Honestly, though, given all of the blowback against Apple going on lately, I wonder if they don't decide from a PR perspective to go soft here, still the precedent... oy....
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.
So, if the person that found the phone called Apple to try to find out where to return it, received a call ticket for his inquiry and never heard back, it sounds like he make a reasonable attempt. Going public with it was probably the best way to get someone from Apple to call him back.
You know Apple really believes this is a stolen phone, can you imagine what the employee (whose name we do not speak) said to his boss:
"I was minding my own business, eating Wiener Schnitzel and a Coke. I had just finished updating my Facebook, laid my iphone next to my plate when these two dudes just sat down at my table. They started talking about how how they love German food. We talked for about 10 minutes and they got up and left. When I got up to pay my bill I realized my iPhone test unit had been stolen. ... No I wasn't drinking, are you serious?"
Nobody left the phone on the bar stool. Nobody found a lost/forgotten phone. This phone was clearly stolen.
If you find something that doesn't belong to you, it is your duty to return it to the rightful owner.
If Gizmodo claims the phone was lost, whoever found and sold it to these idiots, knew who the phone belong to. At least he/she knew who to contact to sell it, therefore he/she has good knowledge of what it is or who it belong to. Therefore it is a crime to sell what does not belong to you, without contacting the rightful owner. If the THIEF can locate Gizmodo, he/she can locate Apple. There is no innocence here. This is a willful and malicious act.
Apple should sue them for at least $100 million, technically shutting them down. I can't believe these idiots are so stupid to do this kind of thing.
Well, then it is a good thing he and Apple have records of him attempting to return it. Pretty sure he doesn't have Steve Jobs personal phone number, so calling Apple and asking to return it is probably the next best 'reasonable' attempt.
1. The person who found the device is not the owner of the device. He should have handed the device into the bar or to the police. Instead he decided to sell the device, which was not his. This is theft. Selling something that you do not own, knowing it belongs to someone else.
2. Gizmodo knew these facts. So they knew the devices (be it real of fake), did not belong to the person selling it. Therefore they purchased stolen goods. Even if they did not know the fact, they knew that the person selling the device was not the owner of the device.
3. Having purchased the device they then made no attempt to return the device to its owner. Instead they decided to pull it appear to see if it was a real Apple device, when they discovered it was, they should then have contacted Apple, but no they decide to use the stolen device to drive up their site traffic. In the process revealing trade secrets.
Quite a dishonest and unprofessional way to act if you ask me.
Greed seems to have overruled common decency.
The person who found the device should be prosecuted for selling stolen property (after all he did not hand it in to the police).
Gizmodo should also be prosecuted for receiving stolen property and for trade secret issues.
You forget step 1a...he called Apple to inform them and find out tho whom he could return it. If the rightful owner denies ownership or refuses to let him know where to send it, he has made his reasonable attempt to return it.
One call does not count as making effort to return the device.
For all you know they could have hung up the call before the person had chance to answer!
If they had proof of a number of calls, plus a police incident number showing they had reported the find to the police . Perhaps even a call to Apple as this person clearly knew what he was dealing with here, else why sell to Gizmodo for £5k. How long did he try before he sold the device.
A court would want more 'effort' than one failed phone call.
It wasn't a failed call. He got through to Apple and informed them of the situation. Apple issued him a call ticket and never got back to him. if you inform the rightful owner, do yuo still have to inform the police?
The old Marathon manuals have the word Blam! in the end credits as well. There's quite a history to that word, starting with the Marathon series and going all the way into Halo. It used to be very cloak-and-dagger stuff around Bungie.
It wasn't a failed call. He got through to Apple and informed them of the situation. Apple issued him a call ticket and never got back to him. if you inform the rightful owner, do yuo still have to inform the police?
No. I find it hard to believe this guy went through those steps though. I hope he has proof of his "good deed."
The sharp edges are going to wear holes in my pocket a lot faster than the smooth edges and sculpted back that we have now. I can't see this being as comfortable to hold or carry around either. If this is the real deal, I guess I'll have to buy a case with smoother edges.
No. I find it hard to believe this guy went through those steps though. I hope he has proof of his "good deed."
if he doesn't he is screwed. If he told Giz that he contacted Apple and was ignored and left it to them to get it back to Apple (which it seems that have been successful at) then he is still screwed (if he never made the calls) but Giz is probably off the hook.
I love how so many people are saying Giz is guilty of something. But no charge they have have described fits in any real way. Hell, the first question to answer is how they hell would they have known it was an Apple device? Thousands of people on the internet looking at the pics and description and many people were sure it was a chinese knockoff, a fake, whatever, but not an Apple device. Then there is the attempts by the person that found it to contact Apple. Then there is Giz in record publishing that if Apple claims it, then will return it immediately. Giz was obviously playing it close to the line, as they mentioned they checked with their legal team before going forward with this, but I haven't seen one reasonable description of a charge of theft or receiving stolen good that fits the situation...but I guess the lawyers will sort that out.
if he doesn't he is screwed. If he told Giz that he contacted Apple and was ignored and left it to them to get it back to Apple (which it seems that have been successful at) then he is still screwed (if he never made the calls) but Giz is probably off the hook.
I love how so many people are saying Giz is guilty of something. But no charge they have have described fits in any real way. Hell, the first question to answer is how they hell would they have known it was an Apple device? Thousands of people on the internet looking at the pics and description and many people were sure it was a chinese knockoff, a fake, whatever, but not an Apple device. Then there is the attempts by the person that found it to contact Apple. Then there is Giz in record publishing that if Apple claims it, then will return it immediately. Giz was obviously playing it close to the line, as they mentioned they checked with their legal team before going forward with this, but I haven't seen one reasonable description of a charge of theft or receiving stolen good that fits the situation...but I guess the lawyers will sort that out.
yea...this is on the shoulders of the guy who "found" it more than Giz for revealing it. now Giz could find itself in a civil suit since they knew what it was and this guy was in no way affiliated with Apple. it seems Apple simply wants it back and they are embarrassed that an idiot lost it in a bar.
You forget step 1a...he called Apple to inform them and find out tho whom he could return it. If the rightful owner denies ownership or refuses to let him know where to send it, he has made his reasonable attempt to return it.
Firstly, how many people lose their iPhone's, iPod,s etc.?
Does a person who has found such a lost item ever call the manufacturer who made the product?
If the finder did call Apple did he make clear that the iPhone he had in his possession was not a production unit. i.e., it had none of the features of the iPhone's retailed version?
What prompted the finder to contact Gizmodo rather than hand it straight in to the police?
If Gizmodo believed this to be genuine prototype, then why did they not tell the finder or return the item to Apple themselves, or report the matter to the police? Gizmodo cannot plead ignorance as they would have known it was clearly not a retail item.
The finder may not have known how to contact higher officials at Apple, but Gizmodo certainly would.
I'm not sure about the law in California, but where I am you don't have to break down a door and knock someone over the head to steal something. Picking up something and keeping it, when you know it is not yours, is enough. Selling it, or buying it, just adds to the charges. Again, I'm no legal expert, but I have been involved in a case like this when someone "found" something of mine and sold it to a pawn shop. The law was clear, turn it in to the police or back to the rightful owner immediately, or its stolen.
I wish Gizmodo luck on this one, should Apple decide to go after them. Taking the thing apart and posting pics probably was not the smartest move on their part. It'll be interesting to see where other companies line up on this one - if anyone else says anything publicly or if they just sit on the sidelines. No doubt there are some companies that would like an example to be made.
And I doubt Apple will get much backlash. There will be some rants no doubt, but they'll mostly be confined to boards like this and fringe publications. I doubt CNN or Fox News would take Apple to task for this, so few people will ever hear about it.
Well, then it is a good thing he and Apple have records of him attempting to return it. Pretty sure he doesn't have Steve Jobs personal phone number, so calling Apple and asking to return it is probably the next best 'reasonable' attempt.
One thing though. Why didn't he leave the phone at the bar for someone to reclaim? Did Apple engineer even attempt to reclaim it?
Comments
Honestly, though, given all of the blowback against Apple going on lately, I wonder if they don't decide from a PR perspective to go soft here, still the precedent... oy....
What blowback?
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.
So, if the person that found the phone called Apple to try to find out where to return it, received a call ticket for his inquiry and never heard back, it sounds like he make a reasonable attempt. Going public with it was probably the best way to get someone from Apple to call him back.
"I was minding my own business, eating Wiener Schnitzel and a Coke. I had just finished updating my Facebook, laid my iphone next to my plate when these two dudes just sat down at my table. They started talking about how how they love German food. We talked for about 10 minutes and they got up and left. When I got up to pay my bill I realized my iPhone test unit had been stolen. ... No I wasn't drinking, are you serious?"
So if i simply try to call someone to restore lost property but get no answer that makes an effort? where is an effort in making a call????????
P.S. people start forgetting times when no mobile phones were around...no so long ago...
Well, trying to make a call and making that call are very different, unless you are challenged to the point of being unable to actually make the call.
he made the call. he made multiple calls. Apple noted his calls and never replied.
Nobody left the phone on the bar stool. Nobody found a lost/forgotten phone. This phone was clearly stolen.
If you find something that doesn't belong to you, it is your duty to return it to the rightful owner.
If Gizmodo claims the phone was lost, whoever found and sold it to these idiots, knew who the phone belong to. At least he/she knew who to contact to sell it, therefore he/she has good knowledge of what it is or who it belong to. Therefore it is a crime to sell what does not belong to you, without contacting the rightful owner. If the THIEF can locate Gizmodo, he/she can locate Apple. There is no innocence here. This is a willful and malicious act.
Apple should sue them for at least $100 million, technically shutting them down. I can't believe these idiots are so stupid to do this kind of thing.
Well, then it is a good thing he and Apple have records of him attempting to return it. Pretty sure he doesn't have Steve Jobs personal phone number, so calling Apple and asking to return it is probably the next best 'reasonable' attempt.
The law is very simple.
1. The person who found the device is not the owner of the device. He should have handed the device into the bar or to the police. Instead he decided to sell the device, which was not his. This is theft. Selling something that you do not own, knowing it belongs to someone else.
2. Gizmodo knew these facts. So they knew the devices (be it real of fake), did not belong to the person selling it. Therefore they purchased stolen goods. Even if they did not know the fact, they knew that the person selling the device was not the owner of the device.
3. Having purchased the device they then made no attempt to return the device to its owner. Instead they decided to pull it appear to see if it was a real Apple device, when they discovered it was, they should then have contacted Apple, but no they decide to use the stolen device to drive up their site traffic. In the process revealing trade secrets.
Quite a dishonest and unprofessional way to act if you ask me.
Greed seems to have overruled common decency.
The person who found the device should be prosecuted for selling stolen property (after all he did not hand it in to the police).
Gizmodo should also be prosecuted for receiving stolen property and for trade secret issues.
You forget step 1a...he called Apple to inform them and find out tho whom he could return it. If the rightful owner denies ownership or refuses to let him know where to send it, he has made his reasonable attempt to return it.
Why *wouldn't* Gizmodo return the phone?
One call does not count as making effort to return the device.
For all you know they could have hung up the call before the person had chance to answer!
If they had proof of a number of calls, plus a police incident number showing they had reported the find to the police . Perhaps even a call to Apple as this person clearly knew what he was dealing with here, else why sell to Gizmodo for £5k. How long did he try before he sold the device.
A court would want more 'effort' than one failed phone call.
It wasn't a failed call. He got through to Apple and informed them of the situation. Apple issued him a call ticket and never got back to him. if you inform the rightful owner, do yuo still have to inform the police?
http://marathon.bungie.org/story/blam.html
The old Marathon manuals have the word Blam! in the end credits as well. There's quite a history to that word, starting with the Marathon series and going all the way into Halo. It used to be very cloak-and-dagger stuff around Bungie.
Seems the sane thing for Giz to do is to just give it back as requested. They got their story, they made news, etc. It's done.
Why *wouldn't* Gizmodo return the phone?
They say they are going to now that Apple has formally informed them it is theirs and requested its return.
It wasn't a failed call. He got through to Apple and informed them of the situation. Apple issued him a call ticket and never got back to him. if you inform the rightful owner, do yuo still have to inform the police?
No. I find it hard to believe this guy went through those steps though. I hope he has proof of his "good deed."
The sharp edges are going to wear holes in my pocket a lot faster than the smooth edges and sculpted back that we have now. I can't see this being as comfortable to hold or carry around either. If this is the real deal, I guess I'll have to buy a case with smoother edges.
I'm hoping that it is a rejected prototype.
B
No. I find it hard to believe this guy went through those steps though. I hope he has proof of his "good deed."
if he doesn't he is screwed. If he told Giz that he contacted Apple and was ignored and left it to them to get it back to Apple (which it seems that have been successful at) then he is still screwed (if he never made the calls) but Giz is probably off the hook.
I love how so many people are saying Giz is guilty of something. But no charge they have have described fits in any real way. Hell, the first question to answer is how they hell would they have known it was an Apple device? Thousands of people on the internet looking at the pics and description and many people were sure it was a chinese knockoff, a fake, whatever, but not an Apple device. Then there is the attempts by the person that found it to contact Apple. Then there is Giz in record publishing that if Apple claims it, then will return it immediately. Giz was obviously playing it close to the line, as they mentioned they checked with their legal team before going forward with this, but I haven't seen one reasonable description of a charge of theft or receiving stolen good that fits the situation...but I guess the lawyers will sort that out.
if he doesn't he is screwed. If he told Giz that he contacted Apple and was ignored and left it to them to get it back to Apple (which it seems that have been successful at) then he is still screwed (if he never made the calls) but Giz is probably off the hook.
I love how so many people are saying Giz is guilty of something. But no charge they have have described fits in any real way. Hell, the first question to answer is how they hell would they have known it was an Apple device? Thousands of people on the internet looking at the pics and description and many people were sure it was a chinese knockoff, a fake, whatever, but not an Apple device. Then there is the attempts by the person that found it to contact Apple. Then there is Giz in record publishing that if Apple claims it, then will return it immediately. Giz was obviously playing it close to the line, as they mentioned they checked with their legal team before going forward with this, but I haven't seen one reasonable description of a charge of theft or receiving stolen good that fits the situation...but I guess the lawyers will sort that out.
yea...this is on the shoulders of the guy who "found" it more than Giz for revealing it. now Giz could find itself in a civil suit since they knew what it was and this guy was in no way affiliated with Apple. it seems Apple simply wants it back and they are embarrassed that an idiot lost it in a bar.
You forget step 1a...he called Apple to inform them and find out tho whom he could return it. If the rightful owner denies ownership or refuses to let him know where to send it, he has made his reasonable attempt to return it.
Firstly, how many people lose their iPhone's, iPod,s etc.?
Does a person who has found such a lost item ever call the manufacturer who made the product?
If the finder did call Apple did he make clear that the iPhone he had in his possession was not a production unit. i.e., it had none of the features of the iPhone's retailed version?
What prompted the finder to contact Gizmodo rather than hand it straight in to the police?
If Gizmodo believed this to be genuine prototype, then why did they not tell the finder or return the item to Apple themselves, or report the matter to the police? Gizmodo cannot plead ignorance as they would have known it was clearly not a retail item.
The finder may not have known how to contact higher officials at Apple, but Gizmodo certainly would.
I wish Gizmodo luck on this one, should Apple decide to go after them. Taking the thing apart and posting pics probably was not the smartest move on their part. It'll be interesting to see where other companies line up on this one - if anyone else says anything publicly or if they just sit on the sidelines. No doubt there are some companies that would like an example to be made.
And I doubt Apple will get much backlash. There will be some rants no doubt, but they'll mostly be confined to boards like this and fringe publications. I doubt CNN or Fox News would take Apple to task for this, so few people will ever hear about it.
Well, then it is a good thing he and Apple have records of him attempting to return it. Pretty sure he doesn't have Steve Jobs personal phone number, so calling Apple and asking to return it is probably the next best 'reasonable' attempt.
One thing though. Why didn't he leave the phone at the bar for someone to reclaim? Did Apple engineer even attempt to reclaim it?
I doubt CNN or Fox News would take Apple to task for this, so few people will ever hear about it.
You were saying?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/te...0/10083480.stm
It's all over the UK news.