Maybe Samsung went after the prototype trying to find something to beef up their lawsuit? The way they've acted since the beginning of this year, they might be willing to spent a few $100K to get their hands on an iP5 early on...
Hasn't it been about 3 months since the alleged incident occurred? Seems like a long time to wait to request footage.
I'm half-thinking of opening up my own Irish pub right outside the new spaceship campus. I'll call it Bowen's and have a drink called the prototype. I'll even have a vacuum tube system where lost phones can be sent right back to Apple HQ immediately.
That is a great idea! Let me know if you need silent investors as it sounds like a can't miss venture. I know nothing about running a pub so hence the silent partner part. My only requirement is free food and drink when I am in town....
Nobody's expecting a surveillance system to employ RED 4k cameras shooting 120 FPS, but 1 frame every 3 minutes?
Somebody could go in there, rob the whole joint, massacre 17 people, rape 3 women and the camera wouldn't even capture any of it.
I think they usually work off of motion detection. There are also systems that can analyze the scene and start recording if anything in the scene is different.
Can't these prototypes be fitted internally with a harmless radioactive material that can be tracked by satellites or ground equipment that would still be functional after the device was powered off and that wouldn't affect the electronics of the device? Or am I just making stuff up that doesn't yet exist in the year 2011?
It's just an iPhone prototype. That's some James Bond stuff you're talking about there.
The repeat fiasco just boggles me. I've had mobile phones for about a decade, and I've never left (or had stolen) even a $50 phone or an iPhone anywhere, never mind a priceless prototype that you shouldn't risk falling into the hands of a competitor or a news/tabloid site. Also, I'd think this person would have learned vicariously from last year's incident to take extra precautions.
That's the part that really has me confused, too. I have never lost a phone either, and I've been pretty fricken drunk at various places from time to time. Maybe I would behave differently if I were trusted with a priceless prototype?
I guess if I ever apply for a job at Apple I could list it as a skill that I don't lose production or prototype phones!
The repeat fiasco just boggles me. I've had mobile phones for about a decade, and I've never left (or had stolen) even a $50 phone or an iPhone anywhere, never mind a priceless prototype that you shouldn't risk falling into the hands of a competitor or a news/tabloid site. Also, I'd think this person would have learned vicariously from last year's incident to take extra precautions.
It's actually making Apple look a little silly.
I never blame the staff... I blame the management.
Officers from the San Francisco Police Department have asked for permission to review the surveillance footage at a bar where an Apple employee allegedly left a prototype of the company's fifth-generation smartphone.
Am I the only one around here who feel very uncomfortable if the Police helps in an investigation where some drunk dork forgot a phone ?
I am pretty certain SFPD would not extend the same service to me, were I to forget my phone on TGIF's.
I though that their job was crime fighting - and AFAIK there has no crime been commited.
Am I the only one around here who feel very uncomfortable if the Police helps in an investigation where some drunk dork forgot a phone ?
I am pretty certain SFPD would not extend the same service to me, were I to forget my phone on TGIF's.
I though that their job was crime fighting - and AFAIK there has no crime been commited.
This has been covered a thousand times.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. Go back and read the thousand times this was covered with the iPhone 4 fiasco. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. Go back and read the thousand times this was covered with the iPhone 4 fiasco. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
Call your local PD and inform them that you lost your car. Not that it was stolen. Be sure not to report it as stolen. Emphasize that you are not reporting it as stolen. Then request they come help you look for it and if possible you would like 3 or 4 detectives to assist. I'd be interested in hearing how that works out for you. Actually, let's keep it even closer to the actual event. Tell them you lost your very expensive phone at a bar.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. Go back and read the thousand times this was covered with the iPhone 4 fiasco. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
"...the phone likely IS stolen...." Likely? You base your argument on LIKELY???? So, is it, or is it not stolen under California law? Link?
Also, how much time do you have to return it before it is considered "stolen" versus the amount of time before it is considered "likely stolen"????
The phone was left somewhere, it wasn't stolen. How can you prove something to be stolen when there is no evidence of the phone anywhere?
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
First : if I were given a multimillion prototype, I would not go to a bar and get thrashed beyond belief and leave my multimillion$ prototype behind. Especially in light of the iPhone 4 fiasko. I have been drunk (even vey drunk) a few times in my life and never lost my (unvaluable according to you) phone.
Since Peter parker we all know, that with great power comes great responsibility, which our TGIF dork obviously chose to ignore.
2ndly am I really the only one who feels uncomfortable that SFPD assists private investigators to gain access to a flat and search it without a proper warrant ? I mean SFPD initially said it had no record of the visit to Calderón's home and some time later Lt. Dangerfield (SFPD's spokesperson) said that four SFPD officers accompanied two members Apple's private security force, but waited outside while the Apple employees conducted the search. How can this be legal ??????
Don't get me wrong I love my Apple product and I have every single one of them, but if their paramilitary security troops get cooperation from an official PD, I feel that some civic liberties and rights are being violated here. And these rights outweigh any commercial interests by one company. I always thought that the 'It is the law' was applicable to everyone.
If you lost a phone, and someone picks it up and takes it without making a reasonable attempt to find its owner, without turning it over to police, it is considered stolen. If it was just lost, it would be where it was left. As I understand it, it was not where it was left because the prototype's phone home software put it at a location other than where it was left.
Penal Code 485 PC -- California's law against appropriating (or misappropriating) lost property -- prohibits you keeping property that you find when there are clues identifying its true owner.1
If you lost a phone, and someone picks it up and takes it without making a reasonable attempt to find its owner, without turning it over to police, it is considered stolen. If it was just lost, it would be where it was left. As I understand it, it was not where it was left because the prototype's phone home software put it at a location other than where it was left.
Penal Code 485 PC -- California's law against appropriating (or misappropriating) lost property -- prohibits you keeping property that you find when there are clues identifying its true owner.1
For all we know it was returned to Apple the day after the search, having been taken by a thoughtful citizen that found it in the bar and didn't feel comfortable leaving it with the bar's lost and found (AKA staff bargain bin). It certainly hasn't resulted in pictures or details being leaked on to the internet, something we might expect if it was still in the wild (if it is still out there, perhaps it is very well camouflaged and so not recognizable as a prototype).
Regardless, what we do know, is that Apple did not report as stolen the night of the search (we don't even know how soon the search occurred after it was lost), yet was able to gain the assistance of the SFPD in looking for it. The SFPD says this is not unusual in order to ensure the safety of all parties involved. Yet, the officers involved intentionally kept it off the books at Apple's request and did not assist in the actual search of the home, bringing into question how effective they would have been in ensuring anyone's safety, a key reason for them being there in the first place.
Yet, the officers involved intentionally kept it off the books at Apple's request and did not assist in the actual search of the home, bringing into question how effective they would have been in ensuring anyone's safety, a key reason for them being there in the first place.
And the access of the Apple into that other dude's flat does not constitute an unlawful entry and/or impersonating sth you are not ?
And the access of the Apple into that other dude's flat does not constitute an unlawful entry and/or impersonating sth you are not ?
I won't make assumptions just yet. Yes, Calderon claims the people he allowed to search his home were introduced as SFPD and that there were threats. If we take him at his word, then that raises questions about of how free and voluntary the search was. However, if the Apple employees were not introduced as police or if they made it clear who they were, then Sergio gave permission and the search was unquestionably legal.
All we have is Sergio word for what took place that night. Apple hasn't commented and the SFPD has done their best to make a mess of their statements. Personally, there is nothing yet that has been presented to call into question Sergio's statements. Nothing factual anyway. He is the only party that has made clear and complete comments that have not been proven to be false. SFPD cannot claim that record in this case since their story has changed and at best has been made unreliable because they not only released contradictory statements but their most up to date statements show that their own policy was broken by not recording the event, and their intention of assisting to ensure safety was at best made useless by remaining outside during the search.
Seems odd that they would have extreme leves of security to even be in the same room as a prototype device - then allow soeone to wander around town with said device.
Lt. Troy Dangerfield, a spokesman for SFPD, said he wasn't aware that investigators had gone to the bar or were looking for the videos. But he said that since Apple had not filed a police report, he was sure that there was no criminal investigation connected to the missing device. "In order for there to be a crime, you need a victim," Dangerfield said. He concluded that the request by police for the surveillance footage was likely part of the internal review launched this month by department officials into how police assisted Apple in a search of a home on July 24.
Doesn't seem like a terribly confusing concept.
Even the police cite that there is no crime, as far as they are concerned and believe their actions of their dept requires a formal investigation. But, by all means, let's assume Sergio is a lying thief (a lack of evidence simply being another inconvenience like the lack of a victim).
But, by all means, let's assume Sergio is a lying thief (a lack of evidence simply being another inconvenience like the lack of a victim).
What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ? Quite frankly if I were to find such [ar any] thing for that matter, I would for sure hand it in to the Police. Whether I would do this whilst staggering home drunk from a bar remains to be seen. Probably next day or so.
Having said that if the iPhone5 was disguised as an iPhone4, how was he supposed to tell the difference ? And is the regular lost and found open outside office hours in SF, cause it most certaily aint in Brussels....
Calderon had the phone, and Apple retrieved it during a search he consented to.
The police simply threatened to come back with a search warrant if he didn't consent, and allowed him to assume they were all cops without necessarily misrepresenting anything. After finding the phone, one guy identifies the other as an Apple employee, and tells Calderson that no charges for possessing stolen property will be filed if they come to an agreement. Calderon agrees to surrender the phone, and not mention it or any agreement with Apple publicly. Classic Mutt and Jeff.
Now Calderon is just pissed that he lost the phone, and wants to accuse the police of doing something improper. But there may be nothing wrong with how they helped an owner of lost or stolen property, and someone in possession of it, come to an agreement that eliminates all the owner's concerns. No one can know for sure what happened in the house; Apple's not talking, and no one else but Calderson was there. The police just want to see the bar's security images to check for any evidence of a crime being committed, as part of an investigation that Calderon's complaints initiated.
Comments
Hasn't it been about 3 months since the alleged incident occurred? Seems like a long time to wait to request footage.
I'm half-thinking of opening up my own Irish pub right outside the new spaceship campus. I'll call it Bowen's and have a drink called the prototype. I'll even have a vacuum tube system where lost phones can be sent right back to Apple HQ immediately.
That is a great idea! Let me know if you need silent investors as it sounds like a can't miss venture. I know nothing about running a pub so hence the silent partner part. My only requirement is free food and drink when I am in town....
Nobody's expecting a surveillance system to employ RED 4k cameras shooting 120 FPS, but 1 frame every 3 minutes?
Somebody could go in there, rob the whole joint, massacre 17 people, rape 3 women and the camera wouldn't even capture any of it.
I think they usually work off of motion detection. There are also systems that can analyze the scene and start recording if anything in the scene is different.
Can't these prototypes be fitted internally with a harmless radioactive material that can be tracked by satellites or ground equipment that would still be functional after the device was powered off and that wouldn't affect the electronics of the device? Or am I just making stuff up that doesn't yet exist in the year 2011?
It's just an iPhone prototype. That's some James Bond stuff you're talking about there.
The repeat fiasco just boggles me. I've had mobile phones for about a decade, and I've never left (or had stolen) even a $50 phone or an iPhone anywhere, never mind a priceless prototype that you shouldn't risk falling into the hands of a competitor or a news/tabloid site. Also, I'd think this person would have learned vicariously from last year's incident to take extra precautions.
That's the part that really has me confused, too. I have never lost a phone either, and I've been pretty fricken drunk at various places from time to time. Maybe I would behave differently if I were trusted with a priceless prototype?
I guess if I ever apply for a job at Apple I could list it as a skill that I don't lose production or prototype phones!
Cartels?
Yeah, the Google and Samsung cartels.
The repeat fiasco just boggles me. I've had mobile phones for about a decade, and I've never left (or had stolen) even a $50 phone or an iPhone anywhere, never mind a priceless prototype that you shouldn't risk falling into the hands of a competitor or a news/tabloid site. Also, I'd think this person would have learned vicariously from last year's incident to take extra precautions.
It's actually making Apple look a little silly.
I never blame the staff... I blame the management.
Officers from the San Francisco Police Department have asked for permission to review the surveillance footage at a bar where an Apple employee allegedly left a prototype of the company's fifth-generation smartphone.
Am I the only one around here who feel very uncomfortable if the Police helps in an investigation where some drunk dork forgot a phone ?
I am pretty certain SFPD would not extend the same service to me, were I to forget my phone on TGIF's.
I though that their job was crime fighting - and AFAIK there has no crime been commited.
Am I the only one around here who feel very uncomfortable if the Police helps in an investigation where some drunk dork forgot a phone ?
I am pretty certain SFPD would not extend the same service to me, were I to forget my phone on TGIF's.
I though that their job was crime fighting - and AFAIK there has no crime been commited.
This has been covered a thousand times.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. Go back and read the thousand times this was covered with the iPhone 4 fiasco. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
This has been covered a thousand times.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. Go back and read the thousand times this was covered with the iPhone 4 fiasco. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
Call your local PD and inform them that you lost your car. Not that it was stolen. Be sure not to report it as stolen. Emphasize that you are not reporting it as stolen. Then request they come help you look for it and if possible you would like 3 or 4 detectives to assist. I'd be interested in hearing how that works out for you. Actually, let's keep it even closer to the actual event. Tell them you lost your very expensive phone at a bar.
This has been covered a thousand times.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. Go back and read the thousand times this was covered with the iPhone 4 fiasco. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
"...the phone likely IS stolen...." Likely? You base your argument on LIKELY???? So, is it, or is it not stolen under California law? Link?
Also, how much time do you have to return it before it is considered "stolen" versus the amount of time before it is considered "likely stolen"????
The phone was left somewhere, it wasn't stolen. How can you prove something to be stolen when there is no evidence of the phone anywhere?
IT WAS LOST.
First, your phone is not a valuable prototype phone. If your car was stolen, you wouldn't want the police to help you locate it? Especially if the car was a prototype worth millions?
Second, the phone likely IS stolen under CA law. If someone has the phone and did not return it to the authorities or rightful owner, then it is stolen.
First : if I were given a multimillion prototype, I would not go to a bar and get thrashed beyond belief and leave my multimillion$ prototype behind. Especially in light of the iPhone 4 fiasko. I have been drunk (even vey drunk) a few times in my life and never lost my (unvaluable according to you) phone.
Since Peter parker we all know, that with great power comes great responsibility, which our TGIF dork obviously chose to ignore.
2ndly am I really the only one who feels uncomfortable that SFPD assists private investigators to gain access to a flat and search it without a proper warrant ? I mean SFPD initially said it had no record of the visit to Calderón's home and some time later Lt. Dangerfield (SFPD's spokesperson) said that four SFPD officers accompanied two members Apple's private security force, but waited outside while the Apple employees conducted the search. How can this be legal ??????
Don't get me wrong I love my Apple product and I have every single one of them, but if their paramilitary security troops get cooperation from an official PD, I feel that some civic liberties and rights are being violated here. And these rights outweigh any commercial interests by one company. I always thought that the 'It is the law' was applicable to everyone.
"...the phone likely IS stolen...." Likely? You base your argument on LIKELY???? So, is it, or is it not stolen under California law? Link?
Also, how much time do you have to return it before it is considered "stolen" versus the amount of time before it is considered "likely stolen"????
The phone was left somewhere, it wasn't stolen. How can you prove something to be stolen when there is no evidence of the phone anywhere?
IT WAS LOST.
The link to the CA law has been shown somewhere. This has been covered in last year's fiasco too.
"Theft is the unlawful taking and carrying away of someone else's property."
http://www.california-criminal-lawyer.com/theft.html
If you lost a phone, and someone picks it up and takes it without making a reasonable attempt to find its owner, without turning it over to police, it is considered stolen. If it was just lost, it would be where it was left. As I understand it, it was not where it was left because the prototype's phone home software put it at a location other than where it was left.
Penal Code 485 PC -- California's law against appropriating (or misappropriating) lost property -- prohibits you keeping property that you find when there are clues identifying its true owner.1
http://www.shouselaw.com/appropriati...-property.html
The link to the CA law has been shown somewhere. This has been covered in last year's fiasco too.
"Theft is the unlawful taking and carrying away of someone else's property."
http://www.california-criminal-lawyer.com/theft.html
If you lost a phone, and someone picks it up and takes it without making a reasonable attempt to find its owner, without turning it over to police, it is considered stolen. If it was just lost, it would be where it was left. As I understand it, it was not where it was left because the prototype's phone home software put it at a location other than where it was left.
Penal Code 485 PC -- California's law against appropriating (or misappropriating) lost property -- prohibits you keeping property that you find when there are clues identifying its true owner.1
http://www.shouselaw.com/appropriati...-property.html
For all we know it was returned to Apple the day after the search, having been taken by a thoughtful citizen that found it in the bar and didn't feel comfortable leaving it with the bar's lost and found (AKA staff bargain bin). It certainly hasn't resulted in pictures or details being leaked on to the internet, something we might expect if it was still in the wild (if it is still out there, perhaps it is very well camouflaged and so not recognizable as a prototype).
Regardless, what we do know, is that Apple did not report as stolen the night of the search (we don't even know how soon the search occurred after it was lost), yet was able to gain the assistance of the SFPD in looking for it. The SFPD says this is not unusual in order to ensure the safety of all parties involved. Yet, the officers involved intentionally kept it off the books at Apple's request and did not assist in the actual search of the home, bringing into question how effective they would have been in ensuring anyone's safety, a key reason for them being there in the first place.
Yet, the officers involved intentionally kept it off the books at Apple's request and did not assist in the actual search of the home, bringing into question how effective they would have been in ensuring anyone's safety, a key reason for them being there in the first place.
And the access of the Apple into that other dude's flat does not constitute an unlawful entry and/or impersonating sth you are not ?
And the access of the Apple into that other dude's flat does not constitute an unlawful entry and/or impersonating sth you are not ?
I won't make assumptions just yet. Yes, Calderon claims the people he allowed to search his home were introduced as SFPD and that there were threats. If we take him at his word, then that raises questions about of how free and voluntary the search was. However, if the Apple employees were not introduced as police or if they made it clear who they were, then Sergio gave permission and the search was unquestionably legal.
All we have is Sergio word for what took place that night. Apple hasn't commented and the SFPD has done their best to make a mess of their statements. Personally, there is nothing yet that has been presented to call into question Sergio's statements. Nothing factual anyway. He is the only party that has made clear and complete comments that have not been proven to be false. SFPD cannot claim that record in this case since their story has changed and at best has been made unreliable because they not only released contradictory statements but their most up to date statements show that their own policy was broken by not recording the event, and their intention of assisting to ensure safety was at best made useless by remaining outside during the search.
http://www.collinsamerica.com/page4/page4.html
Seems odd that they would have extreme leves of security to even be in the same room as a prototype device - then allow soeone to wander around town with said device.
Lt. Troy Dangerfield, a spokesman for SFPD, said he wasn't aware that investigators had gone to the bar or were looking for the videos. But he said that since Apple had not filed a police report, he was sure that there was no criminal investigation connected to the missing device. "In order for there to be a crime, you need a victim," Dangerfield said. He concluded that the request by police for the surveillance footage was likely part of the internal review launched this month by department officials into how police assisted Apple in a search of a home on July 24.
Doesn't seem like a terribly confusing concept.
Even the police cite that there is no crime, as far as they are concerned and believe their actions of their dept requires a formal investigation. But, by all means, let's assume Sergio is a lying thief (a lack of evidence simply being another inconvenience like the lack of a victim).
But, by all means, let's assume Sergio is a lying thief (a lack of evidence simply being another inconvenience like the lack of a victim).
What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ? Quite frankly if I were to find such [ar any] thing for that matter, I would for sure hand it in to the Police. Whether I would do this whilst staggering home drunk from a bar remains to be seen. Probably next day or so.
Having said that if the iPhone5 was disguised as an iPhone4, how was he supposed to tell the difference ? And is the regular lost and found open outside office hours in SF, cause it most certaily aint in Brussels....
Calderon had the phone, and Apple retrieved it during a search he consented to.
The police simply threatened to come back with a search warrant if he didn't consent, and allowed him to assume they were all cops without necessarily misrepresenting anything. After finding the phone, one guy identifies the other as an Apple employee, and tells Calderson that no charges for possessing stolen property will be filed if they come to an agreement. Calderon agrees to surrender the phone, and not mention it or any agreement with Apple publicly. Classic Mutt and Jeff.
Now Calderon is just pissed that he lost the phone, and wants to accuse the police of doing something improper. But there may be nothing wrong with how they helped an owner of lost or stolen property, and someone in possession of it, come to an agreement that eliminates all the owner's concerns. No one can know for sure what happened in the house; Apple's not talking, and no one else but Calderson was there. The police just want to see the bar's security images to check for any evidence of a crime being committed, as part of an investigation that Calderon's complaints initiated.