He'll probably finally go when his parents take him off restriction but we'll have to put up with his hissy fits till then.
With that much hostility and rancor I have to assume he never had decent parents... or he's just plain psycho and has killed them. I'm sure his computer time in the sanitarium will be over shortly.
If Apple had filed the criminal complaint, wouldn't that be public knowledge by now? Also, unless it was specifically requested by the 'injured party' (in this case Apple), I would have to believe that Santa Clara police have cost-benefit trade-offs to make: I'll bet this is far from the most pressing law enforcement issue in that town/county.
If this was a petty theft from a mom & pop store on the corner, I'd agree. But it was hardly a petty theft and Apple is hardly a small mom & pop store. Apple is a huge corporation that pays BIG taxes. If they want something throughly investigated, I assure you, it will get investigated.
And, no, a criminal complaint wouldn't necessarily be made public. Particularly not until the investigation was complete.
With that much hostility and rancor I have to assume he never had decent parents... or he's just plain psycho and has killed them. I'm sure his computer time in the sanitarium will be over shortly.
Apple shut them down and I don't believe Apple would hesitate for a moment in going after Gawker. Gawker's founder, Nick Denton, smugly bragged about how they would use checkbook journalism to get a story. I expect Apple is going to use their substantially larger checkbook to get Gawker.
Here's one attorney's take on the situation. I came across the link to the article this afternoon, long after I had posted my armchair analysis earlier in this thread. I feel my thoughts are pretty much identical to what this attorney has to say about the situation.
Yeah, she admits up front she isn't an attorney in California. But she researched California law and I'm pretty confident she has good legal understanding of the situation.
BTW, I wonder why Gawker Media isn't linking articles like that one on the Gizmodo website?
How can so many of you be forgetting about Think Secret?
Mark
Lots of people have brought it up before. And, some of us have noted that ThinkSecret was a low-budget dorm-room operation by a couple of undergrads, and that perhaps Gawker/Gizmodo is a slightly different cup of tea.
Frankly, 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. Other than for an all-too-common tongue-in-cheekiness (endemic to tech writers on the web, basically all trying to sound a macho to their fellow-geeks), 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).
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
BTW doesn't the name AppleInsider suggest that this website gets "inside" information on Apple related products and news. That's the reason we all visit this site or did initially. Now that the mother of all inside Apple news comes out you're all up in arms. You're all hypocrites
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
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.
I learned not to take things that belong to others when I was in Kindergarden. Giz needs to go back to school to learn the basics of life in a civilized world.
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
You are awfully brassy throwing out glorious generalizations like that - and I suppose we will be treated to a round of raspberries from you and something on the order of "well you are were generalizing too, so there!" adolescent neener-neener stuff, or the like. You have only the un-corroborated claim from them that that was the case - like us you simply don't know. Those pics of the Droid, Nexus One and EVO weren't leaked they were released for viral publicity, which did them just worlds of good now didn't it? If you can't tell the difference, then you practice a level of ignorance or denial that is truly awe-inspiring and at odds with your previously claimed knowledge of the situation. Just stop. I'm actually embarrassed for you - and I don't embarrass easily. Everyone is entitled their own opinion, it's just reality that all opinions don't deserve the same regard or respect. This time, put your assumptions back in the oven for a while - and let them bake until they're DONE and not half-baked.
If I were to put the best face on this - and I am on record herein about my general disregard for Gizmodo as any sort of "news source", (after clear demonstrations of painfully arrested adolescence in a number of public venues about which they boasted gleefully without regret) - they are at BEST a vaguely "newsy" form of entertainment, with bits of helpful hints and other generally innocuous stuff. Not Pulitzer prize material. Not even the BOBs really, but they could be close to being in the running for that. Just occasionally amusing, generally snarky, and unabashedly attempting to be edgy and cool in the tech blog world. Certainly better than truly bad sources like Thurrott, Enderle and the ever grumpy Dvorak. BUt just because the pig stinks less than the other pigs doesn't make it a unicorn.
People around here award themselves points if they care more about Apple than they do about themselves.
They forget that they are consumers, and identify directly with the corporate interests rather than the interests of consumers.
POINTS?? Seriously??? Get off the high horse dude. That is just so much crap I can't believe you actually took time to type it. NO ONE in here has forgotten they are consumers - nearly every contributor here has laid claim to that role repeatedly since I've throwing things into the mix here, so FAIL that statement entirely with gusto AND chips. Not one of us has come in here and claimed *dreamy distracted and disconnected voice* I AM APPLE! I LOVE MYSELF FOR ALL MY COOLNESS. I CAN DO NO WRONG!
FIne you don't like large companies - perhaps a latent anti-authority attitude. Maybe a touch of "they will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes!" We get that but don't even throw stuff like that out here - some of Apple's most ardent critics (and some really insane people) are lurking here and aren't afraid to call them out. But you have to ignore that to make your statement.
You are awfully brassy throwing out glorious generalizations like that - and I suppose we will be treated to a round of raspberries from you and something on the order of "well you are were generalizing too, so there!" adolescent neener-neener stuff, or the like. You have only the un-corroborated claim from them that that was the case - like us you simply don't know. Those pics of the Droid, Nexus One and EVO weren't leaked they were released for viral publicity, which did them just worlds of good now didn't it? If you can't tell the difference, then you practice a level of ignorance or denial that is truly awe-inspiring and at odds with your previously claimed knowledge of the situation. Just stop. I'm actually embarrassed for you - and I don't embarrass easily. Everyone is entitled their own opinion, it's just reality that all opinions don't deserve the same regard or respect. This time, put your assumptions back in the oven for a while - and let them bake until they're DONE and not half-baked.
If I were to put the best face on this - and I am on record herein about my general disregard for Gizmodo as any sort of "news source", (after clear demonstrations of painfully arrested adolescence in a number of public venues about which they boasted gleefully without regret) - they are at BEST a vaguely "newsy" form of entertainment, with bits of helpful hints and other generally innocuous stuff. Not Pulitzer prize material. Not even the BOBs really, but they could be close to being in the running for that. Just occasionally amusing, generally snarky, and unabashedly attempting to be edgy and cool in the tech blog world. Certainly better than truly bad sources like Thurrott, Enderle and the ever grumpy Dvorak. BUt just because the pig stinks less than the other pigs doesn't make it a unicorn.
Its this country of wussies thats embarrassing. This is how journalism is and will be. Get a story at all cost. We all visited their page. Its a cut throat business where do gooders rarely survive. Giz probably got more hurs this week than they do all year. So if leaked photos is good for Moto and HTC is good then why isn't leaked photos of the iPhone good for Apple? And yes they were leaked, it really doesn't matter who took and posted them.
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.
I learned not to take things that belong to others when I was in Kindergarden. Giz needs to go back to school to learn the basics of life in a civilized world.
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. Oh yeah he compensated them just like we paid compensated the indians for Manhattan. We live in a stolen land, and had a president that stole 2 elections, Do you really think only Giz would've acted that way? Giz was probably the only one with the balls to investigate and it paid off. Nothing is gonna happen to them except not get invited to any Apple events. Big deal. There are still many tech companies that will have them.
And Gizmodo isn't in California. Oh ... yeah ... you knew that right?
Neither was a company called Psystar. Your point? Also here is New York's law on this matter (Section 155.00 Larceny):
Larceny includes a wrongful taking, obtaining or withholding of another's property, with the intent prescribed in subdivision one of this section, committed in any of the following ways:
(a) By conduct heretofore defined or known as common law larceny by trespassory taking, common law larceny by trick, embezzlement, or obtaining property by false pretenses;
(b) By acquiring lost property.
A person acquires lost property when he exercises control over property of another which he knows to have been lost or mislaid, or to have been delivered under a mistake as to the identity of the recipient or the nature or amount of the property, without taking reasonable measures to return such property to the owner.
Section 155.30 Grand Larceny in the fourth degree.
3. The property consists of secret scientific material;
Grand larceny in the fourth degree is a class E felony.
They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.
You're right. So what? It doesn't matter where they live. If they broke the law in CA, then they can be charged (and convicted if supported by evidence) in CA. Your argument is akin to robbing a bank in CA and then fleeing to NY and claiming that CA can't do anything about it.
Not to mention, of course, that if you use the NY argument, Gizmodo loses double because transporting stolen property across state lines makes it a FEDERAL crime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No
Wrong. That only works if it's illegal in both states. It's not.
It IS illegal in both states. The definition of theft in both NY and CA derives from American Common Law which further derives from British Common Law - and the definitions are nearly identical.
More importantly, your attempt to bring NY into it only hurt your client further. NY law is much clearer on what constitutes misappropriation of trade secrets:
So not only did you get your client charged and convicted for purchase of stolen property, you just added on additional penalties for misappropriation of trade secrets. Congratulations.
Stolen? So Apple filed a stolen property report? After all, something as valuable as an undisclosed iPhone prototype must be extremely valuable no? I'd imagine we are talking grand theft right?
Apple reported the theft as soon as they knew about it right?
One doesn't need to file a stolen property report for it to be a crime. If you're on vacation and the police catch someone breaking into your house and stealing your TV, they can be charged even though you hadn't filed a stolen property report. Same thing applies here (although I'm sure Apple will file a report if that's necessary to prosecute and if they choose to prosecute).
Don't worry - Apple's lawyers and San Mateo County's lawyers are undoubtedly far more skilled in the practice of the law than you are. They'll know the procedure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messiah
I wouldn't be surprised if it finally comes to light that the software engineer didn't leave the iPhone protoype lying around, but rather, was the victim of a pickpocket.
I think there might be some truth to that. Gizmodo offered a large reward. Someone just happens to be hanging around a bar frequented by Apple employees. The person who 'finds' the phone just happens to think to call Gizmodo - not CBS or Time Magazine or The National Enquirer. Gizmodo - undoubtedly the first name in journalism that most people think of.
The entire thing stinks:
First, the claim that Apple has lost nothing is wrong. Apple maintains strict secrecy about their prototypes in order to avoid giving the competition a head start. That is worth millions of dollars. Want to bet that you?re now going to see a dramatic increase in the number of phones with front facing cameras?
I love the claim that Gizmodo didn?t know it was an Apple phone. Do you think they go around paying people $5,000 every time someone calls them and says ?I found a phone. It?s not working now, but it looks kind of neat??
Then we get into the law. Under CA law (ever other state, for that matter), this clearly involves grand theft ? and receiving of stolen property. The law is crystal clear ? and both the ?finder? and Gizmodo broke the law. Their ?attempt? to contact Apple was laughably feeble. Do you really think that someone who has enough technical knowledge to have contacted Gizmodo as their first choice would have expected AppleCare to be able to get the phone back to its owner? How many times a day do you think iphones get lost. What do you expect AppleCare to do when you call and say ?I found a lost iPhone??
Under CA law, not to mention normal morality which applies not only to the finder, but to Gizmodo, they should have made a REAL attempt to get the phone back to Apple. They knew the owner?s name and facebook page. The owner called repeatedly that night ? and they refused to answer the phone. They never turned it over to the bar or to police. They never mailed it to Apple. They never called Apple HQ (which would have been about 20,000 times more logical than calling AppleCare).
Finally, the whole scenario suggests that the entire story is not out there yet. Are we to believe that Gizmodo offers a large reward for info on Apple products, then someone happens to be innocently hanging out in a bar frequented by Apple employees, then they ?find? a prototype phone, and then the first person they think of calling is Gizmodo? Not CBS or the National Inquirer or Time Magazine or anyone else? Oh, yes ? Gizmodo is obviously the first thing people think of for national news.
The suggestiont that it is reasonable and ethical for Gizmodo to encourage theft of private property (by offering the reward in the first place) and then pay for stolen property ?all in the interests of journalism? is reprehensible.
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
You are wrong to assume everyone here is "pissed" because the surprise was ruined. What people are passionate about is the questionable method by which Giz got the scoop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
BTW doesn't the name AppleInsider suggest that this website gets "inside" information on Apple related products and news.
Look up the concept of poetic license.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Now that the mother of all inside Apple news comes out you're all up in arms. You're all hypocrites
What Giz had was not the mother of all Apple news... hardly. Actually, their method of obtaining this news has eclipsed what you call the "mother of all Apple news."
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. Oh yeah he compensated them just like we paid compensated the indians for Manhattan. We live in a stolen land, and had a president that stole 2 elections, Do you really think only Giz would've acted that way? Giz was probably the only one with the balls to investigate and it paid off.
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.
Comments
He'll probably finally go when his parents take him off restriction but we'll have to put up with his hissy fits till then.
Baiting him doesn't help, just ask him to leave (please for the love of god - leave) plus this is all off-topic anyway.
He'll probably finally go when his parents take him off restriction but we'll have to put up with his hissy fits till then.
With that much hostility and rancor I have to assume he never had decent parents... or he's just plain psycho and has killed them. I'm sure his computer time in the sanitarium will be over shortly.
If Apple had filed the criminal complaint, wouldn't that be public knowledge by now? Also, unless it was specifically requested by the 'injured party' (in this case Apple), I would have to believe that Santa Clara police have cost-benefit trade-offs to make: I'll bet this is far from the most pressing law enforcement issue in that town/county.
If this was a petty theft from a mom & pop store on the corner, I'd agree. But it was hardly a petty theft and Apple is hardly a small mom & pop store. Apple is a huge corporation that pays BIG taxes. If they want something throughly investigated, I assure you, it will get investigated.
And, no, a criminal complaint wouldn't necessarily be made public. Particularly not until the investigation was complete.
Mark
With that much hostility and rancor I have to assume he never had decent parents... or he's just plain psycho and has killed them. I'm sure his computer time in the sanitarium will be over shortly.
I think a sanitarium is too good for him.
You really think the DA or Apple want a headline from going after a media co?
Absolutely! Gawker is the "National Enquirer" of the web. And the National Enquirer finds themselves in high-profile lawsuits on a regular basis.
How can so many of you be forgetting about Think Secret?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-9836575-2.html
Apple shut them down and I don't believe Apple would hesitate for a moment in going after Gawker. Gawker's founder, Nick Denton, smugly bragged about how they would use checkbook journalism to get a story. I expect Apple is going to use their substantially larger checkbook to get Gawker.
Mark
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/04/23/deter...e-lost-iphone/
Yeah, she admits up front she isn't an attorney in California. But she researched California law and I'm pretty confident she has good legal understanding of the situation.
BTW, I wonder why Gawker Media isn't linking articles like that one on the Gizmodo website?
Mark
How can so many of you be forgetting about Think Secret?
Mark
Lots of people have brought it up before. And, some of us have noted that ThinkSecret was a low-budget dorm-room operation by a couple of undergrads, and that perhaps Gawker/Gizmodo is a slightly different cup of tea.
Frankly, 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. Other than for an all-too-common tongue-in-cheekiness (endemic to tech writers on the web, basically all trying to sound a macho to their fellow-geeks), 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).
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
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.
I learned not to take things that belong to others when I was in Kindergarden. Giz needs to go back to school to learn the basics of life in a civilized world.
People around here award themselves points if they care more about Apple than they do about themselves.
They forget that they are consumers, and identify directly with the corporate interests rather than the interests of consumers.
Why do you think breaking the law is in the interest of consumers?
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
No thought....None whatsoever. Anyone should be allowed to do anything that they want.
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
You are awfully brassy throwing out glorious generalizations like that - and I suppose we will be treated to a round of raspberries from you and something on the order of "well you are were generalizing too, so there!" adolescent neener-neener stuff, or the like. You have only the un-corroborated claim from them that that was the case - like us you simply don't know. Those pics of the Droid, Nexus One and EVO weren't leaked they were released for viral publicity, which did them just worlds of good now didn't it? If you can't tell the difference, then you practice a level of ignorance or denial that is truly awe-inspiring and at odds with your previously claimed knowledge of the situation. Just stop. I'm actually embarrassed for you - and I don't embarrass easily. Everyone is entitled their own opinion, it's just reality that all opinions don't deserve the same regard or respect. This time, put your assumptions back in the oven for a while - and let them bake until they're DONE and not half-baked.
If I were to put the best face on this - and I am on record herein about my general disregard for Gizmodo as any sort of "news source", (after clear demonstrations of painfully arrested adolescence in a number of public venues about which they boasted gleefully without regret) - they are at BEST a vaguely "newsy" form of entertainment, with bits of helpful hints and other generally innocuous stuff. Not Pulitzer prize material. Not even the BOBs really, but they could be close to being in the running for that. Just occasionally amusing, generally snarky, and unabashedly attempting to be edgy and cool in the tech blog world. Certainly better than truly bad sources like Thurrott, Enderle and the ever grumpy Dvorak. BUt just because the pig stinks less than the other pigs doesn't make it a unicorn.
People around here award themselves points if they care more about Apple than they do about themselves.
They forget that they are consumers, and identify directly with the corporate interests rather than the interests of consumers.
POINTS?? Seriously??? Get off the high horse dude. That is just so much crap I can't believe you actually took time to type it. NO ONE in here has forgotten they are consumers - nearly every contributor here has laid claim to that role repeatedly since I've throwing things into the mix here, so FAIL that statement entirely with gusto AND chips. Not one of us has come in here and claimed *dreamy distracted and disconnected voice* I AM APPLE! I LOVE MYSELF FOR ALL MY COOLNESS. I CAN DO NO WRONG!
FIne you don't like large companies - perhaps a latent anti-authority attitude. Maybe a touch of "they will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes!" We get that but don't even throw stuff like that out here - some of Apple's most ardent critics (and some really insane people) are lurking here and aren't afraid to call them out. But you have to ignore that to make your statement.
You are awfully brassy throwing out glorious generalizations like that - and I suppose we will be treated to a round of raspberries from you and something on the order of "well you are were generalizing too, so there!" adolescent neener-neener stuff, or the like. You have only the un-corroborated claim from them that that was the case - like us you simply don't know. Those pics of the Droid, Nexus One and EVO weren't leaked they were released for viral publicity, which did them just worlds of good now didn't it? If you can't tell the difference, then you practice a level of ignorance or denial that is truly awe-inspiring and at odds with your previously claimed knowledge of the situation. Just stop. I'm actually embarrassed for you - and I don't embarrass easily. Everyone is entitled their own opinion, it's just reality that all opinions don't deserve the same regard or respect. This time, put your assumptions back in the oven for a while - and let them bake until they're DONE and not half-baked.
If I were to put the best face on this - and I am on record herein about my general disregard for Gizmodo as any sort of "news source", (after clear demonstrations of painfully arrested adolescence in a number of public venues about which they boasted gleefully without regret) - they are at BEST a vaguely "newsy" form of entertainment, with bits of helpful hints and other generally innocuous stuff. Not Pulitzer prize material. Not even the BOBs really, but they could be close to being in the running for that. Just occasionally amusing, generally snarky, and unabashedly attempting to be edgy and cool in the tech blog world. Certainly better than truly bad sources like Thurrott, Enderle and the ever grumpy Dvorak. BUt just because the pig stinks less than the other pigs doesn't make it a unicorn.
Its this country of wussies thats embarrassing. This is how journalism is and will be. Get a story at all cost. We all visited their page. Its a cut throat business where do gooders rarely survive. Giz probably got more hurs this week than they do all year. So if leaked photos is good for Moto and HTC is good then why isn't leaked photos of the iPhone good for Apple? And yes they were leaked, it really doesn't matter who took and posted them.
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.
I learned not to take things that belong to others when I was in Kindergarden. Giz needs to go back to school to learn the basics of life in a civilized world.
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. Oh yeah he compensated them just like we paid compensated the indians for Manhattan. We live in a stolen land, and had a president that stole 2 elections, Do you really think only Giz would've acted that way? Giz was probably the only one with the balls to investigate and it paid off. Nothing is gonna happen to them except not get invited to any Apple events. Big deal. There are still many tech companies that will have them.
And Gizmodo isn't in California. Oh ... yeah ... you knew that right?
Neither was a company called Psystar. Your point? Also here is New York's law on this matter (Section 155.00 Larceny):
Larceny includes a wrongful taking, obtaining or withholding of another's property, with the intent prescribed in subdivision one of this section, committed in any of the following ways:
(a) By conduct heretofore defined or known as common law larceny by trespassory taking, common law larceny by trick, embezzlement, or obtaining property by false pretenses;
(b) By acquiring lost property.
A person acquires lost property when he exercises control over property of another which he knows to have been lost or mislaid, or to have been delivered under a mistake as to the identity of the recipient or the nature or amount of the property, without taking reasonable measures to return such property to the owner.
Section 155.30 Grand Larceny in the fourth degree.
3. The property consists of secret scientific material;
Grand larceny in the fourth degree is a class E felony.
Fun times ahead
They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.
You're right. So what? It doesn't matter where they live. If they broke the law in CA, then they can be charged (and convicted if supported by evidence) in CA. Your argument is akin to robbing a bank in CA and then fleeing to NY and claiming that CA can't do anything about it.
Not to mention, of course, that if you use the NY argument, Gizmodo loses double because transporting stolen property across state lines makes it a FEDERAL crime.
Wrong. That only works if it's illegal in both states. It's not.
It IS illegal in both states. The definition of theft in both NY and CA derives from American Common Law which further derives from British Common Law - and the definitions are nearly identical.
More importantly, your attempt to bring NY into it only hurt your client further. NY law is much clearer on what constitutes misappropriation of trade secrets:
http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-gui...s-law-new-york
So not only did you get your client charged and convicted for purchase of stolen property, you just added on additional penalties for misappropriation of trade secrets. Congratulations.
Find me one then. In NY
http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal...45_165.45.html
You're welcome.
Stolen? So Apple filed a stolen property report? After all, something as valuable as an undisclosed iPhone prototype must be extremely valuable no? I'd imagine we are talking grand theft right?
Apple reported the theft as soon as they knew about it right?
One doesn't need to file a stolen property report for it to be a crime. If you're on vacation and the police catch someone breaking into your house and stealing your TV, they can be charged even though you hadn't filed a stolen property report. Same thing applies here (although I'm sure Apple will file a report if that's necessary to prosecute and if they choose to prosecute).
Don't worry - Apple's lawyers and San Mateo County's lawyers are undoubtedly far more skilled in the practice of the law than you are. They'll know the procedure.
I wouldn't be surprised if it finally comes to light that the software engineer didn't leave the iPhone protoype lying around, but rather, was the victim of a pickpocket.
I think there might be some truth to that. Gizmodo offered a large reward. Someone just happens to be hanging around a bar frequented by Apple employees. The person who 'finds' the phone just happens to think to call Gizmodo - not CBS or Time Magazine or The National Enquirer. Gizmodo - undoubtedly the first name in journalism that most people think of.
The entire thing stinks:
First, the claim that Apple has lost nothing is wrong. Apple maintains strict secrecy about their prototypes in order to avoid giving the competition a head start. That is worth millions of dollars. Want to bet that you?re now going to see a dramatic increase in the number of phones with front facing cameras?
I love the claim that Gizmodo didn?t know it was an Apple phone. Do you think they go around paying people $5,000 every time someone calls them and says ?I found a phone. It?s not working now, but it looks kind of neat??
Then we get into the law. Under CA law (ever other state, for that matter), this clearly involves grand theft ? and receiving of stolen property. The law is crystal clear ? and both the ?finder? and Gizmodo broke the law. Their ?attempt? to contact Apple was laughably feeble. Do you really think that someone who has enough technical knowledge to have contacted Gizmodo as their first choice would have expected AppleCare to be able to get the phone back to its owner? How many times a day do you think iphones get lost. What do you expect AppleCare to do when you call and say ?I found a lost iPhone??
Under CA law, not to mention normal morality which applies not only to the finder, but to Gizmodo, they should have made a REAL attempt to get the phone back to Apple. They knew the owner?s name and facebook page. The owner called repeatedly that night ? and they refused to answer the phone. They never turned it over to the bar or to police. They never mailed it to Apple. They never called Apple HQ (which would have been about 20,000 times more logical than calling AppleCare).
Finally, the whole scenario suggests that the entire story is not out there yet. Are we to believe that Gizmodo offers a large reward for info on Apple products, then someone happens to be innocently hanging out in a bar frequented by Apple employees, then they ?find? a prototype phone, and then the first person they think of calling is Gizmodo? Not CBS or the National Inquirer or Time Magazine or anyone else? Oh, yes ? Gizmodo is obviously the first thing people think of for national news.
The suggestiont that it is reasonable and ethical for Gizmodo to encourage theft of private property (by offering the reward in the first place) and then pay for stolen property ?all in the interests of journalism? is reprehensible.
All of you are pissed that Giz ruined the surprise. They bought that phone not knowing if it truly was an iPhone. They didn't hide the fact that they had it. And promptly returned it when it was asked for. Pics of phones get leaked all the time. I saw pics of the Droid, Nexus One, and the EVO months before they were officially announced. No one screamed bloody murder then so what's the difference now? Stop being a bunch of babies.
You are wrong to assume everyone here is "pissed" because the surprise was ruined. What people are passionate about is the questionable method by which Giz got the scoop.
BTW doesn't the name AppleInsider suggest that this website gets "inside" information on Apple related products and news.
Look up the concept of poetic license.
Now that the mother of all inside Apple news comes out you're all up in arms. You're all hypocrites
What Giz had was not the mother of all Apple news... hardly. Actually, their method of obtaining this news has eclipsed what you call the "mother of all Apple news."
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. Oh yeah he compensated them just like we paid compensated the indians for Manhattan. We live in a stolen land, and had a president that stole 2 elections, Do you really think only Giz would've acted that way? Giz was probably the only one with the balls to investigate and it paid off.
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.