or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Gizmodo affidavit says roommate's tip led police to iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gizmodo affidavit says roommate's tip led police to iPhone - Page 2

post #41 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Sorry, I choose to associate with honest people. I'm sorry you're more comfortable living with criminals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

Chen committed, nothing, as all of you have pointed out via the facts available.

All the facts available indicate that Chen knowingly purchased stolen property. In what state would that NOT be a crime?

Granted, it needs to be proven in a court of law that he actually did what everyone claimed, but all the facts available point in that direction.

So how much is Gizmodo paying you?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #42 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Sorry, I choose to associate with honest people. I'm sorry you're more comfortable living with criminals.



All the facts available indicate that Chen knowingly purchased stolen property. In what state would that NOT be a crime?

Granted, it needs to be proven in a court of law that he actually did what everyone claimed, but all the facts available point in that direction.

So how much is Gizmodo paying you?

Once again you elect to edit to your choosing (I am actually too tired from having been up multiple nights working on month end closing and preparing for an audit to even play with you tonight, much less think of the correct vocabulary.). WHERE does it state CHEN made the purchase?

Not in the affidavit. It blatantly states CHEN'S BOSS was the one contacted in all cases.

Where are YOU getting YOUR facts?
post #43 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormj View Post

You're not a lawyer. The quotes would be admissible because they are statements by a party opponent.

I doubt it is an admission by a party opponent - It doesn't appear that she is a co-conspirator, but maybe it can be argued that she is.
post #44 of 310
Once he realized exactly who the phone belonged to and refused to return it and only was concerned with cashing in... it went from officially lost to officially stolen and trying to profit from stolen items. Simple as that.

He deserves any penalties that follow. What an idiot.

His female roommate was smart to call in and let them know she had nothing to do with it, smart enough to know this could turn into a big issue and didn't want to risk any arrest, major fine, or possible jail time. Very smart of her.
post #45 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

cool! Indeed IANAL, but I gather that Hogan can deny under oath having made the statements, but his actions are consistent with having made them.

If you're a lawyer, stormj, these forums need more of your input--especially if you know IP law!
If you're not a lawyer, then you need to disqualify yourself or not make forthright assertions about the law.

It's not really IP law you are arguing there, but rules of evidence. You can look up these rules. The rule regarding hearsay is rule 801 under the Federal Rules of Evidence - but just reading them cold might not give you much insight in how the rules are applied. California has its own set of rules. See here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html - Evidence.

Edit to add: search warrants can be obtained based on other people's statements, just need probable cause. Generally speaking, hearsay is an issue that is most relevant in the context of a trial or hearing. So it depends on what the context is.
post #46 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

Once again you elect to edit to your choosing (I am actually too tired from having been up multiple nights working on month end closing and preparing for an audit to even play with you tonight, much less think of the correct vocabulary.). WHERE does it state CHEN made the purchase?

Not in the affidavit. It blatantly states CHEN'S BOSS was the one contacted in all cases.

Where are YOU getting YOUR facts?

Let's see:

Whose home was the search warrant for? Chen's

Who published the story and admitted to taking the phone apart? Chen

Who asked Apple for a letter from legal before returning the phone? Chen

Who eventually returned the phone to Apple? Chen

Now, explain to me how Chen did not take possession of stolen property.

Admittedly, his boss may also be in trouble, but that doesn't absolve Chen.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #47 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Personally, I would choose to have a better class of friends. My friends would never, ever do something that stupid and would not put me in a position where I feared I was committing a crime because of their stupidity and greed. If they did, they would no longer be my friend.
post #48 of 310
And here I thought Gizmodo LOVED iPhone stories. I searched their page and didn't see any mention of this story today. I thought they would be all over anything iPhone 4g. What a bunch of D-Bags. So much for journalistic integrity.
post #49 of 310
I'm actually sick of seeing Jason chen's face on google news in the thumbnail. That is one ugly dude.
post #50 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormj View Post

I feel sorry for Chen. He was hung out to dry by Gizmodo. They gave him bad advice.

Chen is (eventually) going to get exactly what he deserves. That's the thing about character and integrity; if you have it, it'll show up at times like this when you really need it.

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #51 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

^^^^^Zealot.

Ignore.....ON!!!

Reread the AI ToS.

First, you don't get to make public attacks on people like that. Second, you don't get to publicly call out who you are putting on your ignore list. You agreed to those terms when you signed up for AI forums, and I -- for one -- would appreciate the added civility that abiding by the ToS would bring to this discussion.

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #52 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

She supposedly called as the phone was connected to her computer in an attempt to snyc it with itunes, and she feared she would be involved in the situation when she had nothing to do with it.
post #53 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

"Snitch".

As if thieves have honor...

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #54 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Are these same gullible people still giving Chen the benefit of the doubt? I wonder what will come of police reading the emails on his computer they confiscated?

Chen is a journalist = untouchable. Al Capone never had nothing on Chen, baby!
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #55 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

"Snitch".

As if thieves have honor...

Didn't Giz also "snitch" on Apple's top secret prototype?
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #56 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Considering that by using the roommates computer he was potentially making her an accomplice after the fact, she did the smart thing by calling. I am pretty sure most people would not consider you to be honest or smart.
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Reply
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Reply
post #57 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

You do not understand the severity of a felony conviction. If you were in the same position, you might reconsider your position of remaining an accessory to a serious crime.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #58 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Let me tell you something. If I am the room mate, why would I sacrifice my freedom for an idiot like Hogan . Are you willing to pay for her lawyers. Will you be the first one offering to take her place in a jail cell for x amount of years as well as, be the first one to help pay the massive fines the court will award Apple for her complicity and oh yeah, will you be the first one to offer her a respectable job when she gets out of prison??

Hogan had put her in that position unwillingly, he endangered her future knowing that if something goes wrong, she will unwittingly go down with him. So tell me, dan2236, why would the room mate protect Hogan ??
post #59 of 310
... oh wait!
post #60 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

Brian Lam wrote an email to Jobs stating that he knew it would cause lost sales. Not only that but, in the email, he was seemingly trying to blackmail Jobs into giving Gizmodo better access (in exchange for getting the phone back sooner) while trying to get confirmation that this was the next iPhone so they could go ahead with the story.

Yes, Gizmodo is in trouble and did all kinds of things wrong, but: why would Gizmodo "return" a phone to Apple if it was not Apple's in the first place?! Of course Lam needed to have it confirmed that it was Apple's property.

For all they knew, it was an elaborate hoax; the only indication they had that it was actually Apple's and not, say, a knock-off with some clever screen printing on the back, was Gray Powell's Facebook page — which in and of itself could have been a hoax, because no one at Gizmodo ever saw the device while it was still functioning, and they did not dismantle it until AFTER Apple confirmed it. Which was fucking stupid, frankly.
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #61 of 310
deleted

Edited by kellya74u - 7/24/13 at 10:44am
post #62 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Yes, Gizmodo is in trouble and did all kinds of things wrong, but: why would Gizmodo "return" a phone to Apple if it was not Apple's in the first place?! Of course Lam needed to have it confirmed that it was Apple's property.

For all they knew, it was an elaborate hoax; the only indication they had that it was actually Apple's and not, say, a knock-off with some clever screen printing on the back, was Gray Powell's Facebook page which in and of itself could have been a hoax, because no one at Gizmodo ever saw the device while it was still functioning, and they did not dismantle it until AFTER Apple confirmed it. Which was fucking stupid, frankly.

If it was an elaborate hoax, Gizmodo would not be foolish enough to pay 5000 dollars unseen. I will hazard a bet that a member of Gizmodo saw the device, held the device before the sale was made.
post #63 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Let's see:

Whose home was the search warrant for? Chen's

Who published the story and admitted to taking the phone apart? Chen

Who asked Apple for a letter from legal before returning the phone? Chen

Who eventually returned the phone to Apple? Chen

Now, explain to me how Chen did not take possession of stolen property.

Admittedly, his boss may also be in trouble, but that doesn't absolve Chen.

It's like a drug case: Bust the little fish to get the big fish. In this case the big fish is Chen's BOSS. Cut and dry, Chen isn't the bad guy here, which I have said all along, therefore you are wrong. He did what he was told and he was told to to be thorough.

Can't blame the man for doing his job. He was left to swing in the wind by his superiors and the affidavit proves this.

In the end, the main mess falls on Apple and Hogan and Brian Lamb.

I am a shareholder. I have apple stock in my 401K . I chose the selection specifically for apple stock. I also have individual shares outside that, but I will be the first to admit they are guilty of vanity in this case just as much as Gizmodo's EDITORS are.

The way it will play out is Chen will be let go. I am willing to bet on it. Hogan and Warner will be hit with he brunt of the charges. Lamb MAY also be hit, but in the end they didn't "steal' the item, Hogan and Warner did. They just took the opportunity and reported on it.

What the police did in apple's favor is similar to the Latvia hacker case, wherein they raided the reporter's house to get info on the hacker. In the end they let the hacker go because he was no threat to the common good and actually revealed information everyone should know.

It's similar but not the same, but Chen did what he was told, did his job.

If your boss tell you: Be thorough, do your job. You'r gonna do it. Period. It's on him to figure out the legalities.

No one looked at that and instead persecuted Chen.

Wrong move.
post #64 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wil View Post

If it was an elaborate hoax, Gizmodo would not be foolish enough to pay 5000 dollars unseen. I will hazard a bet that a member of Gizmodo saw the device, held the device before the sale was made.

Also, the OP is incorrect in the fact the item was disassembled BEFORE Apple contacted them, not after.

I am also willing to hazard the item was not damaged, but apple will say it was anyway, to attempt to make their case.
post #65 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

I think everyone rightly critises this comment and view as rubbish. For some reason Dan fears to be betrayed by a friend. It is rightly pointed out that she was betrayed, although I would argue that her roomates did not deliberately betray her, but sloppily put her in a dangerous position. What I think she could (not must, just could!) have done is, to yell at them what kind of idiots they are and that she will call the cops. Then call the cops. In this she would gave her roomates a head start which is all a friend can ask for in this situation, and she is out of trouble. She is not helping them as long as she is not delaying the call, all she does is telling them what she is doing this very moment.
post #66 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

The detective has a future in Hollywood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BertP View Post

Let me say a word for that roommate. She showed good judgement in a difficult situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blursd View Post

Agreed ... it looks as if she was the only one who actually did the right thing.

So... Scarlett Johansson as the roommate in the movie? "Pirates of iPhone Valley"?

Being a typical male bast*rd I also have to ask, is the roommate hot?
post #67 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

So... Scarlett Johansson as the roommate in the movie? "Pirates of iPhone Valley"?

Being a typical male bast*rd I also have to ask, is the roommate hot?

Probably not, but I agree she did the right thing.
post #68 of 310
Hmm... 5 grand in the SF Bay Area in the year 2010 ain't that much money.

Intellectually I say he should have held out for about 20 grand, or don't sell it to anyone, take pictures, return it properly, then post pictures anonymously.

Morally, this whole thing is a clusterf**k.

Personally, well, I'd say, this whole iPhone and iPad stuff is a bit beyond me. I don't know why but looking at my bank account having some growing savings seems more pleasurable at times than playing with an iPad. I must be getting old.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rwheadon View Post

I don't care about the courts, the lawyers, heck... even the law.

I don't care if the kid lifted the phone off our apple guy or really "found" it.

The kid did a sleezy thing in contacting gizmodo and selling them the phone.and knew it when he did it. Gizmodo was also clearly in the wrong to purchase the phone from a person they knew had no right selling the phone.

Now that it's all unfolding before us and everyone (including me) begins brandish opinion and speculation I can disengage with my own summary.

The kid got a hold of the new iPhone prototype and instead of giving it back to Apple he sold it to Gizmodo. Everyone in this story is old enough to know how to be accountable for their actions and regardless of moral disposition knows that they did not behave in an honorable manner.

IMHO props in the story like Apple, iPhone, Gizmodo, Police and Lawyers (and those that attempt to be) are just peripheral to the matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

Hey, Hogan. "Sucks for you" now, doesn't it? Karma's a bitch. Hope you got some enjoyment out of that $5000 or whatever you got. You've probably figured out by now that the amount of trouble you're in isn't worth ten times that. But, hey, maybe you'll get Jason Chen as a cell mate.
post #69 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

Probably not, but I agree she did the right thing.

We need pictures of the roommate. Is she named in the affidavit? Going back to read it carefully... Time for some Ogling... Er I mean Googling*.

*Yes, stole this joke from Iron Man 2.
post #70 of 310
Katherine Martinson is the roommate's name. No I am not a stalker... Er... I think.

Interesting details in the actual text of affidavit:
http://www.brunotrani.info/blog/2010...hide-evidence/
post #71 of 310
There is a Katherine Martinson listed on LinkedIn in San Mateo County. Now how many Katherine Martinsons could there be in San Mateo county, that are in about the age range of someone that would be sharing a house with a non-romantic (presumably) housemate.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/katherin...son/20/733/281

Maybe I am a media whore too. But, this lady should be interviewed and commended! Future employers should take note too!

Scarlett Johansson should hang out with her in preparing for her role in playing her in: "Raiders of the Lost iPhone".

That Asian guy from Lost (the Chinese one, not the Korean guy) should play Brian Lam... or Jason Chen... Not sure which.

Jack Nicholson could play (controversially) Steve Jobs:
Apple CEO Office Scene, Jack as Steve, iPad in hand, in the phone conversation~
"Gizmodo, you want that iPhone? You can't HANDLE that iPhone...!"
post #72 of 310
I don't get it. If I lose something, no matter how valuable it might be, it is my mistake.

Why did Apple ever let such a valuable proto out of their labs... and why was this pretty little gem left on a bar stool?

Yep, Gizmodo acted unprofessional in leaking the story- potentially damaging existing sales of iPhones.

But again, how could Apple let this valuable iPhone proto get out of sight (in public) for even one minute?

If I find something I try to find the rightful owner... but if I just decide to keep said article, when does that become a criminal act?
post #73 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by podlife View Post

I don't get it. If I lose something, no matter how valuable it might be, it is my mistake.

Why did Apple ever let such a valuable proto out of their labs... and why was this pretty little gem left on a bar stool?

Yep, Gizmodo acted unprofessional in leaking the story- potentially damaging existing sales of iPhones.

But again, how could Apple let this valuable iPhone proto get out of sight (in public) for even one minute?

If I find something I try to find the rightful owner... but if I just decide to keep said article, when does that become a criminal act?

Umm.... By most people's moral compass ("the law" notwithstanding)... it starts to get dodgy once you knowingly try and sell a company's trade secrets for monetary gain.

If he was just posting pictures then win for him, sucks for Apple. Then maybe it goes on eBay after the official launch of the iPhone 4G then maybe... that's alright.
post #74 of 310
It is strongly possible Chen is going to be the fall guy. What we would need to ascertain is whether he raised any concerns about any of the things he might have been told to do? My impression is that he happily went along to be the famous one to reveal the iPhone 4G. Which blogger wouldn't?

Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

It's like a drug case: Bust the little fish to get the big fish. In this case the big fish is Chen's BOSS. Cut and dry, Chen isn't the bad guy here, which I have said all along, therefore you are wrong. He did what he was told and he was told to to be thorough.

Can't blame the man for doing his job. He was left to swing in the wind by his superiors and the affidavit proves this.

In the end, the main mess falls on Apple and Hogan and Brian Lamb.

I am a shareholder. I have apple stock in my 401K . I chose the selection specifically for apple stock. I also have individual shares outside that, but I will be the first to admit they are guilty of vanity in this case just as much as Gizmodo's EDITORS are.

The way it will play out is Chen will be let go. I am willing to bet on it. Hogan and Warner will be hit with he brunt of the charges. Lamb MAY also be hit, but in the end they didn't "steal' the item, Hogan and Warner did. They just took the opportunity and reported on it.

What the police did in apple's favor is similar to the Latvia hacker case, wherein they raided the reporter's house to get info on the hacker. In the end they let the hacker go because he was no threat to the common good and actually revealed information everyone should know.

It's similar but not the same, but Chen did what he was told, did his job.

If your boss tell you: Be thorough, do your job. You'r gonna do it. Period. It's on him to figure out the legalities.

No one looked at that and instead persecuted Chen.

Wrong move.
post #75 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

It because of people like you that the world is in the mess it is. NO MORALS!
post #76 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by podlife View Post

I don't get it. If I lose something, no matter how valuable it might be, it is my mistake.

Why did Apple ever let such a valuable proto out of their labs... and why was this pretty little gem left on a bar stool?

Yep, Gizmodo acted unprofessional in leaking the story- potentially damaging existing sales of iPhones.

But again, how could Apple let this valuable iPhone proto get out of sight (in public) for even one minute?

If I find something I try to find the rightful owner... but if I just decide to keep said article, when does that become a criminal act?

It becomes a criminal act because you know who the owner is (he could see the persons Facebook page on the phone), and you make no attempt to return it. Under California law that is theft.
post #77 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan2236 View Post

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacApfel View Post

I think everyone rightly critises this comment and view as rubbish. For some reason Dan fears to be betrayed by a friend. It is rightly pointed out that she was betrayed, although I would argue that her roomates did not deliberately betray her, but sloppily put her in a dangerous position. What I think she could (not must, just could!) have done is, to yell at them what kind of idiots they are and that she will call the cops. Then call the cops. In this she would gave her roomates a head start which is all a friend can ask for in this situation, and she is out of trouble. She is not helping them as long as she is not delaying the call, all she does is telling them what she is doing this very moment.

Look, I'm sure some of us have been in the position as I have in my twenties when recreational drugs were used and in a small way traded at a house I shared with others. I was an ocassional user and was concerned about drugs in the house to some degree. And in reflection I don't think I was consorting with criminals but one of the things that happens in youth. I never personally sold drugs to anyone else as far as I remember.

But my friends weren't major dealers and they didn't try to stash drugs in my room or try and use my computer to communicate with the bigger dealers or other friends.

Bottom line, you gotta draw the line somewhere. In this case, the roommate was smart. The writing was on the wall. She knew she could get into some major shit.
post #78 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by podlife View Post

I don't get it. If I lose something, no matter how valuable it might be, it is my mistake.

Why did Apple ever let such a valuable proto out of their labs... and why was this pretty little gem left on a bar stool?

Yep, Gizmodo acted unprofessional in leaking the story- potentially damaging existing sales of iPhones.

But again, how could Apple let this valuable iPhone proto get out of sight (in public) for even one minute?

If I find something I try to find the rightful owner... but if I just decide to keep said article, when does that become a criminal act?

If you've been following this case at all, you'd have read that the law in California is that if you find a piece of lost property, you are lawfully bound to make an effort to return it to the owner, if possible. In this case, no effort was made to return the iPhone despite the finder having the owners name and workplace. In other words, he broke the law. To make matters worse, he then sold property which did not rightly belong to him.

Irregardless of the law, the moral thing he should have done was to return the phone. Plain and simple.

And as has been written, the iPhone owner might have been out testing it in the field, as has been the case with previous iPhones.
post #79 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

Also, the OP is incorrect in the fact the item was disassembled BEFORE Apple contacted them, not after.

I am also willing to hazard the item was not damaged, but apple will say it was anyway, to attempt to make their case.

I think that Apple damaged the iPhone on purpose before the kid "lost" it just to make Gizmodo look bad when the story broke.
post #80 of 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Look, I'm sure some of us have been in the position as I have in my twenties when recreational drugs were used and in a small way traded at a house I shared with others. I was an ocassional user and was concerned about drugs in the house to some degree. And in reflection I don't think I was consorting with criminals but one of the things that happens in youth. I never personally sold drugs to anyone else as far as I remember.

But my friends weren't major dealers and they didn't try to stash drugs in my room or try and use my computer to communicate with the bigger dealers or other friends.

Bottom line, you gotta draw the line somewhere. In this case, the roommate was smart. The writing was on the wall. She knew she could get into some major shit.

I think we agree. But please don't forget that a prototype iPhone is not an illegal item. Drugs or money in a Mafia suitcase (as compared to by someone else) are illegal items. So the guys were not playing with an illegal item (like e.g. drugs). Also they were probably quite excited what they are playing with. I am also not sure that at this moment they realised the scale of what they were doing. For example, if at that point they had turned to Apple to return the phone - all would have been happy. Something that would not have been possible with e.g. drugs. That's why I meant she could have told them to call the cops, so they have the chance to think about it again.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Gizmodo affidavit says roommate's tip led police to iPhone