Did you even read that link or the one I quoted above? They both quote Denton admitting that he/Gawker/Gizmodo bought the phone and may have to pay legal fees to defend himself. That's not even in question here.
But of course you didn't read them. You are entertaining yourself by, how did you say it, "pushing people's buttons". Make sure not to give it away again your ban will be forthcoming.
Ban threats are another handy way to invalidate those who disagree with you. I saw it on the internet.
"Oh hell - you're so banned - boy are you banned - no sense debating the issue - just going to stamp my feet and yell banned, or call you a child, or Tekstud, or Macsomebody, or a troll....how many pages of this kind of intelligent discourse is there? On how many threads of people playing lawyer?".
This IS like the Gizmodo comments.
(and of course I didn't read the link because you said so - that's proof enough for this place obviously)
Sorry NoNo boy. No more food for you today. You've been a bad troll, bad troll!
Until we cross paths again!
Walking away - after calling me a troll? Way to prove my point. Don't go away mad, you'll have all sorts of people agreeing with you here tomorrow. It'll be a bright sunny day. (the sun will commmeeee out - tomorrrowww)
Walking away - after calling me a troll? Way to prove my point. Don't go away mad, you'll have all sorts of people agreeing with you here tomorrow. It'll be a bright sunny day. (the sun will commmeeee out - tomorrrowww)
Nothing of the sort. It is 3am in this side of the world... as much as I enjoy the troll hunting, it is way too late for me.
Folks, you went six pages of being trolled by someone who is clearly good at it - and who has been banned for it. The only reason this went on for so long is because you responded to his provocation.
Now yes, he was offside and I went through the thread and warned both him and several other people. If you received a warning for this for being off topic: take it and learn from it. You were breaking the rules (and irritating everyone) just as much as he was.
There is solid discussion to be had around this topic. Please engage in that instead.
Perhaps - but returning it kind of invalidates "stolen" right? Every link mentions returning. They did. So far, I haven't gotten anything returned to me that was stolen from me to date. You think that might be hard to prosecute?
"He stole it after finding it lost in a bar. Then notified us - then didn't move it anywhere - then gave it back to us when we requested it to confirm who we were and what we were talking about - and returned it. - but ya - he stole it."
I think there's a disconnect in there.
No, it doesn't "kind of invalidate it." The return of property, even voluntarily, doesn't negate the elements of the crime. I'm an attorney. Either you're a law professor or an idiot, i.e. the only two types of people who would carry such flawed reasoning so far. The former to illustrate a point, the latter because he believes in his flawed logic when reason clearly illuminates the fallacy.
But by all means, keep it up. We're all enjoying this. Don't bother brushing up on jurisdictional prerequisites or the concepts of agency, full faith and credit, etc.
I have a feeling that apple won't sue Gizmodo. Maybe there will be an out of court settlement. Other then that, I think they will take the incident in stride and Steve Jobs will even make a funny joke about this during the unveil. If they do go after them though I would not be against it, I just have a feeling that it is better to let the whole thing die down then keeping attention on the phone , the theft and so on for much longer.
Yes, but it bought the phone from somebody in California. If any part of the exchange took place in California, it could be in trouble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No
They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.
Hey - I got an idea - medical pot is legal in California - light up a joint in front of a policeman in New York City. Or a DEA office in Washington DC. Let me know how that works out for you, and don't forget to forward me the mug-shots.
I have a feeling that apple won't sue Gizmodo. Maybe there will be an out of court settlement. Other then that, I think they will take the incident in stride and Steve Jobs will even make a funny joke about this during the unveil. If they do go after them though I would not be against it, I just have a feeling that it is better to let the whole thing die down then keeping attention on the phone , the theft and so on for much longer.
I tend to agree. While I feel that Gizmodo/Gawker was knowingly in the wrong, I think they likely spoke with their lawyers and were told there are enough loopholes and whatnot to make their actions financially viable.
I also think that any public action by Apple won't be dealt until after they officially announce the next device, so just like with all these corporate patent lawsuits I don't think we should be so absolute with our feelings toward the penalties Gizmodo will face.
I think everyone here is probably being a little too quick to say it was theft. The police will have to investigate to see if the person who 'found' the phone really found it and if they made a reasonable effort to return it (what constitutes *reasonable* in CA case law?). The police then have to figure out how to prove it was theft and not just a lucky find.
Only then can they look towards Gizmodo to see if they knowingly purchased stolen goods. Even if it was stolen (how would Giz know?), Apple's secrecy could actually help Gizmodo since they can claim that they really had no idea that it was an iPhone since up till now another one hasn't been seen and it doesn't look like any of the other ones out there (actually looks like some of the cheap asian knockoffs).
My guess is that this case isn't going to go anywhere unless they can show the person who 'found' the phone actually stole it directly from the engineer. The problem here is that from all accounts I've seen the engineer was intoxicated so that will be an immediate defense for the person who found it.
where the f are the mods? this is ridiculous. either be proactive and truly ban these douches, give us better tools to ignore them, or at least promote some awareness of the trolls so that people will stop responding to them. stop burying your head in the sand and do something! please
edit: yeah, 'warn' the trolls, that'll teach them. oh, wait, that doesn't work at all apparently, shocker. there will always be novice, troll-naive posters that will unwittingly respond to them.
Folks, you went six pages of being trolled by someone who is clearly good at it - and who has been banned for it. The only reason this went on for so long is because you responded to his provocation.
Now yes, he was offside and I went through the thread and warned both him and several other people. If you received a warning for this for being off topic: take it and learn from it. You were breaking the rules (and irritating everyone) just as much as he was.
There is solid discussion to be had around this topic. Please engage in that instead.
really? how about instead of removing my post (while not removing the troll's posts), that had legitimate concerns about the trolling nonsense, you tell whoever is making money off this site to do something about it. what a joke
and by the way, half the thread is him talking to himself
Apparently, in California, if you find out a company's trade secret, deliberately or accidentally (e.g. an employee lets it slip) it is illegal for you to publish that.
"Therefore, Apple would only have to show that Gizmodo knew or reason to know, before publication, that the prototype was a trade secret."
And given that they published under the headline "The Next iPhone Uncovered," pretty hard to deny.
really? how about instead of removing my post (while not removing the troll's posts), that had legitimate concerns about the trolling nonsense, you tell whoever is making money off this site to do something about it. what a joke
and by the way, half the thread is him talking to himself
The mod was totally hypocritical beyond belief on this one. Step up and remove all the viral crap that Dr. No (teckstud, MacTripper, or whatever alias it is) posted instead of knocking on the folks that contribute to the site.
I was really disappointed in how this was handled. AI is really going downhill fast due to the moderators allowing the trolls to hijack threads.
It will be interesting if the California constabulary pursue the investigation, and whether Apple will actively participate, and/or prefer civil charges against Gawker as well. The question is, is there enough evidence and is it illegal enough for the Cali cops/DA to drive successful prosecution, or not. Gizmodo is permanently off my reading and link list, joining ValleyWag and most of the rest of Gawker properties. After Giz pulled their stunts at one of the trade shows - I consigned them to arrested adolescence, and dismissed them as a credible "news" source.
what i most find offensive in Gizmodo's action is outing the Apple engineer who lost the phone. I really see no benefit whatsoever even in the journalistic sense. Not only do they reveal his name, displayed his photo but also went as far as posting his private messages. Whatever integrity that Gizmodo writers had before this incident they've now been flushed down the toilet.
I do wish for the engineer to file a civil suit on the grounds that his privacy has been compromised.
Comments
Did you even read that link or the one I quoted above? They both quote Denton admitting that he/Gawker/Gizmodo bought the phone and may have to pay legal fees to defend himself. That's not even in question here.
But of course you didn't read them. You are entertaining yourself by, how did you say it, "pushing people's buttons". Make sure not to give it away again your ban will be forthcoming.
Ban threats are another handy way to invalidate those who disagree with you. I saw it on the internet.
"Oh hell - you're so banned - boy are you banned - no sense debating the issue - just going to stamp my feet and yell banned, or call you a child, or Tekstud, or Macsomebody, or a troll....how many pages of this kind of intelligent discourse is there? On how many threads of people playing lawyer?".
This IS like the Gizmodo comments.
(and of course I didn't read the link because you said so - that's proof enough for this place obviously)
Sorry NoNo boy. No more food for you today. You've been a bad troll, bad troll!
Until we cross paths again!
Walking away - after calling me a troll? Way to prove my point. Don't go away mad, you'll have all sorts of people agreeing with you here tomorrow. It'll be a bright sunny day. (the sun will commmeeee out - tomorrrowww)
Walking away - after calling me a troll? Way to prove my point. Don't go away mad, you'll have all sorts of people agreeing with you here tomorrow. It'll be a bright sunny day. (the sun will commmeeee out - tomorrrowww)
Nothing of the sort. It is 3am in this side of the world... as much as I enjoy the troll hunting, it is way too late for me.
Now yes, he was offside and I went through the thread and warned both him and several other people. If you received a warning for this for being off topic: take it and learn from it. You were breaking the rules (and irritating everyone) just as much as he was.
There is solid discussion to be had around this topic. Please engage in that instead.
Perhaps - but returning it kind of invalidates "stolen" right? Every link mentions returning. They did. So far, I haven't gotten anything returned to me that was stolen from me to date. You think that might be hard to prosecute?
"He stole it after finding it lost in a bar. Then notified us - then didn't move it anywhere - then gave it back to us when we requested it to confirm who we were and what we were talking about - and returned it. - but ya - he stole it."
I think there's a disconnect in there.
No, it doesn't "kind of invalidate it." The return of property, even voluntarily, doesn't negate the elements of the crime. I'm an attorney. Either you're a law professor or an idiot, i.e. the only two types of people who would carry such flawed reasoning so far. The former to illustrate a point, the latter because he believes in his flawed logic when reason clearly illuminates the fallacy.
But by all means, keep it up. We're all enjoying this. Don't bother brushing up on jurisdictional prerequisites or the concepts of agency, full faith and credit, etc.
They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.
Hey - I got an idea - medical pot is legal in California - light up a joint in front of a policeman in New York City. Or a DEA office in Washington DC. Let me know how that works out for you, and don't forget to forward me the mug-shots.
I have a feeling that apple won't sue Gizmodo. Maybe there will be an out of court settlement. Other then that, I think they will take the incident in stride and Steve Jobs will even make a funny joke about this during the unveil. If they do go after them though I would not be against it, I just have a feeling that it is better to let the whole thing die down then keeping attention on the phone , the theft and so on for much longer.
I tend to agree. While I feel that Gizmodo/Gawker was knowingly in the wrong, I think they likely spoke with their lawyers and were told there are enough loopholes and whatnot to make their actions financially viable.
I also think that any public action by Apple won't be dealt until after they officially announce the next device, so just like with all these corporate patent lawsuits I don't think we should be so absolute with our feelings toward the penalties Gizmodo will face.
he's been feeding himself pot brownies.. how else do you explain his reasoning?
I think he 10 years old judging by his grasp of logic and the law.
Only then can they look towards Gizmodo to see if they knowingly purchased stolen goods. Even if it was stolen (how would Giz know?), Apple's secrecy could actually help Gizmodo since they can claim that they really had no idea that it was an iPhone since up till now another one hasn't been seen and it doesn't look like any of the other ones out there (actually looks like some of the cheap asian knockoffs).
My guess is that this case isn't going to go anywhere unless they can show the person who 'found' the phone actually stole it directly from the engineer. The problem here is that from all accounts I've seen the engineer was intoxicated so that will be an immediate defense for the person who found it.
edit: yeah, 'warn' the trolls, that'll teach them. oh, wait, that doesn't work at all apparently, shocker. there will always be novice, troll-naive posters that will unwittingly respond to them.
They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.
Extradition. I wonder if there are some sort of federal laws in play here too.
Folks, you went six pages of being trolled by someone who is clearly good at it - and who has been banned for it. The only reason this went on for so long is because you responded to his provocation.
Now yes, he was offside and I went through the thread and warned both him and several other people. If you received a warning for this for being off topic: take it and learn from it. You were breaking the rules (and irritating everyone) just as much as he was.
There is solid discussion to be had around this topic. Please engage in that instead.
really? how about instead of removing my post (while not removing the troll's posts), that had legitimate concerns about the trolling nonsense, you tell whoever is making money off this site to do something about it. what a joke
and by the way, half the thread is him talking to himself
California also has trade secret laws that would enable Apple to seek civil damages related to the incident.
There is an analysis here about the civil side of it (found via Daring Fireball).
http://jballer.tumblr.com/post/54096...cret-liability
Apparently, in California, if you find out a company's trade secret, deliberately or accidentally (e.g. an employee lets it slip) it is illegal for you to publish that.
"Therefore, Apple would only have to show that Gizmodo knew or reason to know, before publication, that the prototype was a trade secret."
And given that they published under the headline "The Next iPhone Uncovered," pretty hard to deny.
really? how about instead of removing my post (while not removing the troll's posts), that had legitimate concerns about the trolling nonsense, you tell whoever is making money off this site to do something about it. what a joke
and by the way, half the thread is him talking to himself
The mod was totally hypocritical beyond belief on this one. Step up and remove all the viral crap that Dr. No (teckstud, MacTripper, or whatever alias it is) posted instead of knocking on the folks that contribute to the site.
I was really disappointed in how this was handled. AI is really going downhill fast due to the moderators allowing the trolls to hijack threads.
It will be interesting if the California constabulary pursue the investigation, and whether Apple will actively participate, and/or prefer civil charges against Gawker as well. The question is, is there enough evidence and is it illegal enough for the Cali cops/DA to drive successful prosecution, or not. Gizmodo is permanently off my reading and link list, joining ValleyWag and most of the rest of Gawker properties. After Giz pulled their stunts at one of the trade shows - I consigned them to arrested adolescence, and dismissed them as a credible "news" source.
I do wish for the engineer to file a civil suit on the grounds that his privacy has been compromised.