AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Affidavit in prototype iPhone case reveals Steve Jobs contacted Gizmodo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Affidavit in prototype iPhone case reveals Steve Jobs contacted Gizmodo - Page 3

post #81 of 250
5/14/10 at 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

This was mentioned from some site awhile back. Apparently Jobs called and abruptly said, "GIVE ME BACK MY PHONE!".

What would you say?
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
post #82 of 250
5/14/10 at 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenclaw View Post

I have to agree. If it's known that, for example, you found a Lamborghini, you aren't going to relinquish it to anyone who calls. A formal request or a request made through proper channels would seem to be prudent.

.

But 'proper channels' don't consist of a guy named Vinnie in a parking lot at midnight.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 250
5/14/10 at 2:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Well, I don't think additional charges can't be added to that list. But, as I said, I don't have any legal opinion (not being a lawyer) on whether they could actually make a case for extortion.

Hope he doesn't resist arrest when they go to pick him up after the courts close on a Friday evening.

If they are considering that charge, I suppose they would have had the evidence the needed without the search, for that specific issue. If so, perhaps that would be why the wouldn't include it in the search warrant...only include issues being investigated by the warrant itself.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply
post #84 of 250
5/14/10 at 2:35pm
hi all,

not sure if any posted this link, but this article tells me that Hogan is not very smart chap and should be pulled through court for his actions

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...ommate-iphone/
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 250
5/14/10 at 2:45pm
Even if Apple had not wanted to pursue this case, there are dozens of other companies in the Silicon Valley (who spend megabucks on R&D) who do not want to see a precedent set that bloggers can offer a bounty for the theft of trade secrets. The DA is pretty much obliged to try to prosecute the Gizmodo guys, whether Apple likes the PR ramifications or not.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 250
5/14/10 at 2:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

and then there's this:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/05/jesus_diaz

Not true:

Quote:
UPDATE, 40 MINUTES AFTER POSTING:

Jesus Diaz responds via Twitter, says hes not in Spain and that yours truly is a loser, assclown, Apple spokesman, liar, and clown. Happy to clear that up.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:00pm
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31376177/Gizmodo-iPhoneOrder
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:07pm
Brian Lam's moustache makes him look like an Asian drag queen....

























...or does it?

I'm only asking questions here...
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Excuse me, but do you follow basic English?

Where did I say that theft is inconsequential!? Did you even read what I wrote?

I did read what you wrote. You called Gizmodo inconsequential. Gizmodo became 'consequential' because of the theft.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #90 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Please please delete the iPhone formatted web site!
Seriosly it makes the site far less enjoyable on the iPhone. We have suffered enough.

I couldn't agree more. The mobile version of AI is a disaster. Better to create an iPhone app that would reformat the pages.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #91 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:19pm
I get it now. Why Jesus Diaz is such a douche:

http://yfrog.com/6bxg3wj

It all makes perfect sense! If I looked like Non I'd be pretty pissed off too...

Reply
Reply
post #92 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

The arrogance by the journalist to stall the return of stolen property will cost him. If he were smart he would have visited the main campus, requested a visit with executive staff and returned it over to them in hopes of possibly getting a story.

Instead, he did what he did.


Exactly!! And could have had some exclusive pictures (external) to boot. Pictures going into Apple Security etc etc

Why they did it the way they did, not sure. He claims its to say that it was not a coordinated plant... but that seems week for the trouble they are gathering. He could have gotten a note from Apples saying they had taken receipt... many options other than the path they took.
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
post #93 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I couldn't agree more. The mobile version of AI is a disaster. Better to create an iPhone app that would reformat the pages.

its those darn headers popping in and out, very poor
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
post #94 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenclaw View Post

Thanks for the article; now that is an example of REAL journalism.

It also corroborates a lot of what we have believed all along, but now we have actual facts instead of speculation.

Good article on Wired. Clearly illustrates the 'bag of hurt' those involved now find themselves in.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #95 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post

its those darn headers popping in and out, very poor

Exactly. Other apps I've seen have the pop-in effect happen in a more sensible fashion. These seem to pop-in when they shouldn't.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #96 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

"Chen created copies of the iPhone prototype in the form of digital images and video".

I don't think so.

Yeah, like he literally *cloned* the prototype .
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

then that's just extortion on top of the illegalities of releasing the trade secrets.

A - "Give us back our phone"
G - "How do we know it's yours?"
A - "I'm telling you that's my phone and I want you to give it back."
G - "Put it in writing and I'll give it back. Meantime, I want to play with it"

.

Then I guess every lost in found in the country is guilty of extortion then. Last time I went to a lost and found and asked for something I lost, I had to be able to prove that it was mine.

I guess I should have asked for everything in the lost and found, and when they refused to give it to me, have the clerk arrested for extortion.
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 250
5/14/10 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Won't happen. The media will close ranks around Gizmodo like you would not believe. Apple would end up getting cast as the villain here, regardless of facts, law, and such. It will be unbelievably damaging PR for the company, and that would worry me a lot as a shareholder.

If I was on Apple's board, this is the advice I would be giving SJ: "It's not worth the fight; move along."

Btw, sorry to re-post this, but take a look at the hugely popular pop icon, Jon Stewart on this issue (it's side-splittingly funny too!): http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...-2010/appholes

Okay, first off anyone who thinks that this information getting released did not cost Apple a heck of a lot more than the retail value of an already released phone can't possibly have even two brain cells to rub together.

If you were on Apple's board and suggested that, I'd fire your ass so fast you wouldn't even have time to see it coming. Apple HAS NO CHOICE but to deal with this very harshly or everyone and their dog will consider it open season on Apple's intellectual property. The HAVE to.

Had Hogan or even Gizmodo handled things differently, and made some better choices, I'd agree with you that Apple might come out looking badly. In light of how things really played out, Apple has no choice but to release the dogs. No one with half a brain is going to feel sorry for Hogan or Gizmodo. To quote Hogan, himself, "Sucks to be him".
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 250
5/14/10 at 4:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Won't happen. The media will close ranks around Gizmodo like you would not believe. Apple would end up getting cast as the villain here, regardless of facts, law, and such. It will be unbelievably damaging PR for the company, and that would worry me a lot as a shareholder.

If I was on Apple's board, this is the advice I would be giving SJ: "It's not worth the fight; move along."

I don't think there will be any long term damage to Apple's reputation from pursuing this, and I think the long term benefits outweigh the cost by sending a message that you can't just do this and expect there to not be consequences. Not pursuing it would send the opposite message -- i.e., that Apple is fair game and you can get away with anything. The media will end up looking self-serving, to their own detriment. And I think most people -- the ones who don't visit AI -- will likely see the very real difference between "reporters" engaging in industrial espionage, where there is no compelling public interest served, and reporters investigating issues like public corruption.
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 250
5/14/10 at 4:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I wonder if the way Chen (or Gizmodo) phrased it, 'confirm it's yours in writing, then we'll send it' could possibly constitute blackmail?

Or maybe proof of ownership. Just because it has an Apple logo on it doesn't make it Apple's. If I lost my iPhone and someone found it and someone other than me tried to claim it I would hope the person who had it would ask for some kind of proof it was theirs and not just hand it over because they said it was, blackmail funny.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 250
5/14/10 at 4:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Then I guess every lost in found in the country is guilty of extortion then. Last time I went to a lost and found and asked for something I lost, I had to be able to prove that it was mine.

I guess I should have asked for everything in the lost and found, and when they refused to give it to me, have the clerk arrested for extortion.

Exactly. Just because it has an Apple logo on it doesn't make it Apples. I sure hope if I lose my iPhone and someone finds it they do not drop it in the mail to Stevie.
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 250
5/14/10 at 4:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post

Exactly. Just because it has an Apple logo on it doesn't make it Apples. I sure hope if I lose my iPhone and someone finds it they do not drop it in the mail to Stevie.

So, help me understand this. You're arguing that they didn't know it was an Apple iPhone prototype?
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 250
5/14/10 at 5:13pm
You guys are too much. As much as I love Apple products and consider SJ a uber genius. He can also be an arrogant a-hole at times. But it seems like SJ gets a pass by you guys. Giz had a story worth a million lost iPhones and nothing SJ would've offered them could equal that. A lil jail time isn't always bad for business, just ask Martha Stewart or Steve Madden. I say bravo to Giz for giving SJ a big F U.
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject" - Winston Churchill
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject" - Winston Churchill
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #104 of 250
5/14/10 at 5:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by clickmyface View Post

What site? The only people to report on the direct contact with Apple was Gizmodo, who never once reported that Steve Jobs personally called them.

I don't get why people (aka you) feel the need to make stuff up.

Daniel Lyons reported it in Newsweek.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/237186/page/2

"But on the day the story ran, Jobs himself called Gizmodo editor Brian Lam and demanded Gizmodo return the phone. "
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 250
5/14/10 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post

Or maybe proof of ownership. Just because it has an Apple logo on it doesn't make it Apple's. If I lost my iPhone and someone found it and someone other than me tried to claim it I would hope the person who had it would ask for some kind of proof it was theirs and not just hand it over because they said it was, blackmail funny.

Asking for a request in writing doesn't PROVE ownership of anything! And exactly WHY would Steve Jobs ask for a fake iPhone back as if it were real. That would cause more harm to Apple and would land them in legal trouble because they would then be in possession of stolen property. Stop putting forth spurious examples to back up an argument that makes no sense from the start. Like Apple needs to STEAL a phone that doesn't even WORK. RIIIIGHT...

It's not blackmail, but it IS a move whose main purpose is to serve Gizmodo's needs as the full disclosed email to Steve Jobs shows.

EXCERPT from http://jsnell.intertext.com/post/599...-in-journalism:
"Hey Steve, this email chain is off record on my side.

I understand the position youre in, and I want to help, but it conflicts with my own responsibilities to give the phone back without any confirmation that its real, from apple, officially.

Something like that from you or apple legal is a big story, that would make up for giving the phone back right away. If the phone disappears without a story to explain why it went away, and the proof it went to apple, it hurts our business. And our reputation. People will say this is a coordinated leak, etc."
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 250
5/14/10 at 6:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

You guys are too much. As much as I love Apple products and consider SJ a uber genius. He can also be an arrogant a-hole at times. But it seems like SJ gets a pass by you guys. Giz had a story worth a million lost iPhones and nothing SJ would've offered them could equal that. A lil jail time isn't always bad for business, just ask Martha Stewart or Steve Madden. I say bravo to Giz for giving SJ a big F U.

you must've missed Jason's email to Apple begging them to give Giz better coverage, and literally giving SJ a virtual bj.
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 250
5/14/10 at 6:12pm
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post

... I went to law school!



.

Is OK

We Understand

It can happen in the Best of Families

.


Reply
Reply
post #108 of 250
5/14/10 at 6:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihxo View Post

you must've missed Jason's email to Apple begging them to give Giz better coverage, and literally giving SJ a virtual bj.

I guess I did, but one does need to strike out with the prettiest girl first before calling her a *unt
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject" - Winston Churchill
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject" - Winston Churchill
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #109 of 250
5/14/10 at 6:18pm
.

And when the Dust has Settled on this Entire Story ?

.

Will make a Great Episode for Patrick Jane

Complete with trips to Silly Cone Valley

.

"Pick a prototype, any prototype, and I'll tell you which one is real"



.
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 250
5/14/10 at 6:20pm
People here a making a lot of noise about the timing of the call by Steve Jobs asking for the phone back. People here are making a lot of noise about the fact that SJ had to prove it was his phone.

I think everyone is forgetting that Gizmodo already admitted they knew the owner. In the original (and all actually) article Gizmodo posted showing the prototype, they state that this IS the new iPhone, that this IS the prototype. I'm not a lawyer, but that sounds like an acknowledgement. They did not need proof as to whose phone this was. They stated in the very first article that it was an Apple prototype phone lost by an Apple engineer named Gray Powell.

This is an admission.

They knew what they were buying and Hogans statement that he was going to get another $5000 from Gizmodo after the 4G release, doubly damns them.
Reply
Reply
post #111 of 250
5/14/10 at 6:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post


I am all for press freedom but this is abuse of such right.

CGC

Yeah, it's actually funny to say 'freedom of the press' when it's a matter of buying stolen property. What's the problem then with Giz just breaking into Apple's campus and taking it - the people have a right to know! Sure, the people are curious, but WTF, this wasn't like he needed to do it to expose that Soylent Green is people or something.

I guess it's for the site hits, but damn, really really crappy way to treat other people 'outing' the engineer who lost it for NO actual news value - and simultaneously demonstrating that they knew who it belonged to and could have returned it. I guess in this case what goes around comes around.
Reply
Reply
post #112 of 250
5/14/10 at 7:00pm
"And I want to work closer with Apple, too. Im not asking for more access we can do our jobs with or without it but again, this is the only way we can survive while being cut out of things. Thats my position on things."

I can either get more inside access, or, you know, accidents like this may happen. And I'd hate to see anything happen to your lovely family. Me and my boys just want you to know where we're coming from - it's a dangerous world.

Well played. (Insert Borat length pause... Not.)
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 250
5/14/10 at 7:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Then I guess every lost in found in the country is guilty of extortion then. Last time I went to a lost and found and asked for something I lost, I had to be able to prove that it was mine.

I guess I should have asked for everything in the lost and found, and when they refused to give it to me, have the clerk arrested for extortion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post

Exactly. Just because it has an Apple logo on it doesn't make it Apples. I sure hope if I lose my iPhone and someone finds it they do not drop it in the mail to Stevie.

There's a huge difference. This was recognized as an Apple prototype phone. It was also recognized right away that it belonged to an engineer at Apple. The CEO of Apple calls and asks for the phone back. At that point, there's more than enough proof that the phone belongs to Apple.

Now, if he had said "I need to know that it's really you, so I'll drive over to Apple HQ and deliver the phone in person to you", then that would not have been reasonable. Insisting on a letter from Legal is extreme.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

You guys are too much. As much as I love Apple products and consider SJ a uber genius. He can also be an arrogant a-hole at times. But it seems like SJ gets a pass by you guys. Giz had a story worth a million lost iPhones and nothing SJ would've offered them could equal that. A lil jail time isn't always bad for business, just ask Martha Stewart or Steve Madden. I say bravo to Giz for giving SJ a big F U.

Sorry, I'm not going to justify criminal activity in order to gain a story. Where do you draw the line? Would it have been OK for them to steal the phone out of the engineer's pocket? Maybe break into his car or home and steal the phone? Or why not bypass the middleman and break into Apple's HQ?

Or, heck, why not kidnap Steve Jobs and say that they're not returning him until Apple gives them ALL the prototypes they're working on.

The law specifically doesn't allow for criminal activity in pursuit of a story. Nor should it.
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 250
5/14/10 at 7:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Much as I like and admire the guy, Jobs is not law enforcement.

I cant stand the guy - who the fuck does he think he is?
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 250
5/14/10 at 7:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

1) And rolling over for some 2 bit stolen property fencers would be WAY worse for their image and ability to protect their intellectual property.
2) Are you f***ing nuts? I don't know ANYONE who's considering buying before June now, including myself.
3) You overestimate the degree to which the public is conscious of Apple's release cycles, as obvious as it is we who follow such trivia. But I may have upgraded now, thinking that new features don't outweigh my ability to get value between now and then, but if I know that, say, there's for sure a front facing camera that I really want, then I'm definitely holding off my purchase.

Finally, Apple lost more than 2 months lead time over competitors. In this industry, that's an enormous amount of time.

(You should watch your language.)

Obviously you think that the average iPhone buyer is stupid and uninformed, but that's your wont.

If you think that two months is what matters from the standpoint of value creation from the life cycle of a fourth generation product, you don't know much about value creation.

You must work in the hedge fund industry.
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 250
5/14/10 at 7:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

There's a huge difference. This was recognized as an Apple prototype phone. It was also recognized right away that it belonged to an engineer at Apple. The CEO of Apple calls and asks for the phone back. At that point, there's more than enough proof that the phone belongs to Apple.

I was responding to the apparent blanket statements of a couple of posters that asking for proof of ownership is extortion, and it is not.

The request for the letter undoubtably served multiple purposes, but at the time the request was made, it was probably a reasonble thing to do to try and cover their butts.
Reply
Reply
post #117 of 250
5/14/10 at 7:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I did read what you wrote. You called Gizmodo inconsequential. Gizmodo became 'consequential' because of the theft.

Very clever. Not.

"My appendix is inconsequential. But my appendectomy made it become consequential for me (even though the rest of the world could care less)."
Reply
Reply
post #118 of 250
5/14/10 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo63 View Post

Okay, first off anyone who thinks that this information getting released did not cost Apple a heck of a lot more than the retail value of an already released phone can't possibly have even two brain cells to rub together.

If you were on Apple's board and suggested that, I'd fire your ass so fast you wouldn't even have time to see it coming. Apple HAS NO CHOICE but to deal with this very harshly or everyone and their dog will consider it open season on Apple's intellectual property. The HAVE to.

You'd 'fire [my] ass' if I were on your board!?

Who'd be you? SJ?

Don't know much about how a modern corporation functions today, do you? (Hint: you should probably have thought about it before you put me on the board).
Reply
Reply
post #119 of 250
5/14/10 at 8:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't think there will be any long term damage to Apple's reputation from pursuing this, and I think the long term benefits outweigh the cost by sending a message that you can't just do this and expect there to not be consequences. Not pursuing it would send the opposite message -- i.e., that Apple is fair game and you can get away with anything. The media will end up looking self-serving, to their own detriment. And I think most people -- the ones who don't visit AI -- will likely see the very real difference between "reporters" engaging in industrial espionage, where there is no compelling public interest served, and reporters investigating issues like public corruption.

These are very thoughtful points. I agree that Apple is in a bit of a bind here: to do nothing would create it's own issues, as would doing something.

I am simply coming out on one side of this, suggesting that in the long run, this amounts to a hill of beans, and that Apple has the opportunity to take the high road here.
Reply
Reply
post #120 of 250
5/14/10 at 8:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You'd 'fire [my] ass' if I were on your board!?

Who'd be you? SJ?

Don't know much about how a modern corporation functions today, do you? (Hint: you should probably have thought about it before you put me on the board).

Hey I don't like everything that Apple does, especially lately. They are getting a bit heavy-handed. That said, they absolutely have no choice on this one. If they let this kind of stuff slide it will happen all of the time.

Their engineer screwed up (it appears). But it was an honest mistake. Hogan, his buddy and Gizmodo's actions were anything but. They're in deep sh*t.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Affidavit in prototype iPhone case reveals Steve Jobs contacted Gizmodo