or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Police investigating Gizmodo's iPhone prototype story
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Police investigating Gizmodo's iPhone prototype story - Page 5

post #161 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

Co'mon, you are just copy-pasting that replay from a post addressed to you in another story!

Can you substantiate your claims that my assertions where incorrect (regarding the story of the iPhone, not that you are Tekstud, that is obviously correct)?

Yes - re-read EVERY story about the phone. It never left CA - done.

Whew - almost broke a sweat.

(like that sweaty hot Tekstud - he's so Tekstuddly! You seem to see him everywhere! But you do seem convinced I'm doing something with my hands (copy-paste ... WHAT?), sure you can't see my finger?)
post #162 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Yes - re-read EVERY story about the phone. It never left CA - done.

everywhere!)

Less than 10 words!

Next question. Who paid $5000 for the prototype?
post #163 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

At least you have mature arguments - no debate there. We now have a solid lock on the demographics here. Perhaps I can throw in some Pro-Wrestling references too. Don't want to overshoot the audience.

Says the guy who can't stop drawing comparisons to theft and smoking pot. Sorry, to say you set the bar for immaturity would be an understatement, I'm sorry you can't find [sane] people who appreciate your presence.
post #164 of 393
Dr.No now on ignore. √
post #165 of 393
wow I just found the ignore list function, thank god for that!
post #166 of 393
Take a deep breath, stay clam and carry on.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #167 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

Less than 10 words!

Next question. Who paid $5000 for the prototype?

Not Gawker - they paid for the story and the pics - they got nothing physical in NY - which they stole - but didn't have.

OW! Still hurts.
post #168 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by gchriste View Post

wow I just found the ignore list function, thank god for that!

samesies. kid is a real piece of work.. a true example of why you don't inbreed..
post #169 of 393
Hey, MacTripper, if you would have been more civil with your comments you may have actually made a valid point.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #170 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters View Post

Says the guy who can't stop drawing comparisons to theft and smoking pot. Sorry, to say you set the bar for immaturity would be an understatement, I'm sorry you can't find [sane] people who appreciate your presence.

Says the person who missed the point on the laws pertaining to both. What level of reading comprehension are we talking about again?

(BODY SLAM! WCW style! Oh yaaaaaaaa snap into a slim jim! - gotta keep those demographics satisfied)
post #171 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

What does that have to do with ANYTHING? They paid for a story and pictures from a freelancer, and he's the editor / owner of Gawker - but hey - nice twitter!

WOW - does anyone here even know how this all went down? And after having that accurate scenario info - you're going to apply law to it too?

OW ow ow - hurt hurt hurt....

OK, let's just end this now. You pretty clearly got schooled on the law showing it's not legal in either CA or NY to keep, let alone sell, found property. You've annoyingly ignored the posts pointing out applicable NY laws, which don't really matter anyway, because you can't commit a crime in one state and then just run to another state and say neener neener.

So now, you've switched your argument to some alternate reality version of how things went down, in which an unaffiliated, rogue freelancer paid $5k for the prototype, then photographed it, held it on camera, and took it apart. But here on planet Earth, here's how it went down.

- Gizmodo/Denton has admitted to paying for the phone.
- Gizmodo editor Jason Chen took video of himself holding the phone.
- Gizmodo said they themselves took it apart to show the insides, but could only go so far because they didn't want to return it to Apple broken (even though they very well might have broken it).
- Lastly, Bruce Sewell, Apple's VP and General Counsel, sent an official letter to Gizmodo. This letter says Gizmodo is in possession of the phone and Brian Lam smugly tells Bruce that Jason Chen has the phone.

Welcome to school, you smug moron.
post #172 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.



Hey - I got an idea - medical pot is legal in California - light up a joint in front of a policeman in New York City. Or a DEA office in Washington DC. Let me know how that works out for you, and don't forget to forward me the mug-shots.


Your comparison makes no sense. I am not a lawyer so I won't argue what the law is and where, but:

According to you, Gizmodo didn't break a law because they are based in NYC where it's not illegal.

The proper comparison would be that you smoked medical pot in California (where it's legal) but it was obtained from NYC (where it's illegal)
post #173 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Not Gawker - they paid for the story and the pics - they got nothing physical in NY - which they stole - but didn't have.


Next question. Who took the pictures?

And by the way, your sentence says that they stole NY, but they didn't have it. That was weird.
post #174 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Hey, MacTripper, if you would have been more civil with your comments you may have actually made a valid point.

We really need some west coast moderating, I'd vote for you.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #175 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters View Post

samesies. kid is a real piece of work.. a true example of why you don't inbreed..

Alright - that's what we're talking about - point - proven, we have Disney Channel confirmation!

Off the rim 3 points! Now go to bed before you Dad catches you on the computer.

Moving right along - can you talk about the topic or just attack people?

(topic? what topic! I get the impression this is a nerd circle jerk - why talk about the topic now right?)
post #176 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

Next question. Who took the pictures?

And by the way, your sentence says that they stole NY, but they didn't have it. That was weird.

The freelancer - and here's a question back atcha - is a freelancer an employee of Gawker?

Tick tock tick tock.

Ding!

No.
post #177 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

The freelancer -


Ah! Wrong answer! You were doing so well!!! Pity. The correct answer was given away just above, and you missed it!

- Gizmodo editor Jason Chen took video of himself holding the phone.

But if you accept this answer, I'll let you continue in the game. And ask you the next question...
post #178 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by talus View Post

OK, let's just end this now. You pretty clearly got schooled on the law showing it's not legal in either CA or NY to keep, let alone sell, found property. You've annoyingly ignored the posts pointing out applicable NY laws, which don't really matter anyway, because you can't commit a crime in one state and then just run to another state and say neener neener.

So now, you've switched your argument to some alternate reality version of how things went down, in which an unaffiliated, rogue freelancer paid $5k for the prototype, then photographed it, held it on camera, and took it apart. But here on planet Earth, here's how it went down.

- Gizmodo/Denton has admitted to paying for the phone.
- Gizmodo editor Jason Chen took video of himself holding the phone.
- Gizmodo said they themselves took it apart to show the insides, but could only go so far because they didn't want to return it to Apple broken (even though they very well might have broken it).
- Lastly, Bruce Sewell, Apple's VP and General Counsel, sent an official letter to Gizmodo. This letter says Gizmodo is in possession of the phone and Brian Lam smugly tells Bruce that Jason Chen has the phone.

Welcome to school, you smug moron.

Personal attacks aside (oh that stung too), I still don't see the law applying to NY as defined in CA, I don't see the source of the Twitter holding the phone (how he's going to jail is going to be tricky since it never went to NY), I don't see any charges, I don't see how something that happened in CA is going to get a bunch of pictures sent out of NY getting someone in NY arrested for possession of something they didn't have.

But then possession seems to be key in all this last I checked.

But don't mind me - I'm so smug I call people morons. I'm that smug.
post #179 of 393
I fault Apple Insider Moderators and Webmasters for allowing the continued descent of this forum to the abyss.

I am not big on banning or ignoring people, no matter how I may disagree with them. Personally, I do not believe in not responding to falsehoods and not pointing out avasions ... because that may be misconstrued by the less informed.

But, come on, there must be a limit.

Also, if it is true that there are people who keep on popping up, masquerading under different usernames... that must not me be let to fester.

I am not techie, but if Apple Insider cannot find a more effective solution to this problems, what is the point of having a forum?

It has been PALATABLE interacting with you! What??? *sigh* [Refer to previous posts if you did not get this.]



Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post


Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post
palatable?

roflmao

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters View Post

if this is how he argues points, I'm afraid to ask how he was potty-trained.

At least, a few people understood the nuance.

CGC
post #180 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters View Post

samesies. kid is a real piece of work.. a true example of why you don't inbreed..

Not inbred, hatched.
Crying? No, I am not crying. I am sweating through my eyes.
Reply
Crying? No, I am not crying. I am sweating through my eyes.
Reply
post #181 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

We really need some west coast moderating, I'd vote for you.

Oops I missed that - who am I again? I thought I was Tekstuddly? Now I'm MacTripper? So much nerd projecting (or is it paranoia?) here. Wow.

Is this how this forum works? If I don't agree I'm one of a dozen nerds that you disagreed with in the past?

Just making sure. Because I find that really sad and nerdy (as opposed to white and nerdy).


Basically you're saying that I must be someone else so that invalidates everything I say, in a weird sort of nerd-logic kind of way. Gotit.

Well, you're just Tekstud so I guess I shouldn't get too worked up.

(did I do it right? - I'm new to this nerd-paranoid fantasy game)
post #182 of 393
No I don't speculate on what other aliases you may have used. It is clear that you are not in control of you faculties so it is irrelevant. But clearly not as intelligent as Tek. You are not even close to being in his league.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #183 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

No I don't speculate on what other aliases you may have used. It is clear that you are not in control of you faculties so it is irrelevant. But clearly not as intelligent as Tek. You are not even close to being in his league.

Well you're just a Tekstud!

So there!

(hey I'm getting the hang of this aren't I?)

I have control of a finger tho - it's right in front of the screen in response for the personal attack you ... you Tekstudder.

(I am getting the hang of this - cool!)



Moving back to the topic - did Gawker - in NY ever have the phone?
post #184 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Because only group think is tolerated and that's what makes a conversation interesting isn't it?

"NAH - BAN HIM raaarrrwwwwrrr - I don't wike him - he won't think like I do - RAARR"...

Interestingly, this is a perfect description of the comments on articles over at Gizmodo. Giz is famous for doing exactly that (Brian Lam's "ban hammer"); for basically shouting down anyone who doesn't agree with the Gizmodo group think.

On the topic of the actual article, at least we will soon know who the actual original thief is if the police are investigating.

Anyone who doesn't believe Gizmodo's whiny little dudes aren't going to immediately tell the Cops who they bought it off of is dreaming. The fact that they bought stolen goods is a slam dunk and once the Police inform Mr. Lam and Mr. Chen of exactly what the possible jail-time for that is they are going to sing like the little scared birdies they are.

The guy who actually stole the phone and got the $5,000 is going to be thrown to the wolves in 3, 2, 1 ...
post #185 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Well you're just a Tekstud!

So there!

(hey I'm getting the hang of this aren't I?)

Hey! NoNo boy, you seem to have lost your concentration. You had agreed that Jason Chen took the video himself, right?
post #186 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Personal attacks aside (oh that stung too), I still don't see the law applying to NY as defined in CA, I don't see the source of the Twitter holding the phone (how he's going to jail is going to be tricky since it never went to NY), I don't see any charges, I don't see how something that happened in CA is going to get a bunch of pictures sent out of NY getting someone in NY arrested for possession of something they didn't have.

But then possession seems to be key in all this last I checked.

But don't mind me - I'm so smug I call people morons. I'm that smug.

Man, you are thick. Did you read the link in my post? Apple's head lawyer said Gizmodo was in possession of the phone. I understand that you get off on arguing just for the sake of it, and you will continue to shift the argument even when blatantly proven wrong.

Maybe this will help you with the concept of possession.

1. Jason Chen works for Gizmodo:


2. This is Jason Chen holding the phone:


Is that getting through?

As for the law, multiple people have already linked to pertinent laws/statutes in both CA and NY which would seem to make this phone stolen property.
post #187 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Interestingly, this is a perfect description of the comments on articles over at Gizmodo. Giz is famous for doing exactly that (Brian Lam's "ban hammer"); for basically shouting down anyone who doesn't agree with the Gizmodo group think.

On the topic of the actual article, at least we will soon know who the actual original thief is if the police are investigating.

Anyone who doesn't believe Gizmodo's whiny little dudes aren't going to immediately tell the Cops who they bought it off of is dreaming. The fact that they bought stolen goods is a slam dunk and once the Police inform Mr. Lam and Mr. Chen of exactly what the possible jail-time for that is they are going to sing like the little scared birdies they are.

The guy who actually stole the phone and got the $5,000 is going to be thrown to the wolves in 3, 2, 1 ...

If Apple actually decides to hand Gawker a ton of page-views in protracting this - yes - I think the person who actually got the money and found the phone in the first place is going to be thrown under a bus. They already outed the engineer. Why not.

Still think it would be insane to give Gawker more ratings tho. Is Apple that petty?
post #188 of 393
Dead men walking.
post #189 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by talus View Post

Man, you are thick.

Nah I can't comment on that anymore because I'm thick and smug - and tekstud, Macwhoever and a dozen other aliases. I'm more interested in what Apple would stand to gain from all this that Gawker wouldn't gain from even more.

(And while Chen might be liable - how is that going to touch Nick in NY who never had the phone? That's still being side-stepped I see - ok I lied about the thread being dropped)
post #190 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Nah I can't comment on that anymore because I'm thick and smug - and tekstud, Macwhoever and a dozen other aliases. I'm more interested in what Apple would stand to gain from all this that Gawker wouldn't gain from even more.

Co'mon guy. You are not thick (smug perhaps). Anyway... who took the video? Can you rise to the challenge?
post #191 of 393
65-10=55 and counting.

What is 55 and counting?

Gizmodo will reward you $5,000 in NY, if you get the correct answer.

CGC
post #192 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

Co'mon guy. You are not thick (smug perhaps). Anyway... who took the video? Can you rise to the challenge?

No idea - probably Chen - or someone who can't make Chen look less horrifying up close - gah. But nobody in NY - and that's what everyone is on about (GAWKER is going DOWN etc). Chen might - certainly the mystery man whose about to become a bus speedbump (the guy in the bar) - but not Nick, and that Twitter graphic was Nick right?
post #193 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

No idea - probably Chen - or someone who can't make Chen look less horrifying up close - gah. But nobody in NY - and that's what everyone is on about (GAWKER is going DOWN etc). Chen might - certainly the mystery man whose about to become a bus speedbump (the guy in the bar) - but not Nick, and that Twitter graphic was Nick right?

So you are back in the game! Next question then.

Who is holding the prototype on the video?

(Stay with me we are still in California)
post #194 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

So you are back in the game! Next question then.

Who is holding the prototype on the video?

(Stay with me we are still in California)

Someone not Nick - who runs / owns Gawker media in NY.
post #195 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Nah I can't comment on that anymore because I'm thick and smug - and tekstud, Macwhoever and a dozen other aliases. I'm more interested in what Apple would stand to gain from all this that Gawker wouldn't gain from even more.

(And while Chen might be liable - how is that going to touch Nick in NY who never had the phone? That's still being side-stepped I see - ok I lied about the thread being dropped)

And just as predicted, the arguments shift yet again. Now he has 2 lines of arguments with which to entertain himself! Nick owns Gawker which owns Gizmodo, and he authorized the payment.

I honestly couldn't care about your new toy (what Apple has to gain). Your intention is to argue, not discuss, and you've already shown you don't know what you're talking about. It's too bad your actual arguments are weak.
post #196 of 393
they bought stolen goods they should be prosecuted..whoever "found" the phone did not own it so whoever bought de facto bought something stolen.

"Apple people have no objectivity when it comes to criticism of Apple.." Lenovo X1 Carbon is out..bye bye MBAir

Reply

"Apple people have no objectivity when it comes to criticism of Apple.." Lenovo X1 Carbon is out..bye bye MBAir

Reply
post #197 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Someone not Nick - who runs / owns Gawker media.

That's correct! But I did not ask who is NOT holding the phone, right?

Who is holding the phone?

Go on, it is not that difficult
post #198 of 393
This thread is everything that's wrong with AI.
post #199 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

That's correct! But I did not ask who is NOT holding the phone, right?

Who is holding the phone?

Go on, it is not that difficult

A person who won't put "Gawker in jail" because he's not in NY holding a phone - getting it?
post #200 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

No idea - probably Chen - or someone who can't make Chen look less horrifying up close - gah. But nobody in NY - and that's what everyone is on about (GAWKER is going DOWN etc). Chen might - certainly the mystery man whose about to become a bus speedbump (the guy in the bar) - but not Nick, and that Twitter graphic was Nick right?

Does this help?

How Checkbook Journalism Gave Gizmodo Its iPhone Scoop

"Asked whether he's concerned his company may have committed a crime in buying the phone, Denton says that Gaby Darbyshire, Gawker Media's chief operating officer, researched the relevant case law and came away satisfied that Gizmodo was in the clear. Moreover, Denton says Gizmodo, having reaped its page view harvest, is working to learn the identity of the person who lost possession of the phone and will return it to that person, or to anyone who establishes a legal claim to it."

There is Nick Denton admitting that his company bought the phone. It's too bad he asked a former British barrister for a legal opinion on California laws.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Police investigating Gizmodo's iPhone prototype story