Search Warrant For Lost Next-Generation iPhone Ordered Unsealed

[Evangelion]

No they didn't. They bought the rights to a story and access to a phone and returned it to the rightful owner.

that's BS and you know it. "access to a phone" is just a weasel-term they are trying to use to cover their backs, when they realized that they had committed a felony.

This is a strawman argument.

No it's not, it mirrors quite closely what happened with the phone. And by your logic no crime took place since you got your car back, right?

If you would like to have a civil, rational debate I'll gladly reply to a reasonable question.

I would be interested in having an intelligent discussion, but it seems you have nothing intelligent to say.

 

[kiljoy616]

that still does not change the fact that Gizmodo committed a felony.



they were there to obtain proof of the felony Gizmodo committed. And that felony is trafficking in stolen goods. Gizmodo bought stolen goods, and that is illegal. It does not matter one bit that Gizmodo returned the phone to Apple.

I guess the courts don't see it that simple and clear, and having a special division of police just for that are of such a big state, is questionable in it self. What a waste of money.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Proof of ownership was not in question at that point.
A letter stating "yeah it's mine" is not proof of ownership.

When the high profile head of a big company wants his billion dollar prototype back and calls you to say so, you give it to him. Period. No demands, no conditions.

How do you verify he is who he says he is? Giz sent an email which should only go the real Steve Jobs. If he replied to that email, it is likely it was the real Steve Jobs making that request. They could have also used registered mail or similar, but email was the way he decided to verify that it was the real Jobs. A voice on a phone could be anyone other than who they say they are.

 

[tingly]

Oh yeah, just believe the spin...

Why not? It's the same crime either way.

 

[Zorro1869]

I can't even read through this thread, there are so many whack-jobs screaming conspiracy. This isn't just a phone, this is a multi million dollar prototype of the most successful phone on the market. This isn't just Job's looking after his own interest, but the interest of his entire company, and everyone who owns stock in Apple. His job as CEO is to report to the shareholders of his company. How could he do that if he didn't report a crime that took place involving the intellectual property of Apple.

So frustrating...

 

[Krizoitz]

I don't think that's the issue...

The issue is why did the PO-lice go into the editor's house and search the crap outta it...

Apple asked for it, they gave it back. What purpose was solved by searching the guy's HOME? Work, sure, home??

Because he commited a crime? I mean if you don't see whats wrong here then you are basically saying you'd be ok with me taking your car out for a spin without asking as long as I bring it back when you ask. See the problem with that (and what Chen and Gizmodo did) is that returning the stolen property doesn't stop you from being guilty of a crime.

 

[FFArchitect]

This wasn't a retail phone, this was a prototype with unreleased IP. There are actual laws against running this story. And even if running the story wasn't illegal (which it was), they still damage/vandalized someone else's property before they gave it back... That is illegal 100%. Also Gizmodo was at that point disassembling stolen property as well. Lost or not, they purchased a phone from someone whom the phone DID NOT BELONG to and they did this knowingly... this is also Illegal, there is no disputing it because the law is black and white on this. Point blank, Gizmodo handled this whole thing like little snot nosed kids and they deserve to be treated like little punks.

I completely agree. I meant "reporting it stolen."

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I guess the courts don't see it that simple and clear, and having a special division of police just for that are of such a big state, is questionable in it self. What a waste of money.

Yes, California is so good at creating budget surpluses, they simply had to find some other ways to spend them.

 

[ingouk]

But from what i read somewhere, they even took his personal computer and stuff...


Ahh well, who knows?? I'm tired of this story anyways....

Apple is just becoming the mean big bully in the play ground. Or at least they are coming off looking like one.

if you work from home, do you label your computers: work and personal??? how would the police know which one is which? they take everything and sort it out later. he could even have some work related stuff on his home computer.

 

[modul8tr]

of the engineer's bag that the engineer claims was on the floor - he didn't leave it on the bar stool. Explains why he didn't get fired.

I think you're right. Martinson in her interview with REACT said he was super tech savvy and fully understood the value of a prototype phone. I'm still going with my initial gut instinct that this was an Apple Engineer that was targeted. Anyone this tech savvy knows that Apple would be testing prototype iPhones in the field. That part of town is crawling with Apple engineers. Who knows, maybe it's known that that restaurant is frequented by Apple employees?





Hogan knew EXACTLY what he was doing. Guess he won't be getting that cash bonus from Gizmodo...since he'll be in the CLINK!

 

[Krizoitz]

I guess the courts don't see it that simple and clear, and having a special division of police just for that are of such a big state, is questionable in it self. What a waste of money.

As I said above, you are ok with people stealing your stuff as long as they give it back?

You'd be ok if I stole your car, sold it to somebody who took it apart and then gave it back to you when you asked for it a month later? Somehow I doubt very much you'd be ok with that.

A crime was commited involving a prototype of technology worth millions (if not more) dollars. You think thats chump change? A waste of money? Computers are a big industry in California and in particular Santa Clara county. You don't think having a task force dedicated to crimes that affect that major industry is something important? OK, if you say so...

 

[TMay]

The phone has not been proven stolen. The guy who sold the rights to the story could have only sold the phone on the condition that they would return the phone to the rightful owner. Gizmodo returned the phone before anyone had to force them to.



Neither of those assertions hold water. I'm sure they would be under the same investigation right now.

The guy sold the phone. That's a fact. He wasn't getting it back. Nowhere have I read that the seller gave Gizz conditions of return.

You are offering a very weak defense of Gizz, but its probably as good as their attorneys' will offer.

Fail

 

[Evangelion]

Its not the same, so stop using the useless same argument about the car vs the phone.

no, it pretty much mirrors what happened with the phone. You might not like that fact, but that's your problem, not mine.

All the BS about "paying for access" is just desperate weaseling at Gizmodos part. I don't think the thief was smart enough to suggest something like that, and neither is Gizmodo (their legal expert was a paralegal specializig in British law)

Its more like someone comes up to ABC news and says, I found this kit car, no idea who it is would you like the chance to view it and report the news. What news outlet would say no. Now go back to apple and get your check.

no, it would be like some news outlet bought stolen property, and them realized that they had committed a felony and tried to covers their assess. It's funny how Gizmodo didn't mention the fact that they merely paid for "access" during their initial communications with Apple that they published...

 

[awmazz]

Hogan knew EXACTLY what he was doing. Guess he won't be getting that cash bonus from Gizmodo...since he'll be in the CLINK!

Not exactly the little angel his lawyer was trying to paint him as earlier, is he?

 

[Mr Fusion]

... "Invaluable." What a joke. I didn't need a prototype iPhone to let me know there's another one coming this Summer. Even if there wasn't, I wouldn't "give in" and buy a 3GS. As for the rest of society, manipulation of the masses can go both ways, Apple's learning it can be a real b*tch.

These comments from Wired sum up my thoughts quite well:

"Posted by: c0mA | 05/14/10 | 3:04 pm |
with frieds like Brian’s roomate, who needs enemys? "

"Posted by: on3k | 05/14/10 | 3:38 pm |
“She was convinced that Apple would be able to trace her Internet IP address”
And in an ironic twist 2010 apparently will be like 1984."

 

[Evangelion]

The phone has not been proven stolen.

Yes it has. If you find lost property, and make no reasonable efforts to return it, it's equal to theft, according to California law. So, even I the phone was "lost and found", the fact that the finder did not

a) hand it to the bartender
b) contact the owner (remember, they knew who he was)
c) hand it over to the police

means that the phone was stolen.

The guy who sold the rights to the story

who sold them the phone that is.

could have only sold the phone on the condition that they would return the phone to the rightful owner. Gizmodo returned the phone before anyone had to force them to.

how magnamious of them... And they only returned it after Apple asked them to, and only after they had earned lots and lots of money with it.

 

[gwangung]

I guess the courts don't see it that simple and clear, and having a special division of police just for that are of such a big state, is questionable in it self.

In an area that's an economic powerhouse, where billions are in play for technological innovative companies and industrial espionage would be a logical to be on the lookout for?

Please tell me you're smarter than this.

 

[TMay]

I guess the courts don't see it that simple and clear, and having a special division of police just for that are of such a big state, is questionable in it self. What a waste of money.

Waste of money? Oh yeah, Silicon Valley tech firms are supported by a specialized police force.

I wonder why they would need that...

Oh, I know, because 100's of billions of dollars in the local economy and tens of thousands of jobs are at stake.

 

[gwangung]

... "Invaluble." What a joke.

Well, only if you know the Apple prototype program inside and out. Otherwise, you're just shooting your mouth, seemingly unaware that prototypes often contain advanced features that may not come out in this coming model, whose revelation may give competitors a jump on their own research.

I mean, that would make you look pretty stupid and foolish, and we know you're not that.

 

[dejo]

Apple asked for it, they gave it back.

Except Apple no longer has the phone again because now it's sitting in an evidence locker.

 

[Mr Fusion]

Well, only if you know the Apple prototype program inside and out. Otherwise, you're just shooting your mouth, seemingly unaware that prototypes often contain advanced features that may not come out in this coming model, whose revelation may give competitors a jump on their own research.

I mean, that would make you look pretty stupid and foolish, and we know you're not that.

Hey look I spelled "invaluble" wrong... Oops! Thank you for the kind remarks, I feel all warm and fuzzy now knowing a person on the internet knows I'm not stupid and foolish. :hug:

 

[Anuba]

Well, only if you know the Apple prototype program inside and out. Otherwise, you're just shooting your mouth, seemingly unaware that prototypes often contain advanced features that may not come out in this coming model, whose revelation may give competitors a jump on their own research.

"Jump", well... they got to see it a few weeks in advance, it's not like Gizmodo published the pictures 12 months ago.

If the world seeing a device a few weeks earlier than Apple wanted would be such a devastating thing, it's a wonder that other cellphone manufacturers with larger market shares than Apple get by even though they show off their upcoming products months in advance.

This sneak preview was only a big deal because it happened to affect the one company that's hell bent on keeping everything top secret until launch day. Whether this policy is actually beneficial to Apple in any measurable way, we'll never know, since we have no alternate universe "open" Apple to compare with – but what we do know is that it hasn't helped them overthrow the Microsoft empire (you know, the guys who show their products YEARS in advance), or Nokia, or any other of the competitors who neither can nor try to keep secrets the way Apple does.

 

[gwangung]

"Jump", well... they got to see it a few weeks in advance, it's not like Gizmodo published the pictures 12 months ago.

You're shooting your mouth, too, I take it? And didn't bother to read what I wrote?

 

[Anuba]

You're shooting your mouth, too, I take it? And didn't bother to read what I wrote?

What you wrote? You mean as in "seemingly unaware that prototypes often contain advanced features that may not come out in this coming model, whose revelation may give competitors a jump on their own research"? Yes, that's the part I responded to, and it still reads like last time.

 

[ToastErickson]

Please post a quote of the law they broke.


They did no such thing and made the proper actions to get the phone back to the original owner.

If by "proper action to return a prototype" you mean "call the Apple Care plan" then they did not. The people they called are the people you call when you need to get an apple fixed under Warranty. I am not sure if those people are actually on Apple's campus, but I know that when my XBox 360 breaks, the people I end up talking to are living in India, or other contracted locations, only affiliated with Microsoft as a call center.

If you really want to contact Apple, all you have to do is go to www.apple.com/contact and there is a WHOLE page of numbers to contact for whatever reason you need to. While there is no direct number to R&D, I am sure one of the TEN corporate contact numbers, for instance... maybe... Apple Public Relations (408) 974-2042, would be a good starting point, and that took about 30 seconds to find by typing "Apple Corporate Contacts" in google.

They didn't make an effort to find the owner, they knew what they had, and the exploited it thinking they could hide behind some clause in the law depending on the interpretation of it.