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
He means there are those who were going to buy a 3GS before the launch date. Now that they've seen this leak - they will not buy one, but wait for the new phone.
Unlikely. The judge wouldn't issue a warrant had Apple's not reported a stolen phone.
Whew..........That's a lot of readin'.
So.....Any chance that said "prototype" iPhone isn't the real thing, and all of this police action is going after a fake phone?
Boy, that would throw everybody off huh?
Thats probably the best thing that could have happened for the consumers.
we're talking about real phones that work, not some prototype thats bricked.
thanks for coming out.
The thing is, surely the people at Gizmodo's were intelligent enough to put 2 and 2 together and realise that dissecting and photographing the next generation iPhone would garner the wrath of Apple and more importantly Steve Jobs.
Sure, they paid $5,000 for the device and would only have done so were they sure it was a genuine next gen iPhone prototype, so they knew what they were buying. However, instead of ripping it apart and showing it's guts to the watching world, why not have a play around with internally and then use their official contacts to get the attention of someone at Apple, and return it.
Now, you're probably thinking, "Why the hell would they pay $5,000 only to return it to Apple"? Think about it though, how much is Apple's appreciation worth? How much would inside access to stories on the latest Apple products be worth? It could possibly been the best $5,000 Gizmodo ever spent, because it could have got them unrivalled access to the latest and greatest Apple gear long before other sites.
Sure, they paid $5,000 for the device and would only have done so were they sure it was a genuine next gen iPhone prototype, so they knew what they were buying. However, instead of ripping it apart and showing it's guts to the watching world, why not have a play around with internally and then use their official contacts to get the attention of someone at Apple, and return it.
Now, you're probably thinking, "Why the hell would they pay $5,000 only to return it to Apple"? Think about it though, how much is Apple's appreciation worth? How much would inside access to stories on the latest Apple products be worth? It could possibly been the best $5,000 Gizmodo ever spent, because it could have got them unrivalled access to the latest and greatest Apple gear long before other sites.
Gizmodo practically boasted about having purchased the item, sent that snarky e-mail back to Apple when they asked for it to be returned, and then act as if they're blameless because they're "journalists." We don't even know if the guy who found the phone's story is true. What's to say he didn't steal it from the guy's coat pocket, but the guy thought that he left if as opposed to it being stolen from him? I just think that Giz is asking us to take a whole lot of things for granted. The police probably want to see what else Giz has found and not bothered to return.
Yes, this has left egg on Apple's face, but since you can't put the genie back in the bottle or squeeze blood from a turnip as someone once said, you might as well put your efforts into fixing your own security detail so the next version doesn't end up outside of your control. Going after Chen merely attacks the symptom of Apple's own security lapse and it risks turning less blindly fanatical sites and blogs against Apple in the future. At a minimum it could alter the carefully crafted scope of future Apple articles as this case slowly winds its way through the court system. Apple products sell on the idea that they're unique and cool, not that they're shiny little cogs in a dystopian machine.
Apple will do just fine, with or without any vengeance. All this does is risk some sort of eventual backlash. It's not like everyone who dissed the phone said "I won't buy it because I saw it early!" Most of them complained about aspects like the physical shape that were under the complete and total direction of Apple and nobody else.
That's exactly the point. If you don't know a new one is coming (which 99% of the population didn't know), or if you think whatever is coming will be pretty similar to the 3GS, you might have just gone and bought a 3GS. Now many people have seen the new phone and will postpone purchasing until the new phone is available.
Absolutely - not to mention they would raise eyebrows w/ the SEC if they did not press charges. Apple is a publicly traded company. They cannot just sit idly by as a herd of dimwits violates their intellectual property rights.
I'm so sure that is how it went down. In the real world, big companies with billions in the bank and connections, e.g. with this REACT team, call the shots. I think its very likely that Apple ordered this thug action. The message is clear: mess with us, and we use our pull with agencies we are a part of, and come to your house with guns and knock down your door.
Apple should have filed the complaint, but this has nothing to do with the SEC, and the SEC has nothing to say about it.
so you're upset because consumers now have the choice of waiting a few months to buy a new phone, instead of buying a phone now and it being outdated in just a few months?
why does this hurt you so much?
Yes, Apple has to be the complainant - but had Apple not filed a complaint concerning this, the SEC would be suspicious that this was an intentional leak by Apple (as many initially claimed when this story first broke), and not theft as it appears to have been.
Further to my earlier response, here's a link to a news story citing and extensively quoting one decision in California: http://www.metnews.com/articles/vari111403.htm Apparently the court found the postings to be libel rather than slander. And you may appreciate the fact that the opinion attaches import to the fact that the defamatory material was communicated by writing (emphasis in original).
Agreed. And part of that security detail would be deterring future opportunists.
Agreed. And one way to keep them unique, and commanding high prices for as long as possible, is to keep them secret until they are properly launched and available to buy.
I don't doubt that, but laws (and upholding them) are what make this a civilised country. I'm not sure that publicly turning a blind eye would be in anyone's interest.
No thinking person (nor the SEC) would think this was an intentional leak. Such a leak only hurts Apple, which will suffer lost iPhone 3GS sales as a result, and which will have a muted iPhone HD launch because of it. No one at the SEC (aside, perhaps, those guys who are busy with the Internet porn) would possibly give any credence to this being such a leak. Further, even if this was a leak, since it was given to the entire public and not to a subset of the public, it likely isn't a securities law issue anyway. (Companies are allowed to announce things - even through unconventional channels. They're not allowed to selectively [i.e.: to only certain people] release material information).
NOTE: Occam's razor is not "the simplest solution which involves conspiracy is usually the correct one". By all means, continue insisting that you know the truth, and that what is obvious to everyone else is too trivial to even conceivably be true. It's easy to judge when you're not burdened with the facts.
My experience is that our legal system is far from perfect, but it's a LOT better than you're suggesting. Don't you suppose that if this was all tied to money and conspiracy, that somebody (who actually knows, and isn't just conjecturing) would say something, even anonymously? Sheesh...
Well, to be perfectly accurate, it would be in the interest of anyone who might otherwise be seen committing crimes.
But, come to think of it, even their long-term interests would be served by their punishment, contrition, and reformation. So let's just scotch the blind eye turning.
Good Gawd, these Gizmodo threads are a disaster. And —much like a multi-car crash on the highway —you know you shouldn't look too closely, but somehow it's difficult to divert one's gaze.
Well, i stopped reading this one on page 40. [if i missed anything interesting or unusual, please link in a reply.] Here's my 2¢ from yet another spawned topic: click this.
Wish me luck... i'm off to look over the next accident scene.
Well, i stopped reading this one on page 40. [if i missed anything interesting or unusual, please link in a reply.] Here's my 2¢ from yet another spawned topic: click this.
Wish me luck... i'm off to look over the next accident scene.