Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I do wish you luck. I'm a lifelong mac customer too and am shocked at the treatment I'm getting form the corporation and here. I emailed SJ last night. Let's see if that gets me anywhere!

On the other hand, I'm disheartened to hear you waited for over 2 months for Apple to respond to the subpoena. Does law student on here know if there is a time limit within which a response is required?

Nope. No clue. Probably varies by jurisdiction.

The one thing I've learned is that once lawyers get invovled, NOTHING moves that quickly. I'm sure the subpoena spent a long time moving up the chain in Apple's legal department determining if/how they had to act.
 
(Although in your case, I'm actually suprised the police got the laptop back and not the name. I would typically think it would be the other way around.)

Apple is resisting because, if the person who brought it in happened to be completely innocent, it would look terribly bad that they were revealing people's identification to the police.

Now, if the police had tracked this guy down (let's say waited for him to come back and pick up the macbook?) and gathered enough evidence to charge him with theft (say, fingerprints matched from the crime scene), then Apple would be more likely to cooperate. But clearly their legal department is sensing that this is not the case.

I appreciate the law lesson because I am mystified. I see what you mean about knowingly in possession. Police wanted to arrest the person when they came in to pick up the laptop, but Apple didn't want that kind of showdown at the store, I'm guessing (I wouldn't either if I were in their shoes!) so they referred police to their legal dept. Police were pissed and got a search warrant in the middle of the night on a saturday to go in an search the entire store for stolen goods unless they turned over my computer. They got my computer back but I guess they were told the information needed to be subpoena'd so they couldn't get that right away.
 
Just my .02 but it is a rather experienced opinion.

I worked in a guitar shop for a NUMBER of years, and guitars and guitar amps are a HIGHLY sought after item and very often easy to steal (from gigs and cars)

We used to PURCHASE used guitars from people all the time. SOMETIMES a guitar that we purchased would show up on a fax that was sent to us by either the police department OR the person who it was stolen from> We would KNOW it was the right guitar because of serial numbers.

Anyways, if we already purchased (before the serial number reached us as a stolen item) the item off of the theif, the store was REQUIRED BY LAW to turn the guitar over to the police department at a loss to the store.

If the person shows up with a guitar to sell that we already KNOW is stolen, OBVIOUSLY it is ILLEGAL for our store to purchase it. The store was REQUIRED by law to try to hold the person in the store within reason until the cop gets there, and to take the actual stolen item into a place where it is safe. For the guitars, we would tell them we are taking it back to our repair guy to look at it before we gave him an offer. Phones are easier because they are smaller. We would then be required to CALL the cops and get as MUCH info as possible> AGain, collecting the info is pretty easy because in order to sell the guitar, theyw ould have to fill out info WITH a copy of their drivers lisence (similar to the info you give to activate a new phone)

I would THINK that the requirement would be the same for activating a KNOWN stolen good. Once it is in the possesion of the store (Like when the clerk has it in their hands to activate it) then it is in the possesion of the store and they HAVE to hold onto it before the police arrive and they are supposed to try to hold the person in the store (within reasonable force by either a security guard, ect) until the police gets there. If it is too dangerous to hold the person there, the stolen item is supposed to be put in a safe place (usually a safe or lock box) and as MUHC information as possible should be collected by the store while the police is in route to the store

Anyways, the reason i know the laws so well in my area is because i started out as a guitar sales person, but the last 2 years i worked there, i was involved in the loss prevention and purchasing department. It was a good gig and i got to work with the police on a lot of stolen goods investigations ( the store was located in a pretty rought city)
 
Or at all? LOL

This thread has become *very* entertaining.


I do not have a car but I'm ALWAYS on the go. I frequently would spend the night at my friend's house and take either the train or the bus to work, gets boring on the commut sometimes so I'd do a little 10-15 minute gaming on the train, listen to music on my Zune, surf the web on my Iphone, ect. I know it wasn't the most secure place in the world but I didn't go around championing the fact that I had those electronics in my back pack. Coupled with the fact that I felt reasonably safe in the EMPLOYEE BREAKROOM and well....Disaster.....

I just feel bad for anyone whose had an expensive electronic stolen, especially since these things don't come cheap, that first generation iphone that i purchased for my then-girlfriend meant alot to me that i could get for her at the time....
 
Just to be clear, I personally never asked Apple to turn any personal information over to me, but to the police, who have procured an arrest warrant and a subpoena for that information. So at this point, Apple is refusing to cooperate with the legal process.

Actually, Apple is working within the bounds of the legal process. Also, giving information to the police is not always in your best interest. If you have some spare time watch these videos by a law professor AND a police detective on providing information to the police.

PART ONE:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865

PART TWO:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6014022229458915912&ei=&hl=en
 
Apple is resisting because, if the person who brought it in happened to be completely innocent, it would look terribly bad that they were revealing people's identification to the police.

Maybe I'm unusual, but if I heard a story similar to my own about the breakin and theft and all, and it turned out that I could help track down the burglar because I might have met him (or her) I'd be happy to help. In fact, I'd JUMP to help. Guess there aren't so many good samaratins out there hunh.

I would only be upset about losing the money paid for the computer.
 
When this is all done, I might compile and post all the correspondence for the non-believers. I will edit out the detective's info, but I think I can legally leave in all the apple contacts, except for our friend, I'll leave her out of this. I hope that wouldn't get her fired..... I'll have to think about this some more.
 
The main thing that I'm learning from this thread is that Apple has no clear policy on what happens when stolen goods are brought in.

This frustrates me, as every Apple laptop / computer / iPhone has a unique code and is heavily tracked in their system. If they offered some sort of anti-theft alerting service, that would put them significantly ahead of other computer companies. It would be a good marketing win, and lead to some good stories, +ve PR, and also serve to deter some thefts.

I'm sure they'd be able to devise a way of preventing people selling their gear then reporting it to Apple as stolen (a combination of requiring a police report, and having clear info for people purchasing second hand macs on how to safely re-register them would go a long way).
 
. Also, giving information to the police is not always in your best interest.

So you are suggesting I should have said "wow my computer turned up at the store. how fascinating." and gone on my way? what choice did I have besides talking to the police?
 
Just my .02 but it is a rather experienced opinion.

I worked in a guitar shop for a NUMBER of years, and guitars and guitar amps are a HIGHLY sought after item and very often easy to steal (from gigs and cars)

We used to PURCHASE used guitars from people all the time. SOMETIMES a guitar that we purchased would show up on a fax that was sent to us by either the police department OR the person who it was stolen from> We would KNOW it was the right guitar because of serial numbers.

Anyways, if we already purchased (before the serial number reached us as a stolen item) the item off of the theif, the store was REQUIRED BY LAW to turn the guitar over to the police department at a loss to the store.

If the person shows up with a guitar to sell that we already KNOW is stolen, OBVIOUSLY it is ILLEGAL for our store to purchase it. The store was REQUIRED by law to try to hold the person in the store within reason until the cop gets there, and to take the actual stolen item into a place where it is safe. For the guitars, we would tell them we are taking it back to our repair guy to look at it before we gave him an offer. Phones are easier because they are smaller. We would then be required to CALL the cops and get as MUCH info as possible> AGain, collecting the info is pretty easy because in order to sell the guitar, theyw ould have to fill out info WITH a copy of their drivers lisence (similar to the info you give to activate a new phone)

I would THINK that the requirement would be the same for activating a KNOWN stolen good. Once it is in the possesion of the store (Like when the clerk has it in their hands to activate it) then it is in the possesion of the store and they HAVE to hold onto it before the police arrive and they are supposed to try to hold the person in the store (within reasonable force by either a security guard, ect) until the police gets there. If it is too dangerous to hold the person there, the stolen item is supposed to be put in a safe place (usually a safe or lock box) and as MUHC information as possible should be collected by the store while the police is in route to the store

Anyways, the reason i know the laws so well in my area is because i started out as a guitar sales person, but the last 2 years i worked there, i was involved in the loss prevention and purchasing department. It was a good gig and i got to work with the police on a lot of stolen goods investigations ( the store was located in a pretty rought city)

Very interesting... I am guessing that the difference between your scenario and the current ones are that 1) there's no purchasing involved here (so the store can't be held liable for purchasing stole goods, and 2) Perhaps that the police should do a better job notifying the Apple Stores of reported stolen equipment (like they were with your guitar store). Again, not trying to justify Apple's action, just trying to figure out the logic behind them.

Just curious but was your store a local shop or a regional/national chain. Cooperation with the police tends to vary based on the size of the legal dept. :)
 
There are such third party devices available for purchase.

I've got Orbicule Undercover. It does just that. Now if only iPhone could have one :D It'd have to be for Jailbreak, and then I doubt you'd get much Apple CoOperation. :D
 
I think it's at least plausible.

Hmmmmm...

Either way, I really did enjoy that microsoft story a few posts back though! lol
 
our shop was a national chain of guitar stores and music equipment.. SAM ASH.

You're right, the police would definitely help the situation IF they were to fax over a weekly list of serial numbers of stolen iphones, BUT if the person in the store ALREADY KNEW it was stolen, ALL that person had to do was call the cops, and there is NO REASON why the manager should not have allowed it. it would be considered illegal to not report a crime correct??

In my mind, even though it is a little different in here that they did not get a serial number DIRECTLY from the police, and they were not purchasing it, but they still by law, have to report a crime correct??

It ALL just seems fishy and completely unbelievable that they would go ahead and activate it, and at the LEAST, they should have called the cops on the spot, held on to the phone and had the cops come in and just question him

And if the guy bought it off craigslist at a great price, not really knowing it was stolen, it is STILL his loss. its illegal to purchase stolen good.. Look at the guitar store.. You might not get prosecuted if you didnt KNOW you were buying stolen goods, but you WILL loose the goods
 
our shop was a national chain of guitar stores and music equipment.. SAM ASH.

You're right, the police would definitely help the situation IF they were to fax over a weekly list of serial numbers of stolen iphones, BUT if the person in the store ALREADY KNEW it was stolen, ALL that person had to do was call the cops, and there is NO REASON why the manager should not have allowed it. it would be considered illegal to not report a crime correct??

In my mind, even though it is a little different in here that they did not get a serial number DIRECTLY from the police, and they were not purchasing it, but they still by law, have to report a crime correct??

It ALL just seems fishy and completely unbelievable that they would go ahead and activate it, and at the LEAST, they should have called the cops on the spot, held on to the phone and had the cops come in and just question him

And if the guy bought it off craigslist at a great price, not really knowing it was stolen, it is STILL his loss. its illegal to purchase stolen good.. Look at the guitar store.. You might not get prosecuted if you didnt KNOW you were buying stolen goods, but you WILL loose the goods

Well, according the OP's (iphone) story. Apple didn't reactivate the phone, they just let him leave with it. So he technically just made off with a paperweight.

But yeah, I agree with you that it's a bit bizarre. Might have involved some store management making some incorrect decisions, and Apple is now covering their butts.
 
our shop was a national chain of guitar stores and music equipment.. SAM ASH.

You're right, the police would definitely help the situation IF they were to fax over a weekly list of serial numbers of stolen iphones, BUT if the person in the store ALREADY KNEW it was stolen, ALL that person had to do was call the cops, and there is NO REASON why the manager should not have allowed it. it would be considered illegal to not report a crime correct??

In my mind, even though it is a little different in here that they did not get a serial number DIRECTLY from the police, and they were not purchasing it, but they still by law, have to report a crime correct??

It ALL just seems fishy and completely unbelievable that they would go ahead and activate it, and at the LEAST, they should have called the cops on the spot, held on to the phone and had the cops come in and just question him

And if the guy bought it off craigslist at a great price, not really knowing it was stolen, it is STILL his loss. its illegal to purchase stolen good.. Look at the guitar store.. You might not get prosecuted if you didnt KNOW you were buying stolen goods, but you WILL loose the goods

Again, you're assuming too much here. How about this: I buy a phone off Fred on Craiglist. I call him, and pay cash, so there's not a "paper" trail. Fred's SO get's pissed that he sold the phone and reports it to Apple as stolen. So I go into Apple, get branded and thief AND they call the cops on me for nothing I did wrong? Sorry, once Apple starts being that loose with their customer information I'm going back to dell.
 
Again, you're assuming too much here. How about this: I buy a phone off Fred on Craiglist. I call him, and pay cash, so there's not a "paper" trail. Fred's SO get's pissed that he sold the phone and reports it to Apple as stolen. So I go into Apple, get branded and thief AND they call the cops on me for nothing I did wrong? Sorry, once Apple starts being that loose with their customer information I'm going back to dell.

Right. It'd be a different story if they got the report from the police though. 'Cause if Fred got pissed and reported it as stolen to the police, you would have to at least give him the benefit of the doubt that he was telling the truth (or he'd be facing massive penalties for fraudulently filing a police report).
 
Again, you're assuming too much here. How about this: I buy a phone off Fred on Craiglist. I call him, and pay cash, so there's not a "paper" trail. Fred's SO get's pissed that he sold the phone and reports it to Apple as stolen. So I go into Apple, get branded and thief AND they call the cops on me for nothing I did wrong? Sorry, once Apple starts being that loose with their customer information I'm going back to dell.

In my case, had he tried to get it back to the rightful owner when he discovered it to have been stolen, I would have paid him a reward, softening the blow.

Here a great rule of thumb: If the seller does not know the pass-code, the phone is prolly stolen.
 
There are such third party devices available for purchase.

I've got Orbicule Undercover. It does just that. Now if only iPhone could have one :D It'd have to be for Jailbreak, and then I doubt you'd get much Apple CoOperation. :D

Yup, I know about that one and a couple others. But Apple should provide their own support and have it more deeply integrated into their systems.
 
AT&T won't block the IMEI of stolen phones (nor will T-Mobile). There are literally hundreds of blog articles and forum posts across the web complaining about this practice.

The Apple Store can't reactivate an iPhone that's not associated with a current AT&T account. No active AT&T account = no iPhone service at the Genius Bar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.