Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Much of this thread reads like the panicked thought processes of an eighteen year old perp caught red-handed stealing something.



  1. Oh no, I'm caught!
  2. It wasn't me!
  3. Who can I blame?
    • the "Man"?
    • my upbringing?
    • the victim?
    • the system?
    • my stepfather?
    • anyone remotely connected?
  4. Justice is only for the rich!
  5. It wasn't really stealing, I was just borrowing it for a while!
  6. Fascist Gestapo Nazi SS jackboot swastika loving regime!
  7. I'll never shop at the place I stole that stuff ever again!
  8. I didn't know it was wrong!
  9. It's a conspiracy at the highest level!
  10. F you target of my crime!
  11. F the police!
  12. F the justice system
  13. This is revenge against me!
  14. They're out to get me!
  15. I was doing it for the greater good, like Robin Hood!
  16. They're only after me 'cause I'm the little guy!
  17. They're out to get me!
  18. Boo hoo... I'm an innocent child! (Wipes back tears.)
  19. Other people steal stuff, why shouldn't I?
  20. My dad's lawyer will fix you!
  21. It was only a worthless trinket that I took!
  22. The forces of evil are at work against me!
  23. Etc.
  24. Etc.
  25. Etc.
 
DA is allowed and required to investigate any possibility that a crime was committed. He doesn't need to get a life, he's acting as he should.

And that's the problem. What they should be doing is giving attention to real issues rather than spending people's tax dollars and raiding a person's home over a phone.
 
Yeah, Apple is Big Brother. Sheesh. I was hoping to find some intelligent discussion here, but that seems to have checked out long ago. Time to move on...

You and me both. We've got a bunch of people claiming that Apple is running the police, that Apple is part of Big Brother, that Gizmodo/Gawker is protected from purchasing stolen goods because they're "journalists," etc.

Everyone has a tin foil hat on and it's pretty annoying. No legit discussion is going on here.
 
I was thinking the same thing, but wouldn't have been able to put it so well.


Much of this thread reads like the panicked thought processes of an eighteen year old perp caught red-handed stealing something.



  1. Oh no, I'm caught!
  2. It wasn't me!
  3. Who can I blame?
    • the "Man"?
    • my upbringing?
    • the victim?
    • the system?
    • my stepfather?
    • anyone remotely connected?
  4. Justice is only for the rich!
  5. It wasn't really stealing, I was just borrowing it for a while!
  6. Fascist Gestapo Nazi SS jackboot swastika loving regime!
  7. I'll never shop at the place I stole that stuff ever again!
  8. I didn't know it was wrong!
  9. It's a conspiracy at the highest level!
  10. F you target of my crime!
  11. F the police!
  12. F the justice system
  13. This is revenge against me!
  14. They're out to get me!
  15. I was doing it for the greater good, like Robin Hood!
  16. They're only after me 'cause I'm the little guy!
  17. They're out to get me!
  18. Boo hoo... I'm an innocent child! (Wipes back tears.)
  19. Other people steal stuff, why shouldn't I?
  20. My dad's lawyer will fix you!
  21. It was only a worthless trinket that I took!
  22. The forces of evil are at work against me!
  23. Etc.
  24. Etc.
  25. Etc.
 
And that's the problem. What they should be doing is giving attention to real issues rather than spending people's tax dollars and raiding a person's home over a phone.

HaHA. Christ, don't make me laugh any harder. This is an issue that they should be spending tax dollars on.

It's not just a phone. It's a prototype phone. The ramifications in terms of income, trade secrets, and even income for the State of California are huge.
 
Espionage? Riight as if Gizmodo went into apple's facility and stole the thing.

It was a lost phone.

That it was a lost phone is not disputed. What Gizmodo did with a lost prototype is the issue. They paid to get their hands on a prototype phone, then they published information about it. Whether or not they originally stole the phone is irrelevant.

Your "espionage" question makes it seem that you don't think an entity stealing the intellectual property rights of another entity either doesn't happen or is not that big a deal. I hold a different opinion. Actually, neither your nor my opinion does not matter, it is an issue for the judicial system to handle. The good thing is that we at least have the option to affect change if we wish to.
 
Shield laws protect sources, not the actions that a journalist does to get information.

yeah .. well .. I am not a lawyer, don't even live in the states, and as said I don't even care who is right or wrong here .. my point was that after all is said and done, people will see Apple behind this (whether they were pushing it or not) and it will cast bad light on Apple.

Calling people tin-foil-hats isn't actually helping a descent, informative discussion either.

T.
 
Much of this thread reads like the panicked thought processes of an eighteen year old perp caught red-handed stealing something.



  1. Oh no, I'm caught!
  2. It wasn't me!
  3. Who can I blame?
    • the "Man"?
    • my upbringing?
    • the victim?
    • the system?
    • my stepfather?
    • anyone remotely connected?
  4. Justice is only for the rich!
  5. It wasn't really stealing, I was just borrowing it for a while!
  6. Fascist Gestapo Nazi SS jackboot swastika loving regime!
  7. I'll never shop at the place I stole that stuff ever again!
  8. I didn't know it was wrong!
  9. It's a conspiracy at the highest level!
  10. F you target of my crime!
  11. F the police!
  12. F the justice system
  13. This is revenge against me!
  14. They're out to get me!
  15. I was doing it for the greater good, like Robin Hood!
  16. They're only after me 'cause I'm the little guy!
  17. They're out to get me!
  18. Boo hoo... I'm an innocent child! (Wipes back tears.)
  19. Other people steal stuff, why shouldn't I?
  20. My dad's lawyer will fix you!
  21. It was only a worthless trinket that I took!
  22. The forces of evil are at work against me!
  23. Etc.
  24. Etc.
  25. Etc.




Marquez+Ill+-+Mix.FullOfWin.jpg
 
HaHA. Christ, don't make me laugh any harder. This is an issue that they should be spending tax dollars on.

It's not just a phone. It's a prototype phone. The ramifications in terms of income, trade secrets, and even income for the State of California are huge.

so its less than a phone is what you're telling me...that's even worst....
 
Hahahah!

The elite bankers just did the biggest bank robbery (wealth transfer from poor to the few rich) in the history of humankind...

...and PEOPLE ARE OBSESSING ABOUT ONE GUY GETTING A LOST IPHONE PROTOTYPE!!! :eek::p:confused::apple::(

America!!! :p

Arrest the bankers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Seriously ? .. you feel treated like a criminal because you have to enter a product code? .. wouldn't want to know how you feel about having to sign when paying with a credit card or using a pin code at the atm .. must be a harsh world.

Besides, Apple doesn't need product codes because they actually hard wire chips into their computers controlling that you cannot install the OS on any none Apple computer (which really is everything Apple is concerned about).

Indeed I do. I have the purchase receipt, why do I need a product code?

In regards to your credit card comparison, I go through that PIN/expiry date etc stuff when actually purchasing the software.

After which I receive my. Receipt. Of. Legal. Ownership.

My credit card pin is to protect MY money, not their product. It's for MY security, not theirs.

Tell me again why I shouldn't feel like I'm being treated like a criminal for being asked to input a serial number on something which I have a receipt of ownership for?
 
No, child porn is a real issue, a phone is not....


Of course not. It's only a phone that's potentially worth BILLIONS to Apple, with Apple's entire mobile strategy riding on it. That's all.

But I guess if it's a "product" from a "company", it must not be important (companies are "evil"), because consumer products aren't important to anyone, so theft of same is also perfectly permissible because it doesn't cure cancer.
 
That it was a lost phone is not disputed. What Gizmodo did with a lost prototype is the issue. They paid to get their hands on a prototype phone, then they published information about it. Whether or not they originally stole the phone is irrelevant.

Your "espionage" question makes it seem that you don't think an entity stealing the intellectual property rights of another entity either doesn't happen or is not that big a deal. I hold a different opinion. Actually, neither your nor my opinion does not matter, it is an issue for the judicial system to handle. The good thing is that we at least have the option to affect change if we wish to.

Actually, according to gizmodo, they investigated what they had...as far as they knew, they simply had a devise that looked like an iPhone and share their investigations with the public. They even returned the freaking piece of metal back to Apple.
 
Psst, CA law speaks to theft of Trade Secrets.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/13/5/s499c

CAL. PEN. CODE § 499c : California Code - Section 499c

(a)As used in this section:

(1)"Access" means to approach, a way or means of approaching, nearing, admittance to, including to instruct, communicate with, store information in, or retrieve information from a computer system or computer network.

(2)"Article" means any object, material, device, or substance or copy thereof, including any writing, record, recording, drawing, sample, specimen, prototype, model, photograph, micro-organism, blueprint, map, or tangible representation of a computer program or information, including both human and computer readable information and information while in transit.

(3)"Benefit" means gain or advantage, or anything regarded by the beneficiary as gain or advantage, including benefit to any other person or entity in whose welfare he or she is interested.

(4)"Computer system" means a machine or collection of machines, one or more of which contain computer programs and information, that performs functions, including, but not limited to, logic, arithmetic, information storage and retrieval, communications, and control.

(5)"Computer network" means an interconnection of two or more computer systems.

(6)"Computer program" means an ordered set of instructions or statements, and related information that, when automatically executed in actual or modified form in a computer system, causes it to perform specified functions.

(7)"Copy" means any facsimile, replica, photograph or other reproduction of an article, and any note, drawing or sketch made of or from an article.

(8)"Representing" means describing, depicting, containing, constituting, reflecting or recording.

(9)"Trade secret" means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that:

(A)Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and

(B)Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.

(b)Every person is guilty of theft who, with intent to deprive or withhold the control of a trade secret from its owner, or with an intent to appropriate a trade secret to his or her own use or to the use of another, does any of the following:

(1)Steals, takes, carries away, or uses without authorization, a trade secret.

(2)Fraudulently appropriates any article representing a trade secret entrusted to him or her.

(3)Having unlawfully obtained access to the article, without authority makes or causes to be made a copy of any article representing a trade secret.

(4)Having obtained access to the article through a relationship of trust and confidence, without authority and in breach of the obligations created by that relationship, makes or causes to be made, directly from and in the presence of the article, a copy of any article representing a trade secret.

(c)Every person who promises, offers or gives, or conspires to promise or offer to give, to any present or former agent, employee or servant of another, a benefit as an inducement, bribe or reward for conveying, delivering or otherwise making available an article representing a trade secret owned by his or her present or former principal, employer or master, to any person not authorized by the owner to receive or acquire the trade secret and every present or former agent, employee, or servant, who solicits, accepts, receives or takes a benefit as an inducement, bribe or reward for conveying, delivering or otherwise making available an article representing a trade secret owned by his or her present or former principal, employer or master, to any person not authorized by the owner to receive or acquire the trade secret, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(d)In a prosecution for a violation of this section, it shall be no defense that the person returned or intended to return the article.


Ooops, even if they can claim some good faith exception to trafficking in stolen goods, the item is a trade secret and they are so screwed.
 
Of course not. It's only a phone that's potentially worth BILLIONS to Apple, with Apple's entire mobile strategy riding on it. That's all.

But I guess if it's a "product" from a "company", it must not be important (companies are "evil"), because consumer products aren't important to anyone, so theft of same is also perfectly permissible because it doesn't cure cancer.

Theft? Billions of dollars? Talk about making something happen out of nothing...

Truth be told, Apple ain't loosing a penny ... the only thing they lost was a phone, and some say it was a prototype which is less than a phone...get real...

I wish I would of found the phone ... I would of sold it to Microsoft...
 
Right..

So the editor of Gizmodo buys a prototype, confidential piece of hardware for $5,000. A piece of hardware that is legally neither rightfully his to buy nor the sellers to sell. He does this knowingly, breaking federal law in the process. Law does not accomodate for a "finders keepers" system. The correct procedure should have been to hand the phone into the authorities, not just take the phone, assume it as his own, and then sell it to a tech blog for pure profit.

He then takes this piece of confidential hardware, which still legally doesn't belong to him despite paying $5,000 for, and takes photographs of it and writes about it's features on the internet. He then opens up the device, tinkers around with it's insides and then splashes his findings across the internet even more. All this with a confidential, secretive piece of hardware that is not his to own in the first place.

Sorry, but how and why do people think there should be no reprecussions to this? This has got nothing to do with Apple being some sort of dragon overlord over society. It has everything to do with the fact that on a very basic level, law's have been broken.

I don't want to see Gizmodo shut down or anything, nor do I want to see either Apple or Gizmodo's name get tarnished by a long and drawn out legal process, but it's perfectly clear to me that Gizmodo took some serious risks by giving the iPhone leak as much exposure as they did. I'm not sure if it was naive or a calculated risk vs reward scenario (think of the hits and $$$$), but surely Gizmodo can't have been so stupid as to think doing this would come free from reprecussions. They took the risk by giving the leak so much attention and it's come to bite them on the ass. I don't see how anyone can lay the blame at either Apple or the legal authorities door for this, unless being completley blinkered to the facts surrounding the case.
 
Theft? Billions of dollars? Talk about making something happen out of nothing...

Truth be told, Apple ain't loosing a penny ... the only thing they lost was a phone, and some say it was a prototype which is less than a phone...get real...

I wish I would of found the phone ... I would of sold it to Microsoft...

Thank-you for saving us time by countering your own argument.
 
Actually, according to gizmodo, they investigated what they had...as far as they knew, they simply had a devise that looked like an iPhone and share their investigations with the public.

Do you actually believe this? Come on, they knew exactly what they were doing. I don't care about Apple, what Gizmodo did was just plain wrong.

And with this post I officially bow out of this thread. It has been an interesting and disturbing read. I thought we were an evolving species...
 
Espionage? Riight as if Gizmodo went into apple's facility and stole the thing.

It was a lost phone.

No. An Apple employee lost a brand new, unreleased, much anticipated multi million dollar product. Giz then paid a large sum of money for it from someone who was clearly not the owner or an Apple employee, in the almost FULL knowledge that it was he new iPhone.

You need to remember that Giz is a tech blog and watches out for sneak peeks etc over the entire GLOBE. There have been pics of roughly this design before Giz got their ands on it.

They then took it apart as far as they could without damaging it, thus admitting their knowledge of the phones identity, and posted the images all over the internet. They then ask Apple for a letter officially asking for the item back and post that as well shouting SCOOP!!!!

The DA is not wasting tax dollars. Its just putting some of the BILLIONS of tax dollars Apple has given them to use on behalf of Apple. Imagine how bankrupt CA would be if Apple moved out :eek:

I would say a member of the Giz staff went to bar and left their collectively shared brain cell behind. Unlike Apple no one has noticed its missing :D

Hope the get screwed into the ground or overstepping the mark
 
Do you actually believe this? Come on, they knew exactly what they were doing. I don't care about Apple, what Gizmodo did was just plain wrong.

And with this post I officially bow out of this thread. It has been an interesting and disturbing read. I thought we were an evolving species...

You just made any discussion on ethics arbitrary with that statement.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.