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.
Finder of Lost Next-Generation iPhone Identified
- Thread starter sravana
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Basic human questions:
Did you buy this with your own money, create it with your own hands, or receive it as a gift from someone else?
Yes: it's yours. No: it's not yours.
What can you do with things that aren't yours?
A) Keep them and use them for as long as you have permission from the owner (loaned items, for example)? YES!
B) if you don't have permission from the owner, or that permission has expired or the terms of the loan exceeded, you need to attempt to return it. YES!
C) Sell them to other people for cash? NO!
If you find a phone, wallet, coat, sunglasses, or anything else in a restaurant, club, park, or anyplace else, what should you do?
A) check it out for info identifying the owner, and use that info to attempt to contact them directly, letting you know you've found their stuff, and what you've done with it? YES!
B) give it to the people who run the place you found it, because removing it from there severs the link that allows the owner to find it, and taking it away looks like you're stealing it? YES!
C) Taking it home, and selling it to a media outlet, because it's cool and interesting? NO!
See where I'm going with this? This guy is going to have a hard time convincing anyone that he did something reasonable and normal when you find a lost object. Taking it home, and thus to a place where the owner has ZERO chance of re-connecting with it, is not OK. He seems to have found the owner's identity quickly via the facebook app, but certainly didn't, say, send him a Facebook message, and tell him he had his phone, where it was, and he could pick it up later in the day, or whatever.
Instead, he sold it (took money, transferred possession, no agreement to return it later seems to have been made, from what's been made public), and pocketed the cash.
When you have something that's not yours, you take it away from the place you found it, and sell it for cash, that looks a HELL of a lot like theft. I think everyone over the age of about 7 gets that.
Did you buy this with your own money, create it with your own hands, or receive it as a gift from someone else?
Yes: it's yours. No: it's not yours.
What can you do with things that aren't yours?
A) Keep them and use them for as long as you have permission from the owner (loaned items, for example)? YES!
B) if you don't have permission from the owner, or that permission has expired or the terms of the loan exceeded, you need to attempt to return it. YES!
C) Sell them to other people for cash? NO!
If you find a phone, wallet, coat, sunglasses, or anything else in a restaurant, club, park, or anyplace else, what should you do?
A) check it out for info identifying the owner, and use that info to attempt to contact them directly, letting you know you've found their stuff, and what you've done with it? YES!
B) give it to the people who run the place you found it, because removing it from there severs the link that allows the owner to find it, and taking it away looks like you're stealing it? YES!
C) Taking it home, and selling it to a media outlet, because it's cool and interesting? NO!
See where I'm going with this? This guy is going to have a hard time convincing anyone that he did something reasonable and normal when you find a lost object. Taking it home, and thus to a place where the owner has ZERO chance of re-connecting with it, is not OK. He seems to have found the owner's identity quickly via the facebook app, but certainly didn't, say, send him a Facebook message, and tell him he had his phone, where it was, and he could pick it up later in the day, or whatever.
Instead, he sold it (took money, transferred possession, no agreement to return it later seems to have been made, from what's been made public), and pocketed the cash.
When you have something that's not yours, you take it away from the place you found it, and sell it for cash, that looks a HELL of a lot like theft. I think everyone over the age of about 7 gets that.
Ever hear the urban legend of the Toothbrush Bandits? Yeah, that's what Gizmodo did to Apple.
Totally. You shouldn't be responsible for your illegal actions until you're at least, oh, I dunno, 35?
And let anyone live to tell the tale...
ATTENTION LEGAL TEAM: initiate the Oopsie Defense!
Please address my real point instead of hiding behind more name calling, if you can. But I imagine you can't -- all you can do is try to minimize the fact that a crime was committed by.. blaming the guy who's phone was taken.
Blaming the victim is the argument someone makes when they really have no way to justify the crime that occurred -- no matter the nature of said crime -- violent, theft, or otherwise.
I'll be happy to respond if you contribute something substantive... but I won't be holding my breath. Have fun with more personal attacks, though -- it's totally making everybody think you're right.
I'm not so sure about that. In order of 'bitchability', I would place them as follows:
1) Apple's men in black conducting house searches
2) The REACT team kicking down Chen's door and seizing equipment
3) Two cops knocking on Hogan's door
And who said they asked to search the home? Isn't it more likely that they asked to speak to Hogan?[/QUOTE]
"Apple representatives attempted to search Hogan's home, but were turned away by a roommate" (MR/Wired) can be interpreted multiple ways, the nicest being that the "attempt" was merely implied, or simply conjecture on the reporter's part.
I really hope you lose your wallet and the person who finds it rips you off as much as possible.
You can't blame the finder for ripping you off, after all you have just said it is all your fault for losing it in the first place.
Oooh man. This is some deep poo poo for him. Though, to be honest, I would have done the exact same thing. Most likely would have sold it to Gizmodo.
Thank You!! Wow. It's like sanity goes flying out of the window when someone hears the word Apple. Why does everyone want apple to be evil here?? Like the man said, they were trying to keep themselves out of the press and this kid, butit just didn't work out that way. 100% SURLY if Apple was able to recover the phone from that visit, we would never have heard about ANY of this. Jeez.
Wow.
What would have done if you found my wallet. Pocket the money and sell the credit cards?
Did I miss this--has anyone established that he was in a drunken stupor, or has this just gained internet credence? And does it really matter? Or could he have just dropped the phone? Doesn't seem to be entirely relevant here. It's what happened afterwards.
Or are you one of those "if he wouldn't have left it there I wouldn't have stolen it, so it's not my fault, your honor" kinda guys? If so, why stop with blaming Powell, lets blame his parents for bringing him into the world, etc. Proximal causes, all of 'em.
Its that or they send their friends/partners from REACT with machine-guns to your home to knock down your door. Pick your poison I suppose.
They need this lawyer...only way it can get stranger:
"...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!
Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a bunch of guys that sold a prototype to a goofy gadget site, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests."
"...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!
Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a bunch of guys that sold a prototype to a goofy gadget site, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests."
What if we added this?
- Two cute girls from Apple Corporate come knocking on the door
All this talk of "men in black" and goon squads is just sensationalism.
Here's How it SHOULD HAVE gone down . . .
After watching this whole mess go down in flames for everyone involved, this could have gone down much better. Considering how long it was since the iPhone was found compared to Gizmodo actually publishing the photos, this is how I see this scenario going down less risky for Brian Hogan, Jason Chen and Gizmodo.
Once the phone was found and discovered to be a prototype, Brian can let Gizmodo "review" the phone for a day or two. Gizmodo can then mail the phone off to Apple headquarters once it "reviewed" it (i.e. take photos, videos, play around with it, etc.). THEN, after doing so can it release said videos, photos, etc. of the phone on its website AFTER it was returned. THEN they could have paid their "review" fee to Brian Hogan. That way, there would be no confusion on them paying for the phone while either one of them had possession of it.
I think part of the mistake (and a big one at that) on Gizmodo's part here was releasing the videos and photos of the phone while still having possession of it. They had to know Apple would come looking for it and know exactly who had possession of it. Apple had to ASK for it back. If the phone was returned before Apple had to ask for it, there would not be much Apple could do about it. They lost it, and someone returned it - end of story.
Now, once the phone was returned AND THEN photos were released afterwards, Apple could still not do anything. Gizmodo nor anyone else involved signed an NDA, so what could they do? Arrest them for taking photos of their phone? Heck, Gizmodo could even have posted a "Looking for the owner of This iPhone" website article. That would have been a hoot. They could say things like, "It looks like an iPhone prototype, has a front facing camera . . we are posting these photos in hope of finding its owner. We sent it to Apple since they might know who this belongs to . . . " all in the guise of "looking" for its owner.
After watching this whole mess go down in flames for everyone involved, this could have gone down much better. Considering how long it was since the iPhone was found compared to Gizmodo actually publishing the photos, this is how I see this scenario going down less risky for Brian Hogan, Jason Chen and Gizmodo.
Once the phone was found and discovered to be a prototype, Brian can let Gizmodo "review" the phone for a day or two. Gizmodo can then mail the phone off to Apple headquarters once it "reviewed" it (i.e. take photos, videos, play around with it, etc.). THEN, after doing so can it release said videos, photos, etc. of the phone on its website AFTER it was returned. THEN they could have paid their "review" fee to Brian Hogan. That way, there would be no confusion on them paying for the phone while either one of them had possession of it.
I think part of the mistake (and a big one at that) on Gizmodo's part here was releasing the videos and photos of the phone while still having possession of it. They had to know Apple would come looking for it and know exactly who had possession of it. Apple had to ASK for it back. If the phone was returned before Apple had to ask for it, there would not be much Apple could do about it. They lost it, and someone returned it - end of story.
Now, once the phone was returned AND THEN photos were released afterwards, Apple could still not do anything. Gizmodo nor anyone else involved signed an NDA, so what could they do? Arrest them for taking photos of their phone? Heck, Gizmodo could even have posted a "Looking for the owner of This iPhone" website article. That would have been a hoot. They could say things like, "It looks like an iPhone prototype, has a front facing camera . . we are posting these photos in hope of finding its owner. We sent it to Apple since they might know who this belongs to . . . " all in the guise of "looking" for its owner.
What if no one came looking for that bill? What is the manager gonna do? just keep it?
Umm, the phone was LOST, not taken. He didn't wrestle it away from his hands. From a few posts back:
I only blamed Apple for losing the phone, nothing more.
And I haven't made any person attacks on anyone... but you comparing a lost iphone to rape is utterly absurd.
Way outta control
IMO the amount of tax money spent on this fiasco is way out of control. DA, React, etc.
You can't begin to think that this much effort would be put into play if you lost your cell phone, now would you?
Just my guess, this kid will get a slap on the wrist, probation, and 20 Hail Marys.
Chen will probably get screwed, unless the courts decide that he really is a journalist and the evidence is not allowed.
IMO the amount of tax money spent on this fiasco is way out of control. DA, React, etc.
You can't begin to think that this much effort would be put into play if you lost your cell phone, now would you?
Just my guess, this kid will get a slap on the wrist, probation, and 20 Hail Marys.
Chen will probably get screwed, unless the courts decide that he really is a journalist and the evidence is not allowed.
Um...me. For one, and I've done this before, if I were to find a dropped or forgotten phone I would have given it to the bartender and said I found it...someone dropped it. I've found 3 different cell-phones at places. People drop things.
Oh, and one time I found a perfect Dell laptop in the middle of the street at like 3am in the morning. It booted and there wasn't a scratch on it. I turned it into the police. Hey, it's not mine. I'm not trying to be Mr. Morality here or anything, but it's just one of those things. I also had my 13 year old son I'm trying to instill SOME values into.
Yeah, I've been ridiculed by some people I know for turning it in. "Man, I woulda kept it...that's so stupid, turning it in. Free computer dude." Well, that's not me I guess.
And thank you too sir/madam. The moral decay that I've been reading on these forums since this happened is so saddening. The kid should have never left the bar with it, let ALONE sold it??? Come on people. He bragged and showed it off to his friends. With NO Intent of ever returning it. Plain an simple. And if you think otherwise, your being fooled. "Poor Kid"? No he and his lawyer are trying to get public sympathy so apple doesn't file charges. Like someone said earlier, he feels "sorry" because he's been caught. Like all morally twisted (no matter to what degree) people do.
I agree. It baffles me these people could be so stupid! Brian Hogan is nothing but a thief, I don't care how old he is. I'm in my twenties too and would never dream of taking home someone's phone when I was at the location it was "lost" let alone taking the case off, and then selling it to someone for $5000. This idiot deserves what's coming to him. Then Gizmodo, how naive and/or stupid is Jason Chen? The only one with half a brain, maybe, is Nick Denton of Gawker, who probably in my opinion used Jason Chen for any wrongdoings.
This is a mess. And I don't understand anyone who places any fault on Apple here. Seriously. WTF did they do wrong? Nothing. It's their property, intellectual and otherwise!
Yeah, this is not really an easy case in the real world. To convict the kid, you have to convince 12 semi-random people sitting on the jury to unanimously agree that: (1) asking around the bar for the phone's owner; and (2) calling Apple; were not "reasonable and just" attempts to find the phone's owner. This means, basically, that each juror will have to be 95% certain that these didn't constitute reasonable attempts to find the phone's owner; it's not enough for them to find it highly likely that these weren't reasonable attempts.
Meaning that if only one juror isn't convinced, there is no conviction. And it's easy to imagine a couple of jurors believing that calling Apple and talking to their reps was enough...the jury won't be made up of Macrumors members who have memorized Apple's address and and Steve Jobs's personal e-mail address.
I kind of also think that a jury might be not be impressed by the argument that the finder had to jump through additional hoops to find the owner, when the owner never called his/its own phone.
The best fact for the prosecution seems to be that the owner may have known the name of the person who lost the phone from the facebook page. Unfortunately, this is hearsay and may be difficult to get into evidence (although possibly for impeachment).
So, anyway, these are all good reasons why charges may not have been filed yet, and why they may not be filed.
Important note: The only source we have for what happened in this case are Giz's reports, plus the couple of other bits in the news. There may be (and probably are) a lot of other relevant facts that law enforcement knows which we don't - these actual facts will have more bearing on what thepeople ultimately decide to do.)