Law Enforcement Reportedly Looking Into Circumstances of Lost Next-Generation iPhone

[Cartaphilus]

Of course, if such a sale took place, they would not be stolen goods, and there would be no fraud. It would simply be the suggestion that Apple might pay a large reward for the phone.

Which action in there is the fraud ? Which is the trafficking in stolen goods ? Conspiracy, yes, but it is not a crime. Conspiracy to commit a crime, is a crime, but this most definitely is not. It then ends up diverting attention to the halfwit Apple engineer being the criminal.

All just a suggestion of what he might say.

Some still fail to understand some basic points:
The most important point of all, which seems to have slipped the "guilty" rants, even more suprisingly by those that "claim" to be legally qualified - a person is innocent until proven guilty. You're not discussing evidence, you're preaching that a crime HAS been commited. I've never seen you use the term "allegedly" once.
The finder is under no obligation to hand the phone to the police, unless he believes it to be evidence in a crime. He makes attempts to return it to Apple, and then sells it. Oops, he's broken the California Civil code. He's not going to go to prison for that.
He doesn't know it's a real iPhone 4G, no-one outside Apple does. None of us here did either, at that time (last month), and we scan the rumours news for any leak we can find of upcoming phones, macbook pros and mac pros. It's all merely suggestion.
Even more compelling, as this is a criminal case, they have to prove to 12 individuals that he is guilty. Pick a random 12 posters here, do you think they'll convict ?

I can see his defence being paid by HTC / Google, who may go with the suggestion that it was a planned leak. Of course back in the real world, if an employee "lost" a prototype product in such a highly competitive market, he'd be sacked, and so would his manager for letting such a muppet have the phone. The defence only have to suggest this, to provide reasonable doubt - "Why is this guy still in his job ?"

If I'm on that jury, I'll vote to convict, and I guarantee you that I'd convince everyone else on the jury to convict too. Even you.

 

[scwinsett]

Vindictive

It is petty to prosecute either of these people. And Apple employee took an unfinished prototype out drinking and left it there. This is no one's fault but his. For Apple to try putting the blame on anyone but their own retarded employee is vindictive and pathetic.

 

[al256]

why would it be less illegal if it has happened before?

and we're not talking about what the police are "allowed" to do. we're talking about what's legal / illegal.

if some cops got tired of finding the same car and telling the owner to lock it... they might stop looking anymore. but that doesn't change the fact that it's still THEFT.

that just means the cops are human. we're talking law, not cops being lazy.

Feel free to go back and read my entire post.

 

[Cartaphilus]

If you call the company and they turn you away when you are trying to return their product, what do you do?

I believe him calling apple to return it is a faithful attempt in the eyes of the court. It is not as if there are other numbers to call

Why he wasn't trasferred to higher ups?

Though I forgot about him knowing the guy. He should have contacted him as well

Hello? Duke Admissions? Yes, I think you ought to know something....

 

[quagmire]

It is petty to prosecute either of these people. And Apple employee took an unfinished prototype out drinking and left it there. This is no one's fault but his. For Apple to try putting the blame on anyone but their own retarded employee is vindictive and pathetic.

They are not blaming Giz or the founder for the employee losing the prototype. What they are doing is possibly going after them for stealing it/ buying stolen property. Which the founder/Giz did. It may have been the employees fault, but it doesn't make it right for the founder to turn around and sell the lost prototype which he doesn't own for a profit. Losing something isn't illegal, but stealing the lost item is.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

It is petty to prosecute either of these people. And Apple employee took an unfinished prototype out drinking and left it there. This is no one's fault but his. For Apple to try putting the blame on anyone but their own retarded employee is vindictive and pathetic.

Apple is vindictive when Steve Jobs is running it.

But I do hope Gizmodo gets in trouble. Those smug hipsters felt no qualms about plastering the apple engineer's identity all over their site. Douche move on their part.

The "it's not stolen, it was found" argument sounds a little bit like "It fell off a truck." I might call Tony Soprano and Paulie Walnuts and ask them about it.

 

[Glideslope]

They are not blaming Giz or the founder for the employee losing the prototype. What they are doing is possibly going after them for stealing it/ buying stolen property. Which the founder/Giz did. It may have been the employees fault, but it doesn't make it right for the founder to turn around and sell the lost prototype which he doesn't own for a profit. Losing something isn't illegal, but stealing the lost item is.

Thank you. There is hope for the Human Race after all.

 

[Fast Shadow]

He knew the name of the owner.
He did not contact him.

He knew the bar it was found in.
He did not tell the bar or ask the bar if anyone was missing it.

You're out of your mind. Those are the FIRST two things he should have tried.

Not to mention he could have driven over to 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA and handed the phone to a security guard, or a receptionist, or even dropped it into an envelope and mailed it. John Gruber has thoroughly covered all of this.

The best thing to come out of this debacle is that by reading some of these posts in this thread it really makes it clear to me how many people out there lack any substantial level of ethics or morality. Either that or the douchebag population of Macrumors is an aberration.

 

[kiljoy616]

It is petty to prosecute either of these people. And Apple employee took an unfinished prototype out drinking and left it there. This is no one's fault but his. For Apple to try putting the blame on anyone but their own retarded employee is vindictive and pathetic.

Well said that about what it is Vindictive.

Some else commented that if they don't do it then the rest loose the right to after people, where did this logic come from?

 

[StyxMaker]

I never said it did

Merely commenting on human nature where the other poster implied people would do the right thing

Most people wouldn't

Studies where they planted obviously valuable items have shown that most people will make considerable effort to find the owner and, the more valuable the item, the more effort most people will make. It results from most people having empathy.

 

[Rooftop voter]

Ok, so they get busted for theft, I doubt it could be grand theft, probably more like petty theft, that's a fine. There lawyers will probably be able to plead that down aswell. Doubt trade secrets will be an issue, as there really wasn't any useful trade info. What did we find out, it has a battery and two cameras. Not like it's a huge leap in phone tech.

 

[Fast Shadow]

Gizmodo is full of a class jerks. Remember they even got banned from CES just this last January.

Anyone who thinks these jerks are ethical are really smoking something.

I'm seriously starting to wonder if some of these "posters" who think that Gizmodo did nothing wrong are simply trolls from Gawker posting in a vain attempt to generate some kind of false sense of public support.

The douches at Gawker are screwed if Apple decides to pursue this in court. They'll probably wait to file suit until some time after the criminal stuff is done with (if charges are filed) and the next gen phone is officially unveiled. Maybe around August? No idea what the statute of limitations is. Probably a year or two. The theft apparently occurred in mid March.

Anyway, at this point Apple legal is probably doing lots and lots of due diligence and investigation, both inside and outside of the company. They'll gather up all the facts and details and then decide if they're going to sue, who they'll be suing, what it is they'll claim, and how much money they'll be asking for.

And if there is a God, when it's all over, Gawker will be a smoking hole in the ground.

 

[scwinsett]

Apple is vindictive when Steve Jobs is running it.

But I do hope Gizmodo gets in trouble. Those smug hipsters felt no qualms about plastering the apple engineer's identity all over their site. Douche move on their part.

The "it's not stolen, it was found" argument sounds a little bit like "It fell off a truck." I might call Tony Soprano and Paulie Walnuts and ask them about it.

Agreed. Really, sure Gizmodo is a douche, and the guy who found it shouldnt have sold it, but the deal is, it happened. The major flaw lies in Apple's hands, and prosecuting really isn't going to fix anything. The Justice system is to be used to protect people's rights and punish those who harm others, it isn't a government-funded revenge system

 

[lilo777]

So now Apple fans hate Gizmodo...

What else is new. The list is growing: Adobe, HTC, Google, Microsoft, Psystar, Nokia, Kodak and on and on. Rather hateful crowd if you ask me. Gizmodo? Really? All they did was to serve the interests of CE enthusiasts and their readers. Are you angry that Steve Jobs will not be able to do his "magic"? Those spectacles are getting predictable and somewhat laughable anyways

 

[marksman]

From the same crowd that endlessly speculates & breaks down every supposed Best Buy inventory screen shot & NOW you are mad someone gave you a legit sneak peek two months early???? Give it a rest people. The engineer is a Apple employee= HE IS APPLE. APPLE LOST THE PHONE. APPLE IGNORED MULTIPLE REQUESTS TO RETURN THE DEVICE. APPLE NEEDS TO SHUT UP & GO BACK TO COUNTING THEIR MONEY.

Oh yeah we are interested in Apple products so we don't care what kinds of crimes are committed to bring it to us... I would say most people here are not in that boat. It is not at all costs.

Please explain to me how someone losing an item, another finding it equates to theft.

Lots of discussion on this the last few days. Please explain to me how taking something that does not belong to you is not theft.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

The problem with this logic is the bolded phrase above. The "owner" was not the employee, but Apple, Inc. When the person who found the phone contacted Apple and tried to return the phone, AND WAS REFUSED by the owner, doesn't that confer ownership to the party who tried to return the phone? Thus, he was under no obligation to return the phone to the employee, the bar, or report the lost property to the police. The OWNER of the phone, Apple Inc., refused to take the phone back.

Well since I don't think Steve was working the switchboard that day, THE OWNER didn't refuse to take it back (not saying that Jobs is the owner either, no one person is.) Also, I don't think the AppleCare rep didn't refuse the proto-type, as they probably had no idea what it was. Steve would have, but again, it wasn't his turn on the switchboard.

 

[muskratboy]

Feel free to go back and read my entire post.

oh, i did. and that's my answer.

" The law never seems to be equally applied. If it was, this issue would be much more clear for us. "

the "rest" is just... completely besides the point. moot.

hypothetically, no human rule is ever, has ever, or will be equally applied to every situation, ever. the problem being the "human" part.

and on something else completely separate...

"Please explain to me how someone losing an item, another finding it equates to theft."

it doesn't. selling it does. law is FUN.

 

[jaw04005]

I have a feeling since this a specialized division of law enforcement, the division itself initiated the investigation because of all the publicity and contacted Apple.

Apple wants this all to go away a soon as possible so the general public will forget about it and continue to buy the current generation iPhone.

It’ll be interesting to see if a police report is filed, and what Apple and Gray Powell said in their statement to law enforcement (provided they gave one).

For the record, Apple posts their corporate Cupertino campus switchboard number on their Contact Us Web site. It’s not like it would have been hard to call that number or even FedEx/UPS the device back to them.

Apple
1 Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014
408.996.1010

http://www.apple.com/contact/

 

[gnasher729]

I haven't read the whole thread, but in case someone hasn't made this point:
If Apple DIDN'T complain, then the next time someone posts their trade secrets on "teh intertubes", they would not have a case.

1. Whether Apple complains or doesn't complain in this case doesn't matter at all for any future case. Or do you seriously think you would get the right to post a Microsoft trade secret and tell a judge "well, Apple didn't complain" as an excuse?

2. To have a trade secret, a company must take reasonable measures to keep it secret. If an employee loses a phone in a bar than any trade secrets involving that phone are gone because it wasn't kept secret.

My response was about whether it makes sense for the cops to use tax payers' money to pursue the case.

The other part (whether it is legal) has been covered multiple times. Obviously, the cops think it is not legal, and I have the feelings the DA, judge and jury wont either.

You are missing an important point: Was keeping the phone legal or illegal, was taking photos legal or illegal, these are two completely different questions that can have two completely different answers. And I suspect that the part that really bothers Apple (the publishing of photos) may have been completely legal.

 

[Salacion]

Anyway, at this point Apple legal is probably doing lots and lots of due diligence and investigation, both inside and outside of the company. They'll gather up all the facts and details and then decide if they're going to sue, who they'll be suing, what it is they'll claim, and how much money they'll be asking for.

Perhaps that's why Apple has been so silent about this whole thing. I mean, it's granted they're not just ignoring this whole thing. They're machinating in private, and they'll unleash their wraith in due time!

Or not...

 

[marksman]

I believe that the person that found the phone went to great lengths to contact Apple and return the device. Apple was unreceptive to the attempts (on more than one occasion). I believe that he did his due diligence to return the device to Apple. Apple seemed to make it clear that they didn't want it. Since Apple wasn't willing to take it back, he assumed ownership of the property and sold it. I am not a legal professional, but in my opinion, there was nothing criminal done.

What Small White car said below.

He knew the name of the owner.
He did not contact him.

He knew the bar it was found in.
He did not tell the bar or ask the bar if anyone was missing it.

You're out of your mind. Those are the FIRST two things he should have tried.

Surely law enforcement has better things to do than look into a lost phone.

I think law enforcement has nothing better to do than enforcing the law. Prosecuting someone for stealing someone else's property and than selling it is the kind of thing that benefits all the law abiding citizens.

Oh no, not another thread full of rants from the uninformed and uneducated.

Before making any comment, please:
Understand the difference between a criminal case and a civil case.
Understand who does the prosecuting in each.
Understand the level of proof required in each to secure a conviction / win.
Understand that if Apple was to sue anyone it would require Apple to show they have suffered a financial loss as a direct result of the defendants actions.

I can hear the iPhone finder saying in court - not that it would ever get that far - "Yeah, the Apple guy sold it to me for $800 cash. He said I'd get a $5000 reward from Apple if I returned it. I tried to phone Apple the next day to return it. but they didn't want to know, so I sold it to the tech website to get my money back".
Then you need to understand that as a defendant he doesn't need to prove any of that.

What trrosen said below. Don't get all uppity and call people to task for playing internet lawyer when you say really uneducated things about the law.

Yeah confessing to trafficking in stolen goods, conspiracy and fraud would really help his case. Thats much better. That way he would have three felonies and a cushy life long stay in the CA penal system due to their three stikes laws. He better get a lawyer thats a lot smarter than you.

 

[marksman]

The problem with this logic is the bolded phrase above. The "owner" was not the employee, but Apple, Inc. When the person who found the phone contacted Apple and tried to return the phone, AND WAS REFUSED by the owner, doesn't that confer ownership to the party who tried to return the phone? Thus, he was under no obligation to return the phone to the employee, the bar, or report the lost property to the police. The OWNER of the phone, Apple Inc., refused to take the phone back.

How would the guy know Apple was the owner.

You understand this argument does not make him any less of a criminal. There is no evidence to support the guy to believe Apple to be the owner of the phone.

So why would he call Apple about it? If you worked at McDonalds and lost your phone, would calling McDonalds customer support justify a legitimate effort to contact the owner.

There is no evidence that first of all this guy actually called Apple support. How about he just answer the phone when the engineer who lost it called it? Why not just do that?

Anyways, saying he called Apple to return it is silly, because there is zero evidence on the phone it was owned by Apple. He had the FB information and the most likely owner was the person who had a facebook account on it.

The guy claims he thought it was a regular 3g or 3gs. Why on earth would he think it was Apples? Beyond that he doesn't get to make that decision.

He should have turned it over to the bar or the police. The law in california is very specific. There is no place for just randomly dialing up billion dollar corporations and then keeping the phone. That is just theft.

 

[al256]

I'm seriously starting to wonder if some of these "posters" who think that Gizmodo did nothing wrong are simply trolls from Gawker posting in a vain attempt to generate some kind of false sense of public support.

The douches at Gawker are screwed if Apple decides to pursue this in court. They'll probably wait to file suit until some time after the criminal stuff is done with (if charges are filed) and the next gen phone is officially unveiled. Maybe around August? No idea what the statute of limitations is. Probably a year or two. The theft apparently occurred in mid March.

Anyway, at this point Apple legal is probably doing lots and lots of due diligence and investigation, both inside and outside of the company. They'll gather up all the facts and details and then decide if they're going to sue, who they'll be suing, what it is they'll claim, and how much money they'll be asking for.

And if there is a God, when it's all over, Gawker will be a smoking hole in the ground.

Some of us have been posting here longer than you

 

[MacModMachine]

How would the guy know Apple was the owner.

You understand this argument does not make him any less of a criminal. There is no evidence to support the guy to believe Apple to be the owner of the phone.

So why would he call Apple about it? If you worked at McDonalds and lost your phone, would calling McDonalds customer support justify a legitimate effort to contact the owner.

There is no evidence that first of all this guy actually called Apple support. How about he just answer the phone when the engineer who lost it called it? Why not just do that?

Anyways, saying he called Apple to return it is silly, because there is zero evidence on the phone it was owned by Apple. He had the FB information and the most likely owner was the person who had a facebook account on it.

The guy claims he thought it was a regular 3g or 3gs. Why on earth would he think it was Apples? Beyond that he doesn't get to make that decision.

He should have turned it over to the bar or the police. The law in california is very specific. There is no place for just randomly dialing up billion dollar corporations and then keeping the phone. That is just theft.

exactly my thoughts,

he is a thief, saying he called apple smells like a ploy to not get his knuckles wrapped for selling it.

why would he call apple at all....sounds like he was looking for a reason to be able to sell the phone.

he should be prosecuted and so should gizmodo

 

[al256]

oh, i did. and that's my answer.

" The law never seems to be equally applied. If it was, this issue would be much more clear for us. "

the "rest" is just... completely besides the point. moot.

hypothetically, no human rule is ever, has ever, or will be equally applied to every situation, ever. the problem being the "human" part.

and on something else completely separate...

"Please explain to me how someone losing an item, another finding it equates to theft."

it doesn't. selling it does. law is FUN.

Well, your answer answers nothing I asked.

I never wrote the second quote at the bottom. Please don't lump someone else's post with mine. Quoting multiple posts inside one post is simple, easy and "FUN."