempts were ever made to a) return the phone to the engineer. b) return the phone to Apple

I'd rather not see Brian Hogan go to jail for being a butt-head, but he now finds himself in a difficult situation of his own making as does Gizmodo.

Oh and Anuba, just because someone disagrees with you, does not mean that their opinions are one-sided.

 

[quik]

Sorry I wasn't clear; I was referring to the hypothetical four year-old Motorola. I'm trying to understand your views. If someone finds a phone on a barstool, and he can easily identify the owner--by looking at an attached business card for example--and if instead of contacting the owner, he goes and sells it for whatever he can get, say $10, what do you say should happen to him, at a maximum. Assume he has a rap sheet as long as your arm; what should the maximum penalty, if any, be for doing this?

I absolutely agree with you if the guy can easily identify the owner, but I'm not sure the guy who found the iPhone could do so.

As for the maximum penalty, I do not live in the United States so I really don't know how your laws apply here. But in Canada, most people won't get anything for this "crime"...maybe a cupple of hours of social work ?

People here steal in retail stores and get in prison for like 24 hours, and get out easily after that.

 

[cmaier]

I absolutely agree with you if the guy can easily identify the owner, but I'm not sure the guy who found the iPhone could do so.

As for the maximum penalty, I do not live in the United States so I really don't know how your laws apply here. But in Canada, most people won't get anything for this "crime"...maybe a cupple of hours of social work ?

People here steal in retail stores and get in prison for like 24 hours, and get out easily after that.

In California this is grand theft due to the value of the phone. It is also misappropriation of trade secrets. Each is subject to up to a year in prison. Additionally, there is likely a conspiracy charge lurking.

As for identifying the guy - they DID! Gizmodo posted his name all over the place. And they said they got it from the facebook app. Based on yesterday's account, the only person to run the facebook app was Hogan. So Hogan knew the name of the guy, and told it to Gizmodo, who then went and published Powell's identity.

 

[Penguissimo]

I absolutely agree with you if the guy can easily identify the owner, but I'm not sure the guy who found the iPhone could do so.

Again, he COULD and DID identify the owner, apparently by opening Facebook when he first found the phone. That's how Gizmodo got Powell's name even though the phone had been wiped long before they got their hands on it.

 

[Cartaphilus]

I absolutely agree with you if the guy can easily identify the owner, but I'm not sure the guy who found the iPhone could do so.

As for the maximum penalty, I do not live in the United States so I really don't know how your laws apply here. But in Canada, most people won't get anything for this "crime"...maybe a cupple of hours of social work ?

People here steal in retail stores and get in prison for like 24 hours, and get out easily after that.

Thanks. I don't think it's all that different here in practice, even though our laws allow for a much higher penalty as a maximum, typically a year in jail. To actually get sentenced to the maximum, though, requires either a pretty horrible prior record, or having discussed the judge's mother and sister during the sentencing hearing.