I really wish some of you would listen to your nonsense. People steal/find things all the time. Beginning with Steve Jobs and the Xerox UI he stole.
You may have had a point if you didn't use an example that wasn't stealing in any since of the word. How about Jobs lying to Woz about what a job paid? How about all the underhanded things companies have done over the years using other people's IP illegally knowing that, if caught, the punishment will be less than the cost of not using it?
I'm really surprised people are so worked up about this as it doesn't directly affect you. Both are businesses trying to make money the best way possible. So what if Apple sued them? So what if Giz loses? Giz is taking a chance and they thought it would pay out? It's not that big a deal to anyone but them.
I'm really surprised people are so worked up about this as it doesn't directly affect you. Both are businesses trying to make money the best way possible. So what if Apple sued them? So what if Giz loses? Giz is taking a chance and they thought it would pay out? It's not that big a deal to anyone but them.
I think people are worked up because some of us perceive a wrong to have been committed and react to this. Tragic is the day when all people (society) stand by and say nothing to an affront real or perceived.
I think people are worked up because some of us perceive a wrong to have been committed and react to this. Tragic is the day when all people (society) stand by and say nothing to an affront real or perceived.
Tragic is the day when all people (society) become enraged over something trivial, especially when based on limited data and without looking at the big picture.
Seriously! There are people that won't read Giz now, yet when Apple or Jobs was accused of a crime that meant nothing. Apple looks to be the victim here, but they are from being squeaky clean so all I'm reading is hypocrisy.
It's all business. Giz/Gawker contacted lawyers to see if and how they could handle it, then they had their accountants run the numbers to see if it would be worth their while. You don't think Apple and other companies that we pride do the exact same thing?
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Business woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Business woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
I'm a bit worked up about it because the attitudes and opinions of some of these Gizmodo defenders/Apple haters could be some of the same folks I'd have to serve on a jury panel with some day. Talk about an exercise in frustration! Trying to reach a consensus that's based upon THE LAW when someone on the panel insists on going with "finders keepers, losers weepers". This is why there should be an intelligence test required to serve on a jury panel.
Fortunately, I also believe that most of that crowd posting here are in grade school so, hopefully, it wouldn't really be an issue.
Nick Denton's (Gawker founder) twitter page was alive with activity about their iPhone scoop starting on Monday. He was tweeting like crazy. That is, right up until the criminal investigation was announced on Friday. No tweets and only two retweets since that time and neither of them had anything to do with the iPhone:
Tragic is the day when all people (society) become enraged over something trivial, especially when based on limited data and without looking at the big picture.
I don't think people have become "enraged" over this... seems more like people are just speaking their mind based on the available data.
Quote:
Seriously! There are people that won't read Giz now...
I chose long ago to avoid that site as it added nothing to the quality of my life in any way whatsoever... in fact, I found the writing less than competent and simply annoying.
Quote:
It's all business. Giz/Gawker contacted lawyers to see if and how they could handle it, then they had their accountants run the numbers to see if it would be worth their while. You don't think Apple and other companies that we pride do the exact same thing?
Others have said this, I'll repeat it: our reaction has nothing to do with Apple. Some of us believe a crime may have been committed and would speak out the same way regardless of the players involved. This just happens to be an Apple related forum, and this particular incident involves an Apple employee and Apple trade secret.
Talk about an exercise in frustration! Trying to reach a consensus that's based upon THE LAW when someone on the panel insists on going with "finders keepers, losers weepers".
That is classic... in a profoundly disturbing sort of way!
No. People are not pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. People are pissed at the way Giz acted and spoke. Giz and its owner seem to think that "journalism" is an excuse for criminal activity.
Why do you think breaking the law is in the interest of consumers?
It depends entirely upon the law in question.
IMO, the public's right to know facts usually trumps a private, profit-seeking motive to keep secrets.
And at this point, nobody has even been charged with breaking the law, except by a bunch of armchair lawyers. When the DA decides to indict, then maybe the charges will have some credibility. When the jury decides to convict, then "breaking the law" will be more than what it is now: Idle Speculation.
I wonder if the guy that "found" the prototype iPhone in the bar has been getting any sleep since the criminal investigation was announced on Friday? I mean, seriously... there's no doubt in my mind that he committed a criminal act based upon what Gizmodo published and my personal research into and understanding of California law. A civil lawsuit is one thing, but serving time in the same cell with "Bubba" is quite a different thing entirely!
Or, have investigators already questioned him and he's sleeping better because he decided to plea bargain and rollover on Gawker? Gawker is the bigger fish that could allegedly end up on the defendant's side of the table and I think the DA would rather catch a bigger fish! Who wouldn't?
It will be disappointing if the DA decides there's not enough evidence to prosecute. Some nice criminal proceedings would be so much fun to watch! But, even if the criminal charges are never filed, I have zero doubt a civil suit by Apple isn't too far off anyway. Maybe we'll be treated to both?
I When the jury decides to convict, then "breaking the law" will be more than what it is now: Idle Speculation.
It will never reach a jury. If the DA does indict, this entire thing has plea bargain written all over it. Starting with the guy that "found" the prototype iPhone. Once he's agreed to testify against Gawker, another plea bargain would surely be forthcoming.
The civil suit that Apple's sure to bring... that may reach a jury. But I'm betting that will get settled out of court too.
IIMO, the public's right to know facts usually trumps a private, profit-seeking motive to keep secrets.
If we're talking about a tobacco company that intentionally and secretively manipulated nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked, I'm in agreement with you. But the public's right to know isn't that black & white. There are laws to protect trade secrets. Hell, there are laws to protect secrets in the interest of national security. In those cases, the public can want to know but they have no right to know.
I wonder if the guy that "found" the prototype iPhone in the bar has been getting any sleep since the criminal investigation was announced on Friday? ...
A civil lawsuit is one thing, but serving time in the same cell with "Bubba" is quite a different thing entirely!
....
But, even if the criminal charges are never filed, I have zero doubt a civil suit by Apple isn't too far off anyway. Maybe we'll be treated to both?
....
Mark
More drama. How are these criminal and civil charges you wish from one company to another 'a treat'?
... IMO, the public's right to know facts usually trumps a private, profit-seeking motive to keep secrets. ...
There is no "right to know" for trade secrets. The public has very little "right to know" in cases like this. You have the right to know the ingredients of a food product for instance, but you have no right to know the details of the new factory they are planning to make the food product.
Almost always, the only time a consumer has the "right to know" a company's secrets, is if the company is itself breaking a law. For instance if Kellog's is putting lighter fluid in it's cereal, that would be a company secret the consumer has "right to know."
... I had never really looked at Gizmodo (except randomly) until this story broke, and I have to say that they have a lot of very useful Mac/Apple-related info and insights on their site. I was pleasantly surprised. ... I find nothing particularly odious about them. ... In fact, the quality of many of their comments is far better than sites such as engadget.com or cnet.com. So is the quality of their writing. I must admit that I have concluded it is a site that I will go back to (not as regularly as AI, but perhaps more so than the others).
They've cleaned up their act a bit in the last year for sure.
Personally, I almost stopped reading Gizmodo when they had links in some of their main article linking to their sister hard-core porn site. I actually stopped later when they started reviewing technology by deciding whether it was "worthy of jerking-off over."
I stopped commenting on their articles when I found out that they intentionally delete comments by people who disagree with them on a regular basis (and no, that doesn't happen at any other reputable site). They actually crow about it in the comments too which is a bit much.
The last straw for me though was actually having a bit of email with Brian Lam and Jason Chen. Two of the most insulting, juvenile, puerile, idiots I have ever talked to bar none.
I stopped commenting on their articles when I found out that they intentionally delete comments by people who disagree with them on a regular basis (and no, that doesn't happen at any other reputable site). They actually crow about it in the comments too which is a bit much.
It happens on MacRumors. Except their excuse is that you're mean to the other people - even when you're not.
Speaking of nonsense: if the guys at Giz are your heroes... I would hate to see the rest of your world view. Oh, I think I just did.
I never said they were my heroes. They just took a risk and it paid off. The publicity they got is worth a million lost iPhones. Right or wrong, guilty or not guilty we all visited their site. Sometimes doing the wrong thing makes good business sense.
Comments
I really wish some of you would listen to your nonsense. People steal/find things all the time. Beginning with Steve Jobs and the Xerox UI he stole.
You may have had a point if you didn't use an example that wasn't stealing in any since of the word. How about Jobs lying to Woz about what a job paid? How about all the underhanded things companies have done over the years using other people's IP illegally knowing that, if caught, the punishment will be less than the cost of not using it?
I'm really surprised people are so worked up about this as it doesn't directly affect you. Both are businesses trying to make money the best way possible. So what if Apple sued them? So what if Giz loses? Giz is taking a chance and they thought it would pay out? It's not that big a deal to anyone but them.
I'm really surprised people are so worked up about this as it doesn't directly affect you. Both are businesses trying to make money the best way possible. So what if Apple sued them? So what if Giz loses? Giz is taking a chance and they thought it would pay out? It's not that big a deal to anyone but them.
I think people are worked up because some of us perceive a wrong to have been committed and react to this. Tragic is the day when all people (society) stand by and say nothing to an affront real or perceived.
I think people are worked up because some of us perceive a wrong to have been committed and react to this. Tragic is the day when all people (society) stand by and say nothing to an affront real or perceived.
Tragic is the day when all people (society) become enraged over something trivial, especially when based on limited data and without looking at the big picture.
Seriously! There are people that won't read Giz now, yet when Apple or Jobs was accused of a crime that meant nothing. Apple looks to be the victim here, but they are from being squeaky clean so all I'm reading is hypocrisy.
It's all business. Giz/Gawker contacted lawyers to see if and how they could handle it, then they had their accountants run the numbers to see if it would be worth their while. You don't think Apple and other companies that we pride do the exact same thing?
Fortunately, I also believe that most of that crowd posting here are in grade school so, hopefully, it wouldn't really be an issue.
Mark
http://twitter.com/nicknotned
The cat still has Nick's tongue.
If he gets arrested, do you think they'll take his phone as part of the investigation? Might be some juicy stuff on there!
Mark
Tragic is the day when all people (society) become enraged over something trivial, especially when based on limited data and without looking at the big picture.
I don't think people have become "enraged" over this... seems more like people are just speaking their mind based on the available data.
Seriously! There are people that won't read Giz now...
I chose long ago to avoid that site as it added nothing to the quality of my life in any way whatsoever... in fact, I found the writing less than competent and simply annoying.
It's all business. Giz/Gawker contacted lawyers to see if and how they could handle it, then they had their accountants run the numbers to see if it would be worth their while. You don't think Apple and other companies that we pride do the exact same thing?
Others have said this, I'll repeat it: our reaction has nothing to do with Apple. Some of us believe a crime may have been committed and would speak out the same way regardless of the players involved. This just happens to be an Apple related forum, and this particular incident involves an Apple employee and Apple trade secret.
Talk about an exercise in frustration! Trying to reach a consensus that's based upon THE LAW when someone on the panel insists on going with "finders keepers, losers weepers".
That is classic... in a profoundly disturbing sort of way!
No. People are not pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. People are pissed at the way Giz acted and spoke. Giz and its owner seem to think that "journalism" is an excuse for criminal activity.
.
Acted and spoke? Or the way they think?
Why do you think breaking the law is in the interest of consumers?
It depends entirely upon the law in question.
IMO, the public's right to know facts usually trumps a private, profit-seeking motive to keep secrets.
And at this point, nobody has even been charged with breaking the law, except by a bunch of armchair lawyers. When the DA decides to indict, then maybe the charges will have some credibility. When the jury decides to convict, then "breaking the law" will be more than what it is now: Idle Speculation.
Or, have investigators already questioned him and he's sleeping better because he decided to plea bargain and rollover on Gawker? Gawker is the bigger fish that could allegedly end up on the defendant's side of the table and I think the DA would rather catch a bigger fish! Who wouldn't?
It will be disappointing if the DA decides there's not enough evidence to prosecute. Some nice criminal proceedings would be so much fun to watch!
Mark
I When the jury decides to convict, then "breaking the law" will be more than what it is now: Idle Speculation.
It will never reach a jury. If the DA does indict, this entire thing has plea bargain written all over it. Starting with the guy that "found" the prototype iPhone. Once he's agreed to testify against Gawker, another plea bargain would surely be forthcoming.
The civil suit that Apple's sure to bring... that may reach a jury. But I'm betting that will get settled out of court too.
Mark
IIMO, the public's right to know facts usually trumps a private, profit-seeking motive to keep secrets.
If we're talking about a tobacco company that intentionally and secretively manipulated nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked, I'm in agreement with you. But the public's right to know isn't that black & white. There are laws to protect trade secrets. Hell, there are laws to protect secrets in the interest of national security. In those cases, the public can want to know but they have no right to know.
Mark
If he gets arrested, do you think they'll take his phone as part of the investigation? Might be some juicy stuff on there!
Mark
A bit dramatic don't you think?
I wonder if the guy that "found" the prototype iPhone in the bar has been getting any sleep since the criminal investigation was announced on Friday? ...
A civil lawsuit is one thing, but serving time in the same cell with "Bubba" is quite a different thing entirely!
....
But, even if the criminal charges are never filed, I have zero doubt a civil suit by Apple isn't too far off anyway. Maybe we'll be treated to both?
....
Mark
More drama. How are these criminal and civil charges you wish from one company to another 'a treat'?
... IMO, the public's right to know facts usually trumps a private, profit-seeking motive to keep secrets. ...
There is no "right to know" for trade secrets. The public has very little "right to know" in cases like this. You have the right to know the ingredients of a food product for instance, but you have no right to know the details of the new factory they are planning to make the food product.
Almost always, the only time a consumer has the "right to know" a company's secrets, is if the company is itself breaking a law. For instance if Kellog's is putting lighter fluid in it's cereal, that would be a company secret the consumer has "right to know."
... I had never really looked at Gizmodo (except randomly) until this story broke, and I have to say that they have a lot of very useful Mac/Apple-related info and insights on their site. I was pleasantly surprised. ... I find nothing particularly odious about them. ... In fact, the quality of many of their comments is far better than sites such as engadget.com or cnet.com. So is the quality of their writing. I must admit that I have concluded it is a site that I will go back to (not as regularly as AI, but perhaps more so than the others).
They've cleaned up their act a bit in the last year for sure.
Personally, I almost stopped reading Gizmodo when they had links in some of their main article linking to their sister hard-core porn site. I actually stopped later when they started reviewing technology by deciding whether it was "worthy of jerking-off over."
I stopped commenting on their articles when I found out that they intentionally delete comments by people who disagree with them on a regular basis (and no, that doesn't happen at any other reputable site). They actually crow about it in the comments too which is a bit much.
The last straw for me though was actually having a bit of email with Brian Lam and Jason Chen. Two of the most insulting, juvenile, puerile, idiots I have ever talked to bar none.
I stopped commenting on their articles when I found out that they intentionally delete comments by people who disagree with them on a regular basis (and no, that doesn't happen at any other reputable site). They actually crow about it in the comments too which is a bit much.
It happens on MacRumors. Except their excuse is that you're mean to the other people - even when you're not.
Speaking of nonsense: if the guys at Giz are your heroes... I would hate to see the rest of your world view. Oh, I think I just did.
I never said they were my heroes. They just took a risk and it paid off. The publicity they got is worth a million lost iPhones. Right or wrong, guilty or not guilty we all visited their site. Sometimes doing the wrong thing makes good business sense.
More drama. How are these criminal and civil charges you wish from one company to another 'a treat'?
Drama is what Gizmodo sells. Nick Denton's twitter page brags that he is a gossip merchant. So, a little drama in his life seems reasonable and just.
And, as a fan of Apple, including their political and social stances, it will indeed be a treat if Gawker gets squashed by Apple.
I'm no fan of the National Enquirer either.
Mark
Sometimes doing the wrong thing makes good business sense.
Until the men with the shiny metal bracelets show up at the door.
Mark