One of the most common traits of thieves is that they believe everyone else thinks the way they do.
If I find something in a bar I am not taking it with me (pretty girls excepted), I'm handing it over to the bartender.
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.
Law Enforcement Reportedly Looking Into Circumstances of Lost Next-Generation iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One of the most common traits of thieves is that they believe everyone else thinks the way they do.
If I find something in a bar I am not taking it with me (pretty girls excepted), I'm handing it over to the bartender.
You're going to be amazed how few people are as shady as you are. One day there are going to be twelve unshady people who unanimously convince you of that fact.
Actually, most people do the right thing because it feels good and makes them feel good about themselves. They have the capacity to empathize with the person who needs help, or has misplaced something. Then they say to themselves that if they were in that position, they would want someone to treat them fairly, so they behave that way themselves.
Then there are people who would be willing to help themselves to others' property, but they are deterred by the prospect of criminal prosecution or of being socially ostracized.
Then there are people who lack the ability to empathize with others and who can rationalize or deny the consequences; we call these people sociopaths. No offense intended.
So in your mind, it's OK to steal private property and pawn it to the highest bidder? Apple has no right to protect its prototypes - so it's OK for the competition to get a couple month head start?
I'm glad you're not making the laws in this country.
Actually, taking it apart and posting pictures doesn't change the criminal action which is being discussed here. It MIGHT create additional civil penalties.
Read the CA state laws - including the one cited in the article you responded to.
Baloney. They allegedly called Apple's tech support line - which would be the LAST place to call.
They knew the owner's name - and never tried to call Apple's main switchboard. They never notified the bar that they had found it. They never went back to the bar after the fact to see if anyone was looking for it. They knew the facebook page for the owner and never notified him.
There were a number of ways they could have gotten it back to the rightful owner - and never even tried.
Only disclosure of their trade secrets to the competition. How many millions of dollars do you think it's worth to the competition to have a 2 month head start on Apple?
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
What happened to it? Nothing. It remains something that kids shout in the schoolyard. Or did you think it actually had some legal validity?
terryzx said:
What happened to it? Nothing. It remains something that kids shout in the schoolyard. Or did you think it actually had some legal validity?
Man you Apple fan boys are dumb as dirt.
The person who found the phone tried to return it to Apple multiple times, Apple refused it every time.
Once Apple refused to take back the phone they lost any case they might have had civil or criminal.
I will never again buy another Apple product due to the actions of Apple Inc.
The person who found the phone tried to return it to Apple multiple times, Apple refused it every time.
Once Apple refused to take back the phone they lost any case they might have had civil or criminal.
I will never again buy another Apple product due to the actions of Apple Inc.
This has been discussed over and over and is not interesting, nor relevant. It does not change the fact he committed a crime, and when properly analyzed acts as actual evidence of his intent to steal the phone.
This really is the bottom line. The guy knew the phone was not his to take and he took it. Nothing else really matters. Even if you found it innocently there are only a couple of things you can legally do. Most normal people would choose to do those things. This guy did not. He intended to steal the phone from the get go. As others have speculated, for all we know he actively stole it.
Probably did. Stupid is as stupid does. Just because someone is a lawyer does not mean they are smart.
That doesn't meet the requirements of the law. He didn't know Apple owned the phone, and there is no actual evidence this guy did this. Why did he just not answer the phone when the engineer called it looking for it? Why did he not at least tell the bar employees he found it and left his number? Everything we know for a fact he did proves he intended to steal it and not to return it. There is no evidence that he called Apple, and even if it existed it would not change the legal reality that he is guilty of theft.
Yeah it is so silly. Three options in my book. 1) Give it to the bar. 2) Give it to the police. 3) Try to find the owner. If that doesn't work give it to the bar or the police.
Call numbers to find friends, answer the phone when the owner calls. (I suspect this happened numerous times.)
The fact that this guy did not do any of these very obvious and reasonable things to find the owner proves that his only intent was to steal it.
Shoot, I cashier as a living. I accidentally forgot to charge some one for something ($40 dollars in value). Right as i discovered it and was about to tell my manager my mistake, he piped up (as he was in line), "That was me, yeah, I noticed you hadn't charged me for it so I came back in to pay."
Yes, there are honest people out there. He could have easily just left and gotten a free 40 dollar item (I didn't even bother to try to run after him cause this had been way long enough that I figured he already drove away).
I've done the same thing myself when I got double the amount of gift cards from costco I was supposed to. Next time I was there I told them they gave me too many and i needed to pay for the extra set.
I have found some one's cellphone. After looking through their contact list and trying to contact some one and telling them where their phone was (I left a message), I left it with the lost and found of the airport I found it in.
So, just cause you are a dishonest person doesn't mean eveyrone else is.
You think Customer Service is in a position to handle a lost prototype?
No they are not. Just like Ford's Customer Service department is not in a position to help return your car keys that I found.
Which is exactly why I'd vote the D.A. out of office if he didn't prosecute Gizmodo and its minions to the full extent of the law. And at the sentencing hearing I'd cite your post to the judge.
He never left his info w/ the bar in case the engineer would call the bar
He never contacted the engineer even though he had the info
He stated he called customer service and that is debatable because if he did they would be able to track the call.
The phone was 20 miles away from the campus he never went by and tried to give it back that way
He never gave the phone over to the police instead he sold it
don't let the door hit you on the way out...
G4
Pretty much not legal.
Who's gonna get hit with the books?
Whoever they can get more ca$h out of.
Pretty much not legal.
Who's gonna get hit with the books?
Whoever they can get more ca$h out of.
So the police should stop investigating theft of valuable property - especially when Gizmodo is so public about paying for stolen property?
That phone is worth millions to the competition or to Apple, but that's not really the point. The police know about grand theft, so you want them to simply ignore it? Isn't their job to try to prevent theft and, lacking that, to track down and prosecute the thieves?
You can't be serious. If they actually were serious about returning the phone, it would have been returned and not sold to Gizmodo. Do you think that Apple would not want their highly secretive prototype phone back if someone really managed to contact them? That prototype is worth millions of dollars in revenue and advertising. They had the name of the person who was testing the phone but never contacted him, rather they went to a tech blog to try and get a cash grab.
Also, you don't want to buy another Apple product because they apparently refused to take back their lost/stolen prototype? You don't even make logical sense.
If I had your wallet with your drivers license (worth under $100), would you refuse to take it back? Now think about how much that prototype is worth to Apple.
Smarten up.
Not even Gizmodo is making such a claim - the farthest they have gone is said was that the guy was ignored and never spoken further - that is miles from legal abandonment and is miles from an active refusal.
And even if it was true its meaningless - Apples CSR are not in any legal position to speak on behalf of corporate and cannot legally abandon a prototype phone. They are in no position to do that. The only person who was in such a position is the person who lost the phone - Grey Powell and he has not abandoned it. You cannot find my wallet, call my neighbor (or even my hypothetical roommate) and take his lack of response as indication of anything.
Anyone reading this thread should also read this article. It will clear up all of the legal questions... which needless to say people seriously misunderstand.
http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gizmodo_prototype_iphone
http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gizmodo_prototype_iphone
Definitely not. Fortunately, no one stole anything in this case.
It's not a "secret" if it's left in a bar for the world to see.
So how is selling someone else's property not stealing and wrong?
People have quoted the law in California that applies to this situation. It clearly shows the seller is in the wrong and committed theft.
I was on the fence before about whether there could be any legal loophole but Gizmodo clearly knew the phone wasn't property of the seller when they bought it, and the law doesn't make any provisions regarding buying it so you can return it (why not just have the buyer do it)...
Gizmodo could have been nice to Apple. I'm sure that if Apple gets an email from Gizmodo (assuming they don't have an PR contact) it would get elevated.
Instead, they tried to put on a big show for pagehits.
The device had clear Apple branding, and the law doesn't make any provisions regarding reasonable efforts to return it (worst case scenario, he should have given it to the police department).
He saw the guy who left it- and he knew that it was his facebook, because he had left himself logged in on the device (and his profile identified him as an Apple employee).
At that point, any argument that the seller didn't know the device owner crumbles into shambles.
And this is also where it's a problem for Gizmodo. Gizmodo's explanation is that they didn't know if the device belonged to the guy whose facebook was on the screen, Apple as a company, or someone else (weak, but whatever).
They did, however, know that the device did not belong to the person selling it.
And this is were Gizmodo is in deep crap.
The person who found it called Apples help desk (supposedly). Apple never refused to take it back, the guy did not make a serious attempt. He had the persons name, why would he have contacted the Apple desk at all?
What actions are you mad about? Informing the police that their property was stolen? Gizmodo told the world it was stolen, Apple only made it official.
Let's say you leave your phone behind in a bar. You arrive at your home, and realize you left it there. You head back and find that it's not there. The owner has no clue about it. What happened to it? "no one stole it".
You know exactly what he meant, yet you decide to take that route.
Your friend trusts you with his secret about (say erectile dysfunction?), and then you go tell the world about it. It was a secret until you went and told the world. You needed to keep that secret, but you didn't. Same scenario.
With all due respect, I completely agree with Gizmodo being in trouble over buying stolen property (felony), but trade secrets? As far as I am aware, neither the seller nor Gizmodo are under any sort of non-disclosure agreement with Apple.
Not a lawyer myself though. If there is some basis for this I'd like to hear why.