Apple asks for iPhone prototype back, Gizmodo could face UTSA lawsuit

2456719

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 364
    maelmael Posts: 15member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gotApple View Post


    No theft, no lawsuit. No Sword of Democles.



    Seems plenty of Lawyers think otherwise.



    This won't go unpunished.



    Whether you think Gizmodo were right or wrong, it doesn't matter, there will be retribution.
  • Reply 22 of 364
    Apple has a right to be pissed off. I hope they make an example of Gizmodo as their actions have a potentially negative impact on Apple's business. We all know everyone loves to copy Apple and now, they all have a couple of month's head start on the process.



    Gizmodo knew exactly what they were doing by publishing these photos, as well as the impact on another company's business. Punishing Gizmodo would send a clear message that any scumbag company that leaks trade secrets to the public will suffer consequences. I say throw the book at them.
  • Reply 23 of 364
    pdaguypdaguy Posts: 1member
    I find it difficult to believe given the apple policies on un-released devices, that someone would have this thing on them in a bar. And leave it.



    While I enjoy the stories about this finally being a chink in the armor of Apple's secrecy stance, I have to believe this is a staged leak given the stories about the Android devices (can you say Incredible? On Verizon?) hitting the street WELL before the expected announce of the next iPhone.



    There's not an 'iPhone" killer per se, but HTC and Android have slowly but surely chipped away at the iPhone armor. And several (actually quite a few now) stories I've seen about both Android and new Android running hardware make it obvious: the iPhone's finally got competition.
  • Reply 24 of 364
    firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,502member
    Thumbs up to Gizmodo. They should probably give it back now though.
  • Reply 25 of 364
    I wonder what the damages are when you screw with a $10 billion dollar revenue stream?
  • Reply 26 of 364
    echosonicechosonic Posts: 452member
    Mod Edit: Removing additional off topic post.
  • Reply 27 of 364
    rnp1rnp1 Posts: 175member
    [QUOTE=echosonic;1615858]

    right on!
  • Reply 28 of 364
    ajpriceajprice Posts: 320member
    10 year old 'Grape' purple iMac G3 style logo and Garamond type on the letterhead? In 2010? Really?
  • Reply 29 of 364
    According to GIZMODO, the device was returned upon request.



    http://gizmodo.com/5520479/a-letter-...et-iphone-back



    Apparently they tried to return it to Apple and were ignored. Oh well...



    BTW, I like the new design and look forward to upgrading my 3G ASAP.



    Time will tell.
  • Reply 30 of 364
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mael View Post


    So the 'Sword of Damocles' hangs over their head for the next 3 years.



    It will crash down upon them at some point, a point when most people aren't looking.



    No it won't. Apple will do absolutely nothing concrete against Gizmodo. I doubt Apple has anything financial to gain by having Gizmodo become more critical of Apple products.
  • Reply 31 of 364
    kgavkgav Posts: 16member
    The moment you take possession of someone else's property to are doing 1 of 2 things,



    1. Taking reasonable responsibility in returning it to the rightful owner.

    2. Committing theft.



    You pick up some dumb bloke's phone he left in a bar you just took responsibility in returning it to that bloke. If you don't want that responsibility turn it into the bar or turn it into the police. Sell it to a blog for $5,000, you just committed theft. That blog just received stolen goods. "Wanna buy this VCR it just fell off the back of a truck." How many times have cops heard that story?



    This isn't the wild west, there is the rule of law and bloggers aren't exempt.



    I personally would love for gizmodo to be taken down a peg with both criminal and civil proceeding. I think an example should be made of them. People seem to have forgotten Think Secret.
  • Reply 32 of 364
    That surprised me too. But hey, it's the Legal department after all.
  • Reply 33 of 364
    jimcordjimcord Posts: 20member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stonefree View Post


    There is no "improper means" . It was not "stolen". Some dumbass took it out in public and left it on a bar stool and left the premises. It was not taken from his bag, it was not acquired on Apple's property. It was not even discovered to be a prototype upon finding.



    I assume AI pays its sources of leaks and info. Does that fall under "bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy" . How is that different from what Gizmodo did? Maybe Kasper should be sent to jail then, or at least shut down the site.



    Just because some one forgot or left behind an item and another person decides to take it does not make it any less of a theft to take something that did not belong to you. It was simply not his to take, left behind or not.
  • Reply 34 of 364
    I'm a big fan of Apple and the computers and devices they make. I have a good deal of Apple stock.

    Gizmodo, is a piece of sh1t website.

    Bring on the lawyers.
  • Reply 35 of 364
    larz2112larz2112 Posts: 275member
    Gizmodo AND the guy who found the phone both deserve to be punished, plain and simple. The guy who found the phone should have given the phone to an employee at the bar, like anyone with morals would have done. Once he realized what he had, instead of returning it to Apple, like anyone with morals would have, he got greedy and decided to make some money off of his find. At this point it becomes stolen property because he is making a conscious decision not only to keep something that he knows isn't his, but to try to profit from it.



    As soon as Gizmodo accepts the phone, whether they paid for it or not, they are in receipt of stolen property. They obviously knew what it was or they wouldn't have paid $5,000 for it. Once again, greed trumps morals.



    This is why we have laws folks, to keep greed and self-serving urges in check. The guy who found and sold the phone and the Gizmodo employees involved need to be held accountable for their greed and lack of morals. The employee who lost the phone should be severely reprimanded, but not fired.



    Concerning whether this was intentionally orchestrated by Apple or not, I really don't think so. They may be guilty of leaking tidbits of information concerning features or functionality, but I don't think they would intentionally reveal such a finalized piece of hardware. Field testing is something Apple has done with every generation of iPhone, and probably with most of their hardware. It's a necessary risk to let a select group of employees take the gadgets out into the real world and put them through their paces to work out any issues. In this particular case, someone just made a really, really dumb mistake and left the iPhone in a bar.



    BTW, some don't like the look of the new iPhone, but I like it a lot.
  • Reply 36 of 364
    2stepbay2stepbay Posts: 111member
    Lucy...you have some splain'in to do.
  • Reply 37 of 364
    macslutmacslut Posts: 514member
    California Penal Code Section 485

    One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.



    IANAL, but I believe over $400 is a felony and as such this would qualify, same goes with receiving stolen goods.
  • Reply 38 of 364
    jb510jb510 Posts: 124member
    Looking around Twitter... @graypowell follows @geohot



    Interesting isn't it... look I subscribe to the philosophy "shit happens", but one does wonder just how messed up one has to be to forget an iPhone prototype on a bar stool...
  • Reply 39 of 364
    I thought this was supposed to be a forum for Apple fans and not some political bull crap. Woohoo for new Apple iPhone and Boohoo for YKW.



    Good luck Gizmodo. Hope you won't be the next Think Secret.
  • Reply 40 of 364
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macslut View Post


    California Penal Code Section 485

    One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.



    IANAL, but I believe over $400 is a felony and as such this would qualify, same goes with receiving stolen goods.



    The finder has a call number proving they tried to return it, and the phone provided no info on it's owner since it was disabled.



    I hope you represent yourself in court someday. You'll be hilarious.
Sign In or Register to comment.