Affidavit in prototype iPhone case reveals Steve Jobs contacted Gizmodo

2456713

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 250
    What site? The only people to report on the direct contact with Apple was Gizmodo, who never once reported that Steve Jobs personally called them.



    I don't get why people (aka you) feel the need to make stuff up.
  • Reply 22 of 250
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Much as I like and admire the guy, Jobs is not law enforcement.



    No, but it seems that Apple didn't report it stolen until after the story broke. If it was also after Jobs call, then there is a chance that if they had simply returned it after receiving the call, Apple would have gone no further. No guarantee of this, just the knowledge that pissing off Jobs isn't a good way to be on his good side. If there was any question that Apple might or might not go to the police, playing games with him is just going to ensure that Apple would report it stolen.
  • Reply 23 of 250
    originalgoriginalg Posts: 383member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    The whole trade secrets case is a totally different issue. I don't see how the timing of the tear down compared to them knowing it was an Apple device would help determine if it was a violation os TS protections. Either it was or it wasn't.



    In that line of thinking, doesn't that mean that iFixIt's teardowns are also violations of trade secret laws?
  • Reply 24 of 250
    jetlawjetlaw Posts: 156member
    The only people who come out ahead in situations like this are lawyers, which, by the way, is why I went to law school!
  • Reply 25 of 250
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post


    The only people who come out ahead in situations like this are lawyers, which, by the way, is why I went to law school!



    Very true and probably true of most lawyers.



    Whatever happened to being in a profession to help your fellow man in their time of crisis and misery instead of being in it only to profit from those times?
  • Reply 26 of 250
    originalgoriginalg Posts: 383member
    http://gizmodo.com/5495765/hello-steve-jobs



    Quote:

    Well isn't that nice! Silicon Alley Insider has it on good authority that Gizmodo is one of the tech sites Steve Jobs has bookmarked in Safari on his iPad. Hi, Steve! We knew he was a fan, but I'm glad to see he's keeping up with us tablet-style, even after letting Bill Gates' byline run here sometime last year. How do we look on that 1024x768 screen? My email's below. Or better yet: drop us a line in the comments. P.S. Can you get us an iPad early? Seriously, it would make life a lot easier!



    I wonder if SJ still reads Giz, and what happened that day. Did he find out by someone telling him about the story, or did he see it himself first.
  • Reply 27 of 250
    glockpopglockpop Posts: 69member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    While I don't think that Chen requesting a formal letter requesting the phone back was legally any more damning than the rest of the episode, it was a dick move to make during a call from Jobs asking for the phone back. Very likely, if he had simply said OK and returned it, this would have all been forgotten. Getting on Jobs bad side is a good way to have a bad day.



    Actually its pretty clearly extortion. You can't say you're going to do something illegal (not return stolen property) on a condition that forces the victim to do something for you.



    You can't steal somebody's kid and then say, hey, I'll return him if you do me a favor.

    You can't say you will claim you found a rat in your burger unless BK gives you one for free.



    Gizmodo's Lam pretty clearly not only paid for stolen merch and then refused to return it, but he also, according to the affidavit (and in concert with what he published), demanded a written request he could publish for web traffic in exchange for doing what he was legally obligated to do. That's extortion, in addition to being a dick move.
  • Reply 28 of 250
    saschkesaschke Posts: 67member
    Obligatory post coming up.....





    "Are you nuts?



    Sent from my iPad"
  • Reply 29 of 250
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,611member
    Wow, Lam has got a set of big brass balls:



    Quote:

    Apple CEO Steve Jobs personally contacted Gizmodo editor Brian Lam to request the prototype's return the day the story was published on April 19, but Lam refused to do so unless the company provided "confirmation that it is real, from Apple, officially," according to an e-mail message that was also made public.



    "Right now, we have nothing to lose," Lam wrote. "The thing is, Apple PR has been cold to us lately. It affected my ability to do my job right at iPad launch. So we had to go outside and find our stories like this one, very aggressively."



    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20005018-37.html
  • Reply 30 of 250
    modul8trmodul8tr Posts: 10member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Much as I like and admire the guy, Jobs is not law enforcement.



    Of course not, but the legal team behind his company can bury you when your illegal activities cost his company millions and millions of dollars.



    It will be interesting if all of the media attention on a new secret iPhone will have an impact on the next quarterly earnings report. I'd imagine there's a segment out there not buying during April/May/June because they now know this is coming.





    Even though the iPhone refresh cycle is obvious to us, it's not to the general public.
  • Reply 31 of 250
    benicebenice Posts: 382member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    You can think what you like, but "copies" in this context (of course) doesn't mean literal functioning facsimiles-- it's referring to the legal language regarding trade secrets and the dissemination of same.



    OK, point taken. I wasn't being too serious about it.
  • Reply 32 of 250
    poochpooch Posts: 768member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    The arrogance by the journalist to stall the return of stolen property will cost him. If he were smart he would have visited the main campus, requested a visit with executive staff and returned it over to them in hopes of possibly getting a story.



    Instead, he did what he did.



    agreed. but nothing ever gets in the way of doing the self-serving thing, does it?
  • Reply 33 of 250
    "Move along folks....there is nothing to see here."
  • Reply 34 of 250
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,692member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    While I don't think that Chen requesting a formal letter requesting the phone back was legally any more damning than the rest of the episode, ...



    Might possibly be considered extortion.
  • Reply 35 of 250
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OriginalG View Post


    In that line of thinking, doesn't that mean that iFixIt's teardowns are also violations of trade secret laws?



    No, why would it?



    Ifixit published teardowns of publicly released products. No trade secret protection for those.



    This device was a trade secret, as it was not yet released. However, there are stipulations for these protections not apply to trade secrets that have been brought into public. Apple, through an authorized employee, took the prototype out into the public and lost it. Do trade secret protections still apply? Some are going to say they know for sure they do. Others with say with certainty that they do not. But, this will have to be determined by a court. Regardless of where people stand on the issue, they cannot definitively state which way a court would rule. There are, however, cases where the courts have stated that the protection is lost in some where the company did not take necessary and reasonable steps to ensure it's secrecy. That alone is enough to remove the protections. Taking to it a bar, getting drunk and losing might not be considered reasonable efforts to ensure it's secrecy.



    If it is found to have still had TS protection in place, then Giz is screwed.
  • Reply 36 of 250
    casey4147casey4147 Posts: 35member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OriginalG View Post


    In that line of thinking, doesn't that mean that iFixIt's teardowns are also violations of trade secret laws?



    Um, iFixIt's publishing teardowns of items Apple has not yet released? Where? I'd like to see it.



    Might just be me, but I think the difference, and it is a subtle one, is that this prototype is an unreleased product. Sure, speculation and expectation are that Apple's got a new phone in the works, likely to be released mid-summer as indicated by past models, but was anything announced or shown in any capacity by Apple? Is the item for sale yet? Once its in peoples hands, there's very little a corporation can do to restrict - thus, the microwaving of the iPads and the teardowns at iFixIt. Don't think there's anything illegal about it, once it's a publicly available product.
  • Reply 37 of 250
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Might possibly be considered extortion.



    Except that other than as a titillating fact to include in their article for rumour seekers and Apple fans, the letter wouldn't have any value to Giz. If it was any other company in the world, asking for the letter wouldn't be considered extortion because no one would care to see that proof offered on a blog. The fact that without it their reputation would be in question to all the people that would comment "proof or it's fake", is why they asked for it.



    In any other circumstance, asking someone to formalize a request wouldn't be considered extortion.
  • Reply 38 of 250
    mrjoec123mrjoec123 Posts: 223member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post


    or maybe it was all an elaborate plot to get EVERYONE all jazzed up and TONS of free media coverage for what will be a major advance for the iPhone and they will have record sales in the coming quarter.



    So you're saying that Apple generally has trouble generating media attention or getting people jazzed up about its new products?



    I've heard this suggestion several times now, and it makes absolutely no sense. This might be something that PALM would do, or some other company that never gets anyone's attention anymore. But Apple doesn't even have to make announcements to get press every day, let alone design elaborate plots. Heck, every time a competitor releases a new product, Apple gets free press.



    If anything, the leaking of this info early will hurt the level of excitement surrounding the next iPhone. The two weeks leading up to WWDC are bound to be less interesting than they otherwise would have been.



    So, no, this was definitely not a deliberate Apple move of any kind.
  • Reply 39 of 250
    zindakozindako Posts: 468member
    Apple does not have to orchestrate any kind of theatrics to get folks to go nuts over their products, the public is fully aware of how good Apple is at shocking in awe when new products are released. This incident was perpetuated by an incompetent media organization and they will pay the penalty for it.
  • Reply 40 of 250
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post


    Well, you have the right to ask for your lost or stolen property back. You don't need to be a law enforcement member to do so. However, I think that Gizmodo asking for written request was more to publish the request than legal.



    I wonder if the way Chen (or Gizmodo) phrased it, 'confirm it's yours in writing, then we'll send it' could possibly constitute blackmail?
Sign In or Register to comment.