The police already stated they have not contacted Apple at all before conducting this investigation. They are only going off what they know, not what Apple told them.
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.
Police Seize Gizmodo Editor's Computers and Other Property Related to Lost Next-Generation iPhone
- Thread starter G4R2
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The police already stated they have not contacted Apple at all before conducting this investigation. They are only going off what they know, not what Apple told them.
Gizmodo knew - in their article on the 4g they made note of apples conventions for naming prototypes.
It was a 4g phone - it wasn't for sale. It's a trade secret.
It was a 4g phone - it wasn't for sale. It's a trade secret.
Real Journalism
To the guy u replied to. The real difference between "real" journalism and fake then is that "real" journalist won't report the news (companies buy them out) and the "fake" ones like this guy who actually reports the news. If you believe that finding a prototype iPhone is not news then you are on the wrong website. Go back to your Dan Rather and listen to some fake news for a while.
Oh give me a break, we haven't had "real journalism" in this country since the Cronkite era
To the guy u replied to. The real difference between "real" journalism and fake then is that "real" journalist won't report the news (companies buy them out) and the "fake" ones like this guy who actually reports the news. If you believe that finding a prototype iPhone is not news then you are on the wrong website. Go back to your Dan Rather and listen to some fake news for a while.
Exactly!
I am no big fan of Gizmodo but what they did was nothing short of REAL journalism!
They did NOT break into Cupertino office - they simply got hold of a product that APPLE LOST THEMSELVES!
Next we know is that some SS officers BROKE INTO THEIR OFFICE apparently "legally" and stole their computers again "legally"...
If anyone is criminal here it is Apple together with Police / SS officers who broke into Gizmodo office...
I hope Apple burns for this but doubt its going to happen in police state
First of all, why would you assume I know "Nothing" about this?
One need not be an expert in a field to form a theory or to ask questions, or to have a discussion. If that were the case, most forums would be completely empty. I put forth what I feel is a valid scenario, and pointed out that he is innocent until proven guilty, which IS the letter of our law, and I don't need a degree to make that statement.
However, you felt the need to make a personal attack, not on my ideas, but on me, which I feel is uncalled for. While I can make a mighty tasty burger, I do that on my own time. And while I am sure your enjoying your stay here at macrumors, some of us been debating things like this for many years, in a mature fashion, and the first sign of someone without a valid argument is a personal attack.
So if you ever want to discuss Avogadro's number, Astrophysics, Or my recipe for a good burger, feel free to, but keep the personal smears to yourself. It just makes you look IMMATURE and that you clearly have a very weak argument.
Discuss my points, without resorting to personal attacks, and maybe we can get somewhere!
Despite what people may-or-may-not feel criminal statues are for the DA to prosecute at their discretion. In this case, based on the evidence that Gizmodo has themselves published, several crimes took place including the possibility of several felonies on the part of Gizmodo staff.
If you are going to commit a crime and publish the details, you had better be willing to suffer the consequences. Gizmodo is in deep and no amount of flag waving at this point will clear some of the more serious charges in this case. In reality it can only get worse for them as discovery progresses.
If you are going to commit a crime and publish the details, you had better be willing to suffer the consequences. Gizmodo is in deep and no amount of flag waving at this point will clear some of the more serious charges in this case. In reality it can only get worse for them as discovery progresses.
I agree. Gizmodo knowingly bought an item that they knew the seller did not own and then returned it after going through it the best they could. (They had to open it up to determine it was Apple property instead of trusting the white apple on the back?) And now the police have their computers and probably should go through the file thoroughly to determine if they truly belong to Chen.
A little thing called poetic justice!
On a side note, I wish Apple would have used some of their renown security obsessiveness to protect my wife's iTunes account. On Sunday someone hacked into her account, changed her account name, password and security question and proceeded to go shopping at the iTunes store. It would be nice if Apple sent an email telling her she changed these things to just confirm. And maybe not allow purchases for 24 hours after such a change.
Instead, they inflated the success of their iTunes store by selling 125 items at $386 that they wouldn't have sold otherwise. They tell me they are not allowed to give refunds for fraud, that has to come from the credit card company. So they have moved some electrons and we are out some money. We should owe $50 of the credit card bill. She lost $34 in iTunes credits from gift cards and the iTunes store says she owes $15 for a purchase that didn't go through before the credit card was cancelled.
Good analogy but you don't say at what point you open the dog up to look at the contents to verify that the dog is owned by who you think might own it.
By the way, I think a reasonable attempt at returning a lost item of this value to its rightful owner would involve a trip to the police station.
Regular larceny has protection for paying for an items with intent on returning it to it's owners.
Theft of Trade Secrets does not have that same exemption. "(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."
I think this is going to make a lot of tech "news" websites VERY hesitant to get their hands on ANY prototype in the future.
This is going to go down just as the ThinkSecret mess, but most likely worse...
Apple attracts more attention than any other tech company out there.
Think about this... If someone found what appeared to be a TracFone sitting on a bar stool, what would have happened? The guy that found it would have given it right to the bar tender or right to the cops or maybe just left it sitting on the stool not giving two sh¡ts about it or the owner.
But no, this was a shiny iPhone. JACKPOT BABY, even if it was an original 1st Gen iPhone. But imagine the creaming that occurred when the guy realized what was actually in his hands. Even BIGGER jackpot! The guy should have dressed in a suit, driven the 20+ miles to IL1, walked in the front door and asked to see Steve Jobs personally, all the while being as discreet as possible.
Imagine the BLING he could have walked away with?
But no.... $5000 is what his soul and body are worth.
By the time he is out of jail, "Tiny" will have made his body only worth a buck seventy five when he's done with him.
This is going to go down just as the ThinkSecret mess, but most likely worse...
Apple attracts more attention than any other tech company out there.
Think about this... If someone found what appeared to be a TracFone sitting on a bar stool, what would have happened? The guy that found it would have given it right to the bar tender or right to the cops or maybe just left it sitting on the stool not giving two sh¡ts about it or the owner.
But no, this was a shiny iPhone. JACKPOT BABY, even if it was an original 1st Gen iPhone. But imagine the creaming that occurred when the guy realized what was actually in his hands. Even BIGGER jackpot! The guy should have dressed in a suit, driven the 20+ miles to IL1, walked in the front door and asked to see Steve Jobs personally, all the while being as discreet as possible.
Imagine the BLING he could have walked away with?
But no.... $5000 is what his soul and body are worth.
By the time he is out of jail, "Tiny" will have made his body only worth a buck seventy five when he's done with him.
How do you know they were not giving Apple a chance to step up and claim ownership? It was stated that a ticket was created when the guy called in to report the phone lost. Maybe they were waiting for a call back. Kind of a bold jump to assume there is only one possible reason for the delay.
Exactly!
I am no big fan of Gizmodo but what they did was nothing short of REAL journalism!
They did NOT break into Cupertino office - they simply got hold of a product that APPLE LOST THEMSELVES!
Next we know is that some SS officers BROKE INTO THEIR OFFICE apparently "legally" and stole their computers again "legally"...
If anyone is criminal here it is Apple together with Police / SS officers who broke into Gizmodo office...
I hope Apple burns for this but doubt its going to happen in police state
Welcome to the new America where protection of corporations is far more important than protection of citizens. After all, corporations provide the "gifts", campaign contributions, hookers, drugs, and other things that the spooks and politicians need to survive. Now if a citizen had lost an iPhone and reported it to the police do you think the police would do more than simply write up a report and forget about it? HA.
He may be a public figure now. Also, it has to be not true. Is he 27? Is he an engineer? Does he like to drink? Lastly, it was written not oral so it would be defamation not slander.
There are several defenses as well. He was just stating an opinion or the engineer's image was not damaged by the statement since his image is already damaged.
Yes, I agree, they'd likely forget about it. With no leads to go on, the cost of investigating wouldn't be worth the slim chance of recovering it.
However, if the person who has it in his possesion publishes a YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImWRNzQrO8A&feature=related) showing his face and the missing item clearly in his possesion, that sorta changes things. If the police didn't act on what's practically a public confession, they'd be a laughing stock.
Moral relativism:
Our neighbor's phone, car, wallet, lucky keychain, whatever is stolen - we tell them to chill out. It's not a big deal. All replaceable - besides, you make good money - maybe the poor clod needed it more than you.
Our own phone, car, wallet, lucky keychain, whatever is stolen - we get indignant. You don't understand - I had some important things in that wallet. I had contacts on that phone I didn't have anywhere else. My grandfather gave me that keychain. It's mine! I hope the bastard that stole it rots in hell.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
A CRIMINAL has a lawful search of his home. Our founding fathers knew much about search & seizure from the British Empire... which is why, when forming our way of governing here, they protected citizens against random searches. The police had a warrant. A judge had to sign it - and for just cause. There was plenty of evidence - on the suspect's website. A warrant was justified. If all you had to do to avoid a lawful search was to not come home or pretend like you weren't home, then no evidence would be gotten in many criminal cases, if not all... just store all the evidence in your home and never open the door when police are around.
The police were acting on a warrant. The tenant was not home and they forced their way in - as is their right under the law.
One of the primary roles of government is to execute justice. The justice system works when all parties do their part. Apple reported a stolen phone. And yes, little children, it was stolen. It ceased being a 'found' item when the person who found it did not return it to the owner or turn it over to the police in a reasonable time frame. Just because you might sympathize with the person who 'found' the phone because you could see yourself doing the same thing doesn't make this an innocent act. The guy held onto property he knew was not his, and then sold it. Gizmodo knew the phone was not the property of the guy who sold it to them, yet they bought it anyway - knowing full well they were committing a crime, but figured they could hide behind the first amendment. You cannot hide behind the shield laws when you have committed a crime. IF the guy who sold them the phone instead just provided photos of the device, and Gizmodo reported on it, then they would be protected. No - they fenced stolen property - and across state lines. This was theft under the guise of journalism. Kinda like when they used jammers at CES - that was vandalism and criminal mischief under the guise of journalism - and it got them banned from CES for life.
What's so ironic is that Gizmodo could have not only saved $5K by not buying the phone, but could have been heroes in the eyes of Apple and not criminal suspects had they contacted Apple and the police concerning the 'buy' of this phone. Apple would have their item back, Gizmodo would make friends with Apple - big time, and would likely be given products to review in advance. They had the opportunity of a lifetime in their hands and decided to forgo the law, thinking they could get away with whatever they wanted.
Gizmodo is Chen's blog. The blog is ranked 234 of visited sites in the US. Chen gets gigantic ad revenue. This is not a case of some kid sitting in his mom's garage apartment, blogging about freedom and then getting waterboarded by the CIA as many of the crybabies in this forum have been claiming.
Apple is not evil because it is a successful company or because it rightfully reported a crime. Apple is not perfect, but in this instance, there is no reason to demonize them. The company is the victim of a crime. They did nothing wrong or irresponsible as a company. They are criticized for issuing phones to their engineers to test in the wild. What if the engineer was held up at gun point for his phone? Would it still be Apple's fault for having its employees field test their prototypes to make sure they're functioning rightly in the wild? To the moral relativists, the answer is yes - until they buy the 4G and something doesn't work right, then they will demonize Apple for not doing more thorough field & real-life testing of the units.
It's time to put on the big panties, people. Apple's phone was held for over a month, disassembled and exposed online, causing untold costs for the company. They reported a crime and it is being investigated by the proper authorities. For those of you that will no longer buy Apple products from now on because of Apple's supposed bullying - it's because you are clearly not mature or intelligent enough to use them. Apple will not miss you. For those who commented that they are glad they are not in this country - I am in agreement with you. I'm glad you're not here, either. We have enough idiots as it is. We don't need you to help us meet our idiot quotient.
This IS a real issue. A theft (among other crimes) has occurred. Our tax dollars are well spent in the investigation and prosecution of this crime. This is how the real world works.
Our neighbor's phone, car, wallet, lucky keychain, whatever is stolen - we tell them to chill out. It's not a big deal. All replaceable - besides, you make good money - maybe the poor clod needed it more than you.
Our own phone, car, wallet, lucky keychain, whatever is stolen - we get indignant. You don't understand - I had some important things in that wallet. I had contacts on that phone I didn't have anywhere else. My grandfather gave me that keychain. It's mine! I hope the bastard that stole it rots in hell.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
A CRIMINAL has a lawful search of his home. Our founding fathers knew much about search & seizure from the British Empire... which is why, when forming our way of governing here, they protected citizens against random searches. The police had a warrant. A judge had to sign it - and for just cause. There was plenty of evidence - on the suspect's website. A warrant was justified. If all you had to do to avoid a lawful search was to not come home or pretend like you weren't home, then no evidence would be gotten in many criminal cases, if not all... just store all the evidence in your home and never open the door when police are around.
The police were acting on a warrant. The tenant was not home and they forced their way in - as is their right under the law.
One of the primary roles of government is to execute justice. The justice system works when all parties do their part. Apple reported a stolen phone. And yes, little children, it was stolen. It ceased being a 'found' item when the person who found it did not return it to the owner or turn it over to the police in a reasonable time frame. Just because you might sympathize with the person who 'found' the phone because you could see yourself doing the same thing doesn't make this an innocent act. The guy held onto property he knew was not his, and then sold it. Gizmodo knew the phone was not the property of the guy who sold it to them, yet they bought it anyway - knowing full well they were committing a crime, but figured they could hide behind the first amendment. You cannot hide behind the shield laws when you have committed a crime. IF the guy who sold them the phone instead just provided photos of the device, and Gizmodo reported on it, then they would be protected. No - they fenced stolen property - and across state lines. This was theft under the guise of journalism. Kinda like when they used jammers at CES - that was vandalism and criminal mischief under the guise of journalism - and it got them banned from CES for life.
What's so ironic is that Gizmodo could have not only saved $5K by not buying the phone, but could have been heroes in the eyes of Apple and not criminal suspects had they contacted Apple and the police concerning the 'buy' of this phone. Apple would have their item back, Gizmodo would make friends with Apple - big time, and would likely be given products to review in advance. They had the opportunity of a lifetime in their hands and decided to forgo the law, thinking they could get away with whatever they wanted.
Gizmodo is Chen's blog. The blog is ranked 234 of visited sites in the US. Chen gets gigantic ad revenue. This is not a case of some kid sitting in his mom's garage apartment, blogging about freedom and then getting waterboarded by the CIA as many of the crybabies in this forum have been claiming.
Apple is not evil because it is a successful company or because it rightfully reported a crime. Apple is not perfect, but in this instance, there is no reason to demonize them. The company is the victim of a crime. They did nothing wrong or irresponsible as a company. They are criticized for issuing phones to their engineers to test in the wild. What if the engineer was held up at gun point for his phone? Would it still be Apple's fault for having its employees field test their prototypes to make sure they're functioning rightly in the wild? To the moral relativists, the answer is yes - until they buy the 4G and something doesn't work right, then they will demonize Apple for not doing more thorough field & real-life testing of the units.
It's time to put on the big panties, people. Apple's phone was held for over a month, disassembled and exposed online, causing untold costs for the company. They reported a crime and it is being investigated by the proper authorities. For those of you that will no longer buy Apple products from now on because of Apple's supposed bullying - it's because you are clearly not mature or intelligent enough to use them. Apple will not miss you. For those who commented that they are glad they are not in this country - I am in agreement with you. I'm glad you're not here, either. We have enough idiots as it is. We don't need you to help us meet our idiot quotient.
This IS a real issue. A theft (among other crimes) has occurred. Our tax dollars are well spent in the investigation and prosecution of this crime. This is how the real world works.
How is it that so many here think it is fine to look at blurry pictures of what could be the new iPhone bezel, but go completely mental when there is a video of high quality images of said new device?
You guys are like kids that go peek in mommies closet before Christmas and then yell "you ruined my surprise" when you actually get to see something.
T.
You guys are like kids that go peek in mommies closet before Christmas and then yell "you ruined my surprise" when you actually get to see something.
T.
ha ha. Welcome to life. Although the loss of a prototype is a little different what with all the trade secrets involved.
What has Apple really lost in all this anyway? Two months? Although in the technology world two months is quite a long time. I bought my computer and 2 days later there is better stuff out on the market.
LOOOOOOL!
If Apple guy was robbed then I would be behind Apple all the way so would 99.9% of other people on this site. Including EFF...
Fact is that APPLE FOOL LOST THE BLOODY PHONE!
No theft and no other crime was ever committed unless you consider GREAT JOURNALISM as a crime that is - which you might do reading your post
By the way I hope your "real" corporate world burns together with Apple and other corporate megalomaniacs asap!
If Apple guy was robbed then I would be behind Apple all the way so would 99.9% of other people on this site. Including EFF...
Fact is that APPLE FOOL LOST THE BLOODY PHONE!
No theft and no other crime was ever committed unless you consider GREAT JOURNALISM as a crime that is - which you might do reading your post
I get the feeling that most of the outraged people on here demanding that Gizmodo is bought to justice would have a completely different opinion on the matter if it was a Microsoft engineer which had lost one of their prototypes.
Can you prove that? I bet you cannot.I get the feeling that most of the outraged people on here demanding that Gizmodo is bought to justice would have a completely different opinion on the matter if it was a Microsoft engineer which had lost one of their prototypes.
Do we genuinely know it was lost? Not trying to be argumentative, it's a genuine question. For example, is there CCTV footage showing the Apple guy walking away from the phone without realizing it? Did anyone witness it?
Without witnesses, who's to say it wasn't deliberately stolen, in the first instance, from the Apple guy? And to be quite clear here, I'm not claiming it was, but the police have to investigate the possiblity.