Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I could laugh. Before this story was posted, Gizmodo were the bad guys. Now (mostly) everyone feels sorry for them.

I don't know what to think! We'll know when Apple releases iPhone 4.
 
I suppose theft is against the law... But we all know that Apple is gonna make a bigger deal over this than normal. If they care this much they shouldn't have allowed someone to go to a bar with the prototype. And apparently the guy who lost it wasn't fired... Go figure.

Firing the employee would essentially admit to people that it wasn't just a prototype in an odd case but the upcoming iPhone. Also, Gizmodo made his name public- now there's some public sympathy for the guy.

And you expect Apple to test the phone in a faraday cage? You have to test a device like a cell phone outside of your own building eventually...
 
Do you really think the police would react this much or even get involved at all if one of us lost a phone that was then sold for $5,000 then returned to us? They might do something, but they wouldn't be raiding houses taking away computers and hard drives. It would be a very low priority case.

Committing a possible crime in a city that has a special task force specific to the crime involved is a bad idea? The SWAT team was just itching for someone to screw up.
 
Apple, at minimum, had to report the phone to the police as "stolen". If the item is never considered "stolen", then the police have *ZERO* reason to even investigate, much less get a warrant to search his home.

Mere press speculation and statements regarding the "stolen" nature of it is not sufficient as evidence that something was stolen.

All big firms do have a clause to report to police any missing company owned laptops, phone etc. Not necessarily stolen, even missing one. I have a company laptop , and I do have to report to local authority if I lost it somewhere.
 
Erm have you been living under a rock for the past week? It's not just a phone, it's a prototype, of which it is covered as Trade Secrets.

Apparently under the same rock as you, running around with your "Trade Secrets" in plain view is gross negligence.
 
If they care this much they shouldn't have allowed someone to go to a bar with the prototype. And apparently the guy who lost it wasn't fired... Go figure.

Actually any ADULT with a lick of common sense wouldn't of lost a prototype of the phone like that. Mistakes happen yes? But this is just plain stupidity. For some reason you think it's apples fault and it is not. If it was me i damn sure wouldn't of put myself in a situtation like this.
 
This was a perfectly reasonable response, given that the aforementioned prototype phone had industry secrets, like teleportation, shrink ray, levitation, brain scanners, the password to the nation's nukes, and--

Oh what? No? It was just the same exact goddamn phone as the last three models?
 
Do you really think the police would react this much or even get involved at all if one of us lost a phone that was then sold for $5,000 then returned to us? They might do something, but they wouldn't be raiding houses taking away computers and hard drives. It would be a very low priority case.

Personally I think there is much more to this story. IMO, the Apple Engineer was "set up" in some manner. The amount for the phone was prearranged. Only my opinion, no proof. Just seems to be getting very big very quickly. Apple and the police know some things we are not even close to.:apple:
 
Inventory Listing

I'm assuming Apple knows exactly what is and isn't missing.

On the assumption that they aren't missing any other future prototypes this would be seen as fairly vindictive.

On the assumption they are missing something and that's why they ordered the search- what are they missing??

Or is this just procedure to see if the guy has stolen anything else?
 
Journalism does not trump trafficking in stolen goods.
Paying for something which you know is not the lawful property of the seller is theft.

That may be true, but was the property stolen?
Did the one finding the phone take steps to return it to the owner? That is the real question. And even if the phone is deemed stolen, now they're issuing a search warrant for what?

If those phone was not stolen, the referenced laws apply.

(g) No warrant shall issue for any item or items described in
Section 1070 of the Evidence Code.

(a) A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected
with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical
publication, or by a press association or wire service, or any person
who has been so connected or employed, cannot be adjudged in
contempt by a judicial, legislative, administrative body, or any
other body having the power to issue subpoenas, for refusing to
disclose, in any proceeding as defined in Section 901, the source of
any information procured while so connected or employed for
publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication,
or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or
prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for
communication to the public.
(b) Nor can a radio or television news reporter or other person
connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any
person who has been so connected or employed, be so adjudged in
contempt for refusing to disclose the source of any information
procured while so connected or employed for news or news commentary
purposes on radio or television, or for refusing to disclose any
unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving
or processing of information for communication to the public.
(c) As used in this section, "unpublished information" includes
information not disseminated to the public by the person from whom
disclosure is sought, whether or not related information has been
disseminated and includes, but is not limited to, all notes,
outtakes, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort not
itself disseminated to the public through a medium of communication,
whether or not published information based upon or related to such
material has been disseminated.

In this case, Gawker wins. No doubt.

Here are my sources.

1.

2.
 
As a publicly held corporation, Apple's goal is to maximize value for their stockholders. The loss of a high profile product- which is valued on its uniqueness, and secrecy, and surprise launches- is definitely something that harms the country.


I don't think this in any way harmed America.

I don't think it hurt Apple much either ;). Like honestly, who did it hurt? HTC already had most of these features. People who "wait to buy a new iphone" will still buy a new iphone.

And stop feeling sorry for that Engineer. He messed up. Big time. Rule #1: Don't drink and use a top secret prototype iPhone.
 
They asked Apple if they owned it. Apple said it wasn't theirs.
Somehow methinks us popcorn-munchers aren't getting the full nuanced story.

If you get what you KNOW beyond any doubt is a major industry prototype about to spawn billions of dollars in revenue, and the company/owner says "nope, not ours", you don't just respond with a chipper "oh, ok" and publish the details expecting nothing ill to come of it.
 
Do you really think the police would react this much or even get involved at all if one of us lost a phone that was then sold for $5,000 then returned to us? They might do something, but they wouldn't be raiding houses taking away computers and hard drives. It would be a very low priority case.

I think it all hinges on the value of the item stolen.

You "lose" a $1 million phone, then ya, I think the police would get pretty involved.

The value of the lost iPhone is far more than $5000. And there is some debate surrounding the circumstances of the loss.

arn
 
Except that the items seized were not stolen. :rolleyes:

Except legally, they are considered such under the California penal code.

Calling Applecare when the employee had a public Facebook (hidden info, but you can send a message to him without being his friend, Gizmodo shows this in their own screenshot) is not a reasonable step to attempt return and establish legal abandonment.
 
stevejobs630x.jpg
 
Trade secrets are invaluable. I remember when someone (an employee) of the oil company i worked for sold trade secrets to another company, pretty much the same thing happened. He was prosecuted and lord knows what else. No one heard much about it (or him) after that.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.