Teenager Targeted by Apple in White iPhone 4 Lawsuit Interviewed

[Sardonick007]

Tell us you're being sarcastic. You sound just as bad as the teenager that's in trouble right now. And he does sound like a punk.

How is it admirable to "handle" yourself in light of a legal situation that you caused? You're acting like he did something brave or honorable. He did something illegal and is subject to whatever consequences are passed his way. Maybe you two to take some time to learn what accountability means? It's sad that you think him facing the consequences for working illegally correlates to a bright future.

Thanks for not being like everybody else and glorifying this POS. If he broke the law, which it sounds like he did, he should get what's coming to him. As a teen, his parents should pay too. Making these punks sound like entrepreneurs is typical of our society today and it shows what a total lack of ethical and moral compass will get you.

 

[DeanSolecki]

Thanks for not being like everybody else and glorifying this POS. If he broke the law, which it sounds like he did, he should get what's coming to him. As a teen, his parents should pay too. Making these punks sound like entrepreneurs is typical of our society today and it shows what a total lack of ethical and moral compass will get you.

Guilty until proven innocent?

I think personal attacks on a 17 year old kid shows roughly what moral caliber your possessed of.

 

[UrsaMajor]

I'd say he already used it on Apple when he stole their intellectual property and conspired with his international accomplices to illegally profit at Apple's expense.

He's not a "kid" he's a criminal.

WRONG. You don't know law, this is tort, not a criminal offense. If anything saying he IS a criminal is libelous on your part.

I have zero sympathy for apple or any big company. A lot of their ideas and patents are not their own and they use the law and lobby to make the law to benefit their interests.

The biggest source of apple's product clone and infringement issues are from people in china making knock offs. No way do they have the ability to catch those nameless people and if they do the next guy will take their place. Seems to easy to target a tiny USA reseller and push them around.

 

[UrsaMajor]

Thanks for not being like everybody else and glorifying this POS. If he broke the law, which it sounds like he did, he should get what's coming to him. As a teen, his parents should pay too. Making these punks sound like entrepreneurs is typical of our society today and it shows what a total lack of ethical and moral compass will get you.

I really don't care. We saw an entire banking industry break the law and no one went to jail and any fines paid were a fraction of the Ill gotten profits they made.

Law does not equal morals or ethics. Law is often a tool used by business to profit and get their way.

Apple shareholders should be pissed that the company is wasting legal resources, money and time on issues like this.

One very valid last point to make is apple using the name iPhone. iPhone was owned by cisco and apple decided to use the name anyway and later made a settlement. If apple could do no wrong, shouldn't they have asked permission and worked a deal before just running out to the public and get sued by cisco?

 

[BobbyCarbn]

IMO, Apple is doing one of two things, maybe a combination of both. I did not read every post, so forgive me if someone covered this angle. Apple is trying to do the right thing and go after anyone that uses their trademark without permission and...Apple does not want to find themselves in the same mess as Sony with the Geohot lawsuit. The last thing Apple needs now is to have Anonymous or some other hacktivist group start poking at their armor. To date, Sony has been hacked 9 times since April 2011 and will have to deal with an estimated 174 million (which I think is really low) in damages, data breach notification costs and lost sales. They have not even put a price tag on the damage that has been done to the Sony brand yet. That figure alone could add up to billions.

So...Apple will let this kid have his 80k or so and give him a stern talking to.

 

[DeanSolecki]

IMO, Apple is doing one of two things, maybe a combination of both. I did not read every post, so forgive me if someone covered this angle. Apple is trying to do the right thing and go after anyone that uses their trademark without permission and...Apple does not want to find themselves in the same mess as Sony with the Geohot lawsuit. The last thing Apple needs now is to have Anonymous or some other hacktivist group start poking at their armor. To date, Sony has been hacked 9 times since April 2011 and will have to deal with an estimated 174 million (which I think is really low) in damages, data breach notification costs and lost sales. They have not even put a price tag on the damage that has been done to the Sony brand yet. That figure alone could add up to billions.

So...Apple will let this kid have his 80k or so and give him a stern talking to.

I don't know if apple is "trying to do the right thing" although excluding that your thinking seems reasonable. Apple isn't the worst at marketing, after all.

 

[UrsaMajor]

Apples legal team is doing what they are paid and meant to do, protect their intellectual property rights. If you hold patents and trademarks you must tackle people and companies that infringe on them.

That's why many small companies and individual inventors may get pushed around or their ideas taken and patented by someone else, because they don't have deep pockets for legal issues. Put yourself in the invetors shoes - What's to stop some company in china from stealing your widget idea and selling it on eBay? Do have the lawyers to stop them? Would it eat away all of your profit?

But what I do see clear is apple nor other companies have resources to stop the infringement at it's source, foreign factories. Too much of a language, legal and cultural barrier to stop them.

 

[scoobydoo99]

WRONG. You don't know law, this is tort, not a criminal offense. If anything saying he IS a criminal is libelous on your part.

You really shouldn't bring up issues that you obviously do not comprehend. The perp broke a variety of criminal laws, but you might start by reading the US Code;

§ 506. Criminal offenses

(a) Criminal Infringement. —

(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —

(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;

Additionally, there are various other criminal offenses committed when the individual conspired with others (the sellers in China) and brought the infringing goods into the US from international origins. Distribution via the internet also opens up various interstate commerce violations.

Your ill-formed argument only highlights your ignorance.

 

[DeanSolecki]

You really shouldn't bring up issues that you obviously do not comprehend. The perp broke a variety of criminal laws, but you might start by reading the US Code;

§ 506. Criminal offenses

(a) Criminal Infringement. —

(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —

(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;

Additionally, there are various other criminal offenses committed when the individual conspired with others (the sellers in China) and brought the infringing goods into the US from international origins. Distribution via the internet also opens up various interstate commerce violations.

Your ill-formed argument only highlights your ignorance.

It hasn't been demonstrated that he willfully infringed the copyright. The fact that he stopped upon request demonstrates the opposite. I don't know why you assume guilt preemptively when nothing has suggested it. Where's all the hate coming from?

Just saying "your ignorant" doesn't make it so. Michael Jackson used to do that and he wasn't exactly a rhodes scholar.

 

[blipper]

You really shouldn't bring up issues that you obviously do not comprehend. The perp broke a variety of criminal laws, but you might start by reading the US Code;

§ 506. Criminal offenses

(a) Criminal Infringement. —

(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —

Your ill-formed argument only highlights your ignorance.

The fact is that the story is about a civil lawsuit for trademark infringement, not a criminal case for copyright infringement.

 

[Monty88]

So, all expenses paid trip to NY? Nice.

?

Yeah, maybe apple will reimburse him for the $2.25 metrocard trip he'll pay going from Queens to Manhattan.

 

[shadowjeff]

Don't get why you guys are calling him a dufus/punk by looking at his replies.

Kid is most probably an immigrant from China which means he doesn't have decent English.

 

[Legion93]

Kid is most probably an immigrant from China which means he doesn't have decent English.

Really? And the source? Or was that just sarcasm?

 

[scoobydoo99]

The fact is that the story is about a civil lawsuit for trademark infringement, not a criminal case for copyright infringement.

Never said it was. In my OP, i called the guy that did it a "criminal" and was challenged by someone who claimed that what he did WASN'T criminal. I was just responding with the facts. Copyright infringement is a criminal offense, regardless of what Apple may have pursued in the case.

 

[blipper]

Never said it was. In my OP, i called the guy that did it a "criminal" and was challenged by someone who claimed that what he did WASN'T criminal. I was just responding with the facts. Copyright infringement is a criminal offense, regardless of what Apple may have pursued in the case.

Where's the copyright infringement --- I see possible trademark infringement (though not reaching criminal level standards)?

 

[ggibson913]

I Agree with the Woz on this one

In an interview, the interviewer noticed that Steve Wozniak had a white iPhone 4. When asked how he got one he said he bought one off of this kid and the company should leave him alone. Is Apple going to sue one of their co-founders too? Leave the kid alone, Apple didn't have a white iPhone, he found a way to supply one and meet a demand. I say good for him.

Even if he meets with apple's lawyers, I doubt Apple will take any money from him.

 

[DakotaGuy]

In an interview, the interviewer noticed that Steve Wozniak had a white iPhone 4. When asked how he got one he said he bought one off of this kid and the company should leave him alone. Is Apple going to sue one of their co-founders too? Leave the kid alone, Apple didn't have a white iPhone, he found a way to supply one and meet a demand. I say good for him.

Even if he meets with apple's lawyers, I doubt Apple will take any money from him.

Although I do believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty if the facts remain then Apple should take this kid for everything they can. This kid appeared to be profiting handsomely from selling unauthorized Apple parts. If Apple and it's legal team makes an example of this kid then it will discourage others from doing the same in the future. Now if the court case proves the kid did nothing wrong then so be it, but for now the facts are stacked against him. No money for a lawyer? Cry me a river. He should have thought about the legal implications before he ever sold the first kit. He knew that Apple likes to litigate and has a powerful legal team. If he was smart enough to arrange the supply, sales, and distribution of these kits he was smart enough to know it wasn't legal.

 

[ggibson913]

I see ur point but try to see mine

Although I do believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty if the facts remain then Apple should take this kid for everything they can. This kid appeared to be profiting handsomely from selling unauthorized Apple parts. If Apple and it's legal team makes an example of this kid then it will discourage others from doing the same in the future. Now if the court case proves the kid did nothing wrong then so be it, but for now the facts are stacked against him. No money for a lawyer? Cry me a river. He should have thought about the legal implications before he ever sold the first kit. He knew that Apple likes to litigate and has a powerful legal team. If he was smart enough to arrange the supply, sales, and distribution of these kits he was smart enough to know it wasn't legal.

I question the illegality of what he did. I am kind of old fashioned and am a firm believer in once I pay you money to purchase something from you, that item becomes my property and I am able to do whatever I want with it. This kid wasn't selling white iPhones, if he was I would agree with Apple's actions, this was not the case here. He was selling a conversion kit where someone who had already bought an iPhone from Apple could modify it to be a white iPhone. The courts have already upheld our right to jailbreak an iPhone, shouldn't that same principle apply here? Remember, he wasn't selling iPhones, just a kit to convert the glass outside layer to white. I see nothing wrong with that. If anything, I could see Apple going after the manufacturer who sold these to the kid.

 

[Mal]

I question the illegality of what he did. I am kind of old fashioned and am a firm believer in once I pay you money to purchase something from you, that item becomes my property and I am able to do whatever I want with it. This kid wasn't selling white iPhones, if he was I would agree with Apple's actions, this was not the case here. He was selling a conversion kit where someone who had already bought an iPhone from Apple could modify it to be a white iPhone. The courts have already upheld our right to jailbreak an iPhone, shouldn't that same principle apply here? Remember, he wasn't selling iPhones, just a kit to convert the glass outside layer to white. I see nothing wrong with that. If anything, I could see Apple going after the manufacturer who sold these to the kid.

Read the article again. He wasn't selling kits, he was selling actual Apple parts (probably factory rejects). They were not available for sale via any legal party, so therefore they were obtained illegally. He may have been unaware of that fact, but it is his responsibility to inform himself of those matters. I don't suspect there's any way he didn't know it was illegal to receive and resell those parts, however. They were, in essence, stolen goods, even if it was the result of a worker in one of Apple's factories selling them, because they were, and still are, Apple's property.

jW

 

[GREEN4U]

Doesn't this kid live in China? Why don't he just hide there? 1.3 billion people. I think he's safe.

 

[Legion93]

I fear Apple will soon file a lawsuit against my name due to "copyright infringement".

Quick, run! Apple is trying to take over the world!

 

[BC2009]

How the hell would you know the parts were stolen? If they are legally purchased with proof of purchase such as a receipt Apple cannot do anything apart from file a lawsuit against the supplier that sold the parts.

Its pretty obvious that Apple does not sell the unused parts to products they never released. When purchasing products from such a seller most states put the burden on the buyer to determine if the purchased product was indeed stolen. That is what got Gizmodo in trouble with the iPhone, though they claimed some sort of "journalist exemption" defense.