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.
Gizmodo iPhone 4 theft investigation closing, charges may be next
- Thread starter smithrh
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The main difference being that libya is currently having a civil war, and journalists are welcomed by the rebels, and have a freedom of movement within certain areas.
Apple is still a dictatorship which holds its events in a private building, with a private security firm who have the back up of police when needed.
Are you seriously trying to compare a computer and tech lifestyle company to a militarised dictatorship?
It's the same principle, sorry to say. Apple can't pick who they want because they feel like it. There credibility would be affected. Reputable journalists from reputable sites which has thousands of consumers reading everyday wouldn't be excluded.
Anyway, I have not seen any evidence of gizmodo not being aloud to attend. Just sensationalism it seems.
Very polarizing, that's for sure. You either love it or hate it.Someone should be locked up for that bad redesign...hey-oooooo!
If Apple were to host its media events in a public forum, then any journalist would be welcome to attend and report on those events.
As long as Apple hosts its events on its own private property, they have the right to decide who can (and who cannot) step onto their private property. (... And to decide when a guest that they'd previously welcomed onto the property has outstayed their welcome and have to leave.) It doesn't matter if somebody is a journalist or not...in a part of the world that is covered by the rule of law and that acknowledges the principle of private property, if anybody steps foot onto somebody's private property without permission, then they are trespassing, and they can be lawfully removed from that property.
In Lybia, for one thing, the rule of law is very much in a shambles right now. For another thing, journalists may be staying in a part of the country which are under the de facto control of rebels who might welcome the journalists' presence. If the rule of law were actually functioning properly in Lybia at the moment, then journalists who remained in public spaces, or who occupied private property with the private owners' consent, would be perfectly at liberty to report on the things that they observed.
At a media event like Apple puts on, bouncers at the door can easily check to see who's on the guest list and who isn't, and if you or I (or a Gizmodo representative) just happen to step into the line-up but aren't on the guest list, we can be refused entry.
Last edited:
Give me a break it's just a freakin phone. It's not like Apple didn't sell a ton of them anyway.
I'm not familiar with California state law, but IMO finding lost property is a very different act from stealing property. And IIRC, the finder contacted Apple trying to return it and was turned away (for obvious reasons... no front-line customer service rep would know Apple had lost a prototype iPhone 4).
I'd like to know more about the law the article mentions about "misappropriating lost property", but calling it outright theft it a bit much, I think.
Then you obviously don't read Gizmodo. They mention it whenever they talk about Apple events, because they never get an invite.
I'd like to know more about the law the article mentions about "misappropriating lost property", but calling it outright theft it a bit much, I think.
Then you obviously don't read Gizmodo. They mention it whenever they talk about Apple events, because they never get an invite.
They didn't get invited on the verizon event that announced the CDMA iPhone either.
And they always get invitations to verizon stuff.
And they always get invitations to verizon stuff.
Most of the journalists are in the capital.
The truth is silly to those who deny it.
I'm not familiar with California state law, but IMO finding lost property is a very different act from stealing property. And IIRC, the finder contacted Apple trying to return it and was turned away (for obvious reasons... no front-line customer service rep would know Apple had lost a prototype iPhone 4).
I'd like to know more about the law the article mentions about "misappropriating lost property", but calling it outright theft it a bit much, I think.
Then you obviously don't read Gizmodo. They mention it whenever they talk about Apple events, because they never get an invite.
Still waiting for a link.
http://ca.gizmodo.com/5727934/the-verizon-iphone-will-be-announced-on-january-11
Giz also wasn't invited to the iPod launch event in September:
http://gizmodo.com/#!5626542/apple-ipod-and-music-meta+liveblog
Same here.
I thought it was my IE9 that wasnt displaying things right.
Same on all the gawker sites like lifehacker, gizmodo etc...
Many of the journalists I've heard from who are able to provide actual first-hand reporting of events actually unfolding in front of them, have been reporting from Benghazi.
Foreign journalists in Tripoli are only there because the government chose to give them permission to be there, and their movements within the city are subject to severe government limitation. For example, when an anti-government rally was planned by opposition forces in Tripoli this past Friday, the government imposed a mandatory curfew on all foreign journalists, forcing them to remain inside their hotel so that they could not get a first-hand view. The government's excuse: It was "unsafe" for them to go outside. But the effect was the same: they ended up sequestered and only got to see what the government decided they were allowed to see.
http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/money/Tripoli+journalists+lockdown+ahead+protest/4463367/story.html
It's not public. It's Apple's private event. They can invite whomever they wish, same as you for your birthday.
The police had a search warrant from the court. The search was completely legal.
As pointed out in another post, journalists get extra protections in California beyond just the warrant requirement. The District Attorney even admitted that the search happened without all the proper authorization in place first.
I am not a fan of gawker at all. Gizmodo with the iPhone 4 debacle. Sorry the moment the person sold the prototype, it became stolen property. Calling AppleCare hardly qualifies as taking the proper steps in returning the device. As mentioned, like anyone in a call center would acknowledge it. Apple's campus was within walking distance how about turning it into security? He knew whose phone it was.
Then you have jalopnik. Who is known to break embargoes just to be the first to get the story out.
Gawker owned sites are unethical.
Then you have jalopnik. Who is known to break embargoes just to be the first to get the story out.
Gawker owned sites are unethical.
Was it stolen or was it found.
I'm tired of these double-digit IQ politicians trying to make a name for themselves by indicting people for bogus charges.
Was it stolen or was it found.
I'm tired of these double-digit IQ politicians trying to make a name for themselves by indicting people for bogus charges.
The person found it in a bar. He made a lame attempt in returning the iPhone. He then sold it to Gizmodo. The moment he didn't go through the proper procedures when recovering lost property and sold it to Gizmodo, it became stolen property.
My stance is neutral, since in my opinion we rarely hear both sides of the story in a true matter of fact way.
Furthermore if we step back and look at the big picture, the justice system almost always rules in favor of the party with the best legal team. When it's a high profile case it's rare that a very popular corporation would lose. No matter the truth.