Kinda obvious when you think about it! After all if the phone was lost in a bar than the finder had to be there to find it!
To me is was more along the lines that a customer or someone who was there found it, not someone working at the bar itself.
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
To me is was more along the lines that a customer or someone who was there found it, not someone working at the bar itself.
So, where you live, is there a law that legally compels you to hand lost property over to a staff member? Unless I know who I'm giving the property to, I always hand things over to the Police, and there's no law in my neck of the woods preventing me from doing so, in fact it's preferred.
Within the month? Even Giz did better than that
I found a wallet with no ID save for some company business cards (plus a reasonable sum of cash), it made it's way back to the owner in two days.
The owner was even nice enough to leave a cash reward at the Police station, which I picked up at Headquarters, where I happen to work
Not particularly necessary to tell me what you're not a fan of, but good for you ("Oh dear"
).You'll also probably know that world does not revolve around yourself, and numerous entertaining ranters are available.
Not particularly necessary to tell me what you're not a fan of, but good for you ("Oh dear"
You'll also probably know that world does not revolve around yourself, and numerous entertaining ranters are available.
Being an Apple fan here on MR doesn't mean we are not capable of criticizing Apple when they are in the wrong as well. While there are those types here, you can't lump us all as Apple fanboys who will go to the ends of the Earth to defend Apple.
Now-now, no need to patronise them, although if your lucky they might try to give you a beer
wow. this has been explained so many times, i don't understand why some ppl are having trouble grasping it. FIRST, NO legitimate attempt was made to return the phone. The "finder" did NOT call the owner of the bar where it was found. He did NOT attempt to contact the owner of the phone (whom he had identified on the phone and located on Facebook.) He KNOWINGLY SOLD something that wasn't his, which is a crime in California. Gizmodo KNOWINGLY purchased stolen property, ALSO A CRIME.
As for "what damages" Apple suffered? omg. PUHLEEZ. It is a simple matter to calculate the value of the publicity that surrounds upcoming Apple launches. The news and web frenzy generates a measurable amount of media exposure, most of which surrounds conjecture as to the features expected in the upcoming release. With most of the features now known, Apple has lost a huge amount of money that can be measured in lost media exposure. Not to mention lost sales of 3GS iPhones during coming months as would-be buyers opt to wait for the new iPhone. So, to answer your question, THOSE are the damages Apple "would be seeking to recover"!!!!
Of course not, I would be including myself by default.
That breed has been in decline for the past few years (maybe they all went to SpyMac and got eaten by AtariST), still, there's enough of them kicking about here to last us years, mostly new converts by the looks of things, talking the talk like it's 1999 again.
I've already made it clear that it's my opinion that Gawker Media is guilty of criminal act. But here's my armchair analysis anyway:
1) Although the prototype iPhone was supposedly found in a bar, the person that found it did NOT make reasonable attempts to return the iPhone to its proper owner. The moment that person removed the iPhone from the bar, he/she became guilty of theft. It was not his/hers to take and it CERTAINLY was not his/hers to sell. This is the person that I have the most desire to see prosecuted for criminal activity. Having him/her spend a bit of time in jail would send a nice message to all of the "finders keepers" believers out there. (The ones that are, apparently, still in grade school.) Once the thief has to hire a lawyer to defend him/herself, he/she will wish he/she had gotten a lot more than $5K from Gawker Media. In fact, I bet that person is worried sick right now. As he/she should be!
2) By Gawker Media's own admission, they knew the prototype iPhone did not belong to the person they purchased it from. That's all that we need to know. They KNEW it was not the rightful property of the person selling it. In my opinion, by purchasing it, Gawker Media became guilty of purchasing stolen property.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
4) "Freedom of speech" and "Freedom of the press" will not protect Gawker Media in this case. This isn't a first amendment case. It's a criminal case about stolen property. The first amendment issues would only come into play during a subsequent civil suit (filed by Apple) over the release of trade secrets, etc.
5) Apparently, the only good advice Gawker Media got from their "legal team" was to make sure the prototype iPhone remained in California. That saved Gawker Media from the biggest bag of hurt. Had the prototype crossed state lines, then it would be the US District Attorney and the FBI investigating this situation. The federal laws on the transportation of stolen property across state lines are quite clear. It would have been a felony.
6) Lastly, the story linked at the beginning of this thread is about a CRIMINAL investigation. Nowhere does it say that Apple is suing Gawker or anyone else. Apple may be preparing a civil suit, but, as of now, none has been announced. This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement. If, during their investigation, they discover that the prototype iPhone ever crossed state lines, I am sure the feds will get involved too. If Santa Clara law enforcement finds sufficient evidence of violation of California law, then charges will be brought.
And HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART... In a CRIMINAL case, Gawker Media cannot use a first amendment defense to protect the person that found and sold the prototype iPhone. In a CRIMINAL case, they will be forced to reveal the identity of that person. If Gawker Media refuses, then principles at Gawker Media will likely find themselves behind bars for contempt of court and charged with interfering with a criminal investigation.
If the person that "found" this prototype iPhone is reading this... You should be very very worried right now! You are in for a world of hurt if law enforcement and the DA decides to move forward with criminal charges. You could be facing jail time and significant fines. Gawker Media will not be able to protect you. Your best bet is to come forward immediately and contact the Santa Clara district attorney to try to work a plea deal in exchange for your testimony against Gawker Media. I'm sure the district attorney would rather make the bigger headlines of hanging Gawker Media out to dry vs. some John Doe that happened to make a really really stupid error in judgement in a bar.
Then, after the criminal part is done, then you can start worrying about the civil suit that Apple might bring. But at least that won't land you in jail.
BTW, the above recommendation applies to Jason Chen, who is, apparently, the Gawker Media employee that is based here in California that held possession of the prototype iPhone for Gawker. Jason is likely to be the "fall guy" in any criminal prosecution. If there is an arrest (fingerprinting and photos and all that stuff), Jason is likely to be the first one. Jason just might want to consider working a plea deal himself.
Mark
1) Although the prototype iPhone was supposedly found in a bar, the person that found it did NOT make reasonable attempts to return the iPhone to its proper owner. The moment that person removed the iPhone from the bar, he/she became guilty of theft. It was not his/hers to take and it CERTAINLY was not his/hers to sell. This is the person that I have the most desire to see prosecuted for criminal activity. Having him/her spend a bit of time in jail would send a nice message to all of the "finders keepers" believers out there. (The ones that are, apparently, still in grade school.) Once the thief has to hire a lawyer to defend him/herself, he/she will wish he/she had gotten a lot more than $5K from Gawker Media. In fact, I bet that person is worried sick right now. As he/she should be!
2) By Gawker Media's own admission, they knew the prototype iPhone did not belong to the person they purchased it from. That's all that we need to know. They KNEW it was not the rightful property of the person selling it. In my opinion, by purchasing it, Gawker Media became guilty of purchasing stolen property.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
4) "Freedom of speech" and "Freedom of the press" will not protect Gawker Media in this case. This isn't a first amendment case. It's a criminal case about stolen property. The first amendment issues would only come into play during a subsequent civil suit (filed by Apple) over the release of trade secrets, etc.
5) Apparently, the only good advice Gawker Media got from their "legal team" was to make sure the prototype iPhone remained in California. That saved Gawker Media from the biggest bag of hurt. Had the prototype crossed state lines, then it would be the US District Attorney and the FBI investigating this situation. The federal laws on the transportation of stolen property across state lines are quite clear. It would have been a felony.
6) Lastly, the story linked at the beginning of this thread is about a CRIMINAL investigation. Nowhere does it say that Apple is suing Gawker or anyone else. Apple may be preparing a civil suit, but, as of now, none has been announced. This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement. If, during their investigation, they discover that the prototype iPhone ever crossed state lines, I am sure the feds will get involved too. If Santa Clara law enforcement finds sufficient evidence of violation of California law, then charges will be brought.
And HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART... In a CRIMINAL case, Gawker Media cannot use a first amendment defense to protect the person that found and sold the prototype iPhone. In a CRIMINAL case, they will be forced to reveal the identity of that person. If Gawker Media refuses, then principles at Gawker Media will likely find themselves behind bars for contempt of court and charged with interfering with a criminal investigation.
If the person that "found" this prototype iPhone is reading this... You should be very very worried right now! You are in for a world of hurt if law enforcement and the DA decides to move forward with criminal charges. You could be facing jail time and significant fines. Gawker Media will not be able to protect you. Your best bet is to come forward immediately and contact the Santa Clara district attorney to try to work a plea deal in exchange for your testimony against Gawker Media. I'm sure the district attorney would rather make the bigger headlines of hanging Gawker Media out to dry vs. some John Doe that happened to make a really really stupid error in judgement in a bar.
Then, after the criminal part is done, then you can start worrying about the civil suit that Apple might bring. But at least that won't land you in jail.
BTW, the above recommendation applies to Jason Chen, who is, apparently, the Gawker Media employee that is based here in California that held possession of the prototype iPhone for Gawker. Jason is likely to be the "fall guy" in any criminal prosecution. If there is an arrest (fingerprinting and photos and all that stuff), Jason is likely to be the first one. Jason just might want to consider working a plea deal himself.
Mark
Look know-it-all, it's not about stolen property or even purchasing of stolen property. They had no way of knowing it was a real iPhone or that it was "stolen" until they bought it. A criminal prosecutor is going to have a hard time proving this was malicious, and I bet they won't press charges, as it would likely be a waste of money with no real conviction.
Apple gets soooooo much free press and publicity from Giz, so it sounds just like Steve to take every measure possible to piss them off. ****, he has Google and Adobe pissed at Apple, so why not start with the news outlets now?
Does Steve actually think it will look good to have Giz post articles about how Apple is suing them for losing their own phone? Legal matters aside, they are quickly working on making many enemies in the world.
Does Steve actually think it will look good to have Giz post articles about how Apple is suing them for losing their own phone? Legal matters aside, they are quickly working on making many enemies in the world.
Gizmodo said it themselves that their source found the prototype at a bar.
Even if they thought it was fake, they should have been weary about the source saying he found it because then they would be buying stolen property because if it was real, then they would be in deep trouble with the law. They should have requested to see it before paying for it to examine if it could be the real deal and was indeed Apple's before paying $5000 for it.
It's tough to defend that characterization when Gizmodo is paying people $5000 for the thing.
If the guy left it on the bar to take a leak, and someone spirited it out of the bar, would it still be Apple's fault? If someone took it from his unlocked car? Where's the line?
Clearly Gizmodo conspired with a guy who stole the phone. End of story.
They did examine it and they knew it was real after that examination.
Part of that examination was plugging it into a computer, which launched iTunes.
It doesn't matter though, whether it was a knock-off or real, under CA law it was stolen.
Oh... BTW... While Gawker Media being located in New York could provide some challenges for a civil suit by Apple, that geography would provide ZERO protection for Gawker in a criminal matter. It is clear a Gawker employee/agent took possession of the prototype iPhone here in California (we have video, nicely supplied by Gawker). In a criminal matter, the United States constitution requires all states to extradite defendants to the state that filed charges. If it went that far, principles at Gawker Media in New York would be arrested by authorities there, and then extradited to California.
Now... I don't believe it will go that far. I believe that, in the course of the criminal investigation, Gawker Media and the person that found the iPhone will be so busy rolling over on each other (to try to protect themselves) that there won't be any need to extradite anyone.
Mark
Now... I don't believe it will go that far. I believe that, in the course of the criminal investigation, Gawker Media and the person that found the iPhone will be so busy rolling over on each other (to try to protect themselves) that there won't be any need to extradite anyone.
Mark
It will be interesting to know whether Gizmodo even has the identity of the "founder".
It is quite possible that the founder knew better than Gizmodo. Think about it, if a thief sells stolen goods, would he reveal his identity, and would he even tell the truth about how he "found" it?
Cash transaction at the street corner, just like all stolen good should be sold.
If they did determine it was the real deal before paying $5000 for it and tearing it apart, OMG they are screwed.
Not really. They are subject to personal jurisdiction in California (both specific - they committed the acts here - and general, they have offices here, they publish from here, etc.). Apple will sue them in Federal District Court for the Northern District of California, in all likelihood. (Since the amount of damages is >$75,000, and since Gawker is a NY company, there is subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity).
The fact that they paid $5000 proves they were at least reasonably sure it was the real deal, and in California that is more than enough.
They knew it was a prototype before buying it.
Don't believe me? Email them and tell them you have a strange iPad/iPhone/Macbook. See if you would pay you 5000 for it.
The finder supposedly put in a ticket with Apple support. If that is true, Apple should know who the finder is.
That is what I said... They knew it before they paid.
Sadly that may end up being the case, There is only so far that authorities are going to go and only so much effort that Apple is interested in exerting. Once the iPhone 4 comes out, there will be less interest to peruse a civil matter.
Criminal on the other hand is going to be much cheaper since the state handles most of the cost.
Assuming that CSR still has it - I wouldnt be surprised after not knowing what he was referring to and rejected him, they closed the ticket.
It also assumes that he left his contact info...
Apple still keeps closed tickets. It should still be available.
If the finder did not leave contact info, kiss the "good faith effort defense" goodbye.