From the sound of Jason's note, he hasn't yet obtained his own lawyer. Big mistake.
We'll find out soon enough, I'll eat popcorn for now & burn the carbs off later.
From the sound of Jason's note, he hasn't yet obtained his own lawyer. Big mistake.
That presumes that the proprietor is aware of the property being misplaced in their establishment. Most people will turn it in to the bar or restaurant. But in California, they are not required to. They can also make independent attempts to return it or they can turn it over to the police. If they ever hope to obtain legal ownership of the item, it must be turned over to the police.I still don't like the outcome and the apparent fact that anyone finding a purse/wallet/laptop/phone has the legal right to leave the restaurant with it, and the proprietor has no right to suggest otherwise, even though this decreases the chances the owner will ever get his/her property back
The court acknowledged the distinction in out of state locations and law before rejecting the argument on an "either/or" basis because the distinction does not exist in California. The effect of the dicta paragraph you quote is, "Even under the defendant's own argument, which is not based in California law, he loses." But because the authority isn't of California law to begin with, it's invalid anyway.This is from People v. Stay, where defendant was attempting to use lost v. mislaid as a defense to theft:
[...]
The court acknowledged the distinction and the policy behind it.
I wonder if this story will make it into the "Dumb Crooks" files?
Party A steals a prototype phone (let's just call it what it is and stop all the BS legal wrangling) and sells it to Party B who then publishes a step-by-step account of the theft and their purchase of stolen property in their popular tech blog, which is then read by millions. That's just like the guys who rob a convenience store right after writing a personal check.
I also think that Gizmodo was horribly wrong in identifying the poor guy who lost his phone. How come we don't know the identity of the thief? Why are they protecting him and making the victim a laughingstock? I really hope Gizmodo and the thief are punished for their crimes (and stupidity).
One more thing . . . let's get real. All this legal mumbo-jumbo is nice and idealistic, but it does not reflect what really happens. People lose phones everyday and never get them back because the finders become keepers. These incidents aren't even reported to the police for the most part and even if they are, most items are never recovered. It doesn't matter if you leave it at a bar or if it's stolen from your pocket, the fact is that the vast majority of these losses result in theft and nothing is ever done about it. We only know about this case because Gizmodo was stupid enough to publish it.
What I find amazing is that there are easy technological solutions to recover stolen phones or at the least, prevent stolen phones from being used, but none of these easy solutions are being implemented. 1)Every phone has a serial # - why don't carriers have databases with stolen serials that can be matched to people bringing in phones for activation or used on their network? 2)With GPS in just about every phone, why can't that data be used to find the phone? If I could report it stolen and have the carrier search for that phone's serial # . . . case closed. That way it's tied to serial number, not something temporary like a mobile me account. Hell, all you have to do is tie phone accounts into serial numbers and not just sim cards, which can be removed. It should be easy for a carrier to look up calls made on a phone with a certain serial #.
No, it's theft. There is no scenario under which the series of events that has taken place is lawful. Whether charges or convictions result from the crime is, as always, simply a question of practicality and evidence gathering.It's not theft until proven in a court of law
The police already have the name.Gizmodo might be subpoenaed to reveal the name of the seller and they will just claim shield law protection.
Your assumption is far more egregious than his. Everything about this smacks of no one stopping to speak to a lawyer. Gizmodo has totally mismanaged the situation. They'd have been in the same position to report, and actually had a plausible shield argument, had they purchased photos.You're making a big assumption here, that Gizmodo is some garage outlet that doesn't even know what a lawyer looks like. You can be assured that they consulted multiple lawyers before this went down.
They never called that person, nor did they contact Apple's corporate offices, by their own admission. Moreover, "lost/unclaimed" property is not subject to a fictional "finders, keepers" rule.If you call the only presumed owner of the device and they claim it's not their device then I think that's a fair assumption that the property is lost/unclaimed.
(A) It wasn't unclaimed and (B) selling something that does not belong to you is a crime.Showing someone unclaimed property, while trying to contact the owner, isn't a crime.
I am tired of these holier than thou people who think they are the best thing since sliced bread just because they have been on a forum longer than someone else.
You're making a big assumption here, that Gizmodo is some garage outlet that doesn't even know what a lawyer looks like. You can be assured that they consulted multiple lawyers before this went down.
Considering I would be legally liable? Yes. It's also the decent thing to do (and I say it as a person who does not own a Mac or iPhone).
I *may* have taken it from the bar (Assuming I used the guy's facebook to tell him I found the lost phone). People lie about **** all the time, and I'd want to give the device back personally.
If it bricked before I got in touch with the guy, in what actually happened, I had his name. I could have searched him publicly on Facebook - and I don't need to be his friend to send him a message through Facebook.
Let's say his Facebook was private. At the point where I removed the case and saw the Apple branding on a device I knew wasn't on the market, I'd contact Apple.
He did that, you say. Not in any reasonable way. I have a friend-of-a-friend who knows somebody at Apple who is above AppleCare support (not anything like a CxO, but up the food chain). And if I didn't know her, Steve Jobs' email is public. With a company as secretive as Apple, you bet Jobs was told about the lost phone immediately.
Failing all of that- I'd give it to the cops. People file missing items reports all the time.