What? Why would someone be put in jail because they paid for a phone that was a prototype? I think its just Verizons bad if they screwed up (If thats what REALLY happened).
They didn't pay for the prototype. They paid for a regular iPhone.
Obviously this will be taken down as stolen merchandise once Apple gets wind of it.
It was taken down yesterday. Likely not stolen merchandise but fraud. Apple could just contact eBay and tell them that the seller is lying and eBay would cut it. Especially with risk that highest bidder is in on it and would claim they paid but never got phone and try to get a huge refunds from eBay.
Verizon got the phone form Apple, Verizon shipped the phone to this person. As far as I see it, it's HIS. he's the owner of it. He paid for it legally. It wasn't found in a Bar or something. This is not even close to how it was last time. That was completely different situation.
Someone is saying above that the owner took it down. I'd bet you Apple offered this person money for it. It was after all Apples, or maybe even Foxconn's Mistake. Rather then going up against Apples legal team which would be costly, hand over the phone and get a Reward and keep quite about it. I think that's what ended up happening. I'm sure a new phone was also thrown in.
The seller should have listed the auction for only 24 hours; they still would have made a pile of money, and Apple would not have had time to pressure eBay to stop the auction.
The seller should have listed the auction for only 24 hours; they still would have made a pile of money, and Apple would not have had time to pressure eBay to stop the auction.
No he should of went to the DarkNet, there are a few underground auction sites that he could have listed it on, he wouldn't have gotten a hundred G's for it but definitely more then what he is going to make on it now. Trying to sell something like this on eBay is almost the same as going to a mall with a bullhorn, and shouting into the air that you have cocaine for sale, retarded. Even if he acquired the phone because of an accident, any intelligent person would know that trying to sell it in a public arena would not be the smartest course of action. $100,000, where did he even come up with that number, who would want it for that, maybe $2,000 at the most.
For stealing both property and intellectual property.
Or, as written several times by several people in this thread, not. Depending on local law. You're not always big on the concept of "law is different in different places" it seems, TS...
Or, as written several times by several people in this thread, not. Depending on local law. You’re not always big on the concept of "law is different in different places" it seems, TS...
Correct. Apple's board should be put in prison for stealing the idea of a tablet from Star Trek.* /s
Obviously, "theft" is a very complicated definition, because it hinges*** on the definition of "property", which even American lawmakers don't always agree** on. In a world where anything you receive by mail is YOUR PROPERTY, this guy stole nothing. No theft if it's his.
It's his. HIS, but only if the laws in his location state that anything you receive by mail is YOUR PROPERTY.
I hope it's clear enough. I do NOT know if his situation is such, but I know it is a possibility. Discounting it and calling him a thief just because you disagree with that possibility? Seriously? I often agree with your comments, but I'll have to disagree this time.
In Massachusetts, you are entitled to keep, without further obligation, merchandise delivered to you which you did not order. This rule applies whether the merchandise was mailed to you, or delivered by some other method.
Massachusetts is not North Dakota or Pakistan, it's in America. (Sorry, North Dakotans, just kidding).
With that, I wish you a great evening (or probably afternoon in sunny America)!
***No theft in a world where no property rights exist, for example.
**In the same interesting line, I read a very nice argument about "acceptable violence". The example went this way: Imagine a guy A who just punched another one B and took an apple from B. A and B are both adult males of the same general strength. Is it acceptable violence? Let's add an element to the story. It so happens that B had stolen the apple from A's kid daughter. Is it acceptable violence? This example just goes to show that context is essential to understanding a story. Acceptable violence depends on context, property depends on context, theft depends on context.
*Also for stealing people's money by manufacturing a phone that can be easily bent by a normal guy and teenagers in stores. Theft is such a risky term to define. (In case it's not clear, BendGate is ridiculous, but just pointing out how, if you consider a phone should not be bendable by a human, Apple is guilty of selling phones that do not meet such a standard, hence scamming people, which is a kind of theft. It all depends on your assumptions. Most people would agree on 'normal use' for a phone not including trying to bend it, and at least a few law-makers agree on 'normal property' for something you're sent by a megacorp being it belongs to you now.).
At least use a comparison that is in any way relevant.
It’s pretty clear. Prototypes are the sole property of Apple. Theft would be to take said prototypes therefrom without the permission thereof.
The comparison is relevant in that it demonstrates you can actually see anything as "theft" if your assumptions, as yours on this, are wrong. I'm not saying my assumptions are right, mind you, just that there are other options out there.
As for "it's pretty clear", obviously it's not clear at all, since there is "debate". You also clearly ignored the very undeniable quote I made of the State of Massachusetts rule about mail. Could it be you don't appreciate being proven wrong? Don't worry, so do I, it's a human feeling
What really astonishes me is how you can just deny reality because it doesn't suit you, where reality is defined as "some people might actually think different and not be automatically wrong". Also, "think different" is kind of an Apple slogan, just for the record.
With that, I'll leave you enjoy your day and be happy!
Your assumption about my “assumption” is wrong. Try again.
As for "it's pretty clear", obviously it's not clear at all, since there is "debate".
Okay. Try to steal something from me and mail it to yourself, claiming immunity. We’ll see how that goes.
You also clearly ignored the very undeniable quote I made of the State of Massachusetts rule about mail.
Because it’s completely irrelevant, referring only to third parties.
Don't worry, so do I, it's a human feeling
That’s obvious; you refuse to acknowledge that stealing something from someone is theft! How pathetic are you?
I’m “sorry” that reality–in which when you steal something from someone, that makes it theft–doesn’t suit you. That’s your problem, unfortunately. Get over it soon.
Comments
They didn't pay for the prototype. They paid for a regular iPhone.
They didn't pay for the prototype. They paid for a regular iPhone.
Which may or may not mean they now own a prototype depending on local law.
It was taken down yesterday. Likely not stolen merchandise but fraud. Apple could just contact eBay and tell them that the seller is lying and eBay would cut it. Especially with risk that highest bidder is in on it and would claim they paid but never got phone and try to get a huge refunds from eBay.
Probably because of a call from the FBI.
For stealing both property and intellectual property.
Someone is saying above that the owner took it down. I'd bet you Apple offered this person money for it. It was after all Apples, or maybe even Foxconn's Mistake. Rather then going up against Apples legal team which would be costly, hand over the phone and get a Reward and keep quite about it. I think that's what ended up happening. I'm sure a new phone was also thrown in.
The seller should have listed the auction for only 24 hours; they still would have made a pile of money, and Apple would not have had time to pressure eBay to stop the auction.
No he should of went to the DarkNet, there are a few underground auction sites that he could have listed it on, he wouldn't have gotten a hundred G's for it but definitely more then what he is going to make on it now. Trying to sell something like this on eBay is almost the same as going to a mall with a bullhorn, and shouting into the air that you have cocaine for sale, retarded. Even if he acquired the phone because of an accident, any intelligent person would know that trying to sell it in a public arena would not be the smartest course of action. $100,000, where did he even come up with that number, who would want it for that, maybe $2,000 at the most.
For stealing both property and intellectual property.
Or, as written several times by several people in this thread, not. Depending on local law. You're not always big on the concept of "law is different in different places" it seems, TS...
Theft is the same everywhere.
Theft is the same everywhere.
Correct. Apple's board should be put in prison for stealing the idea of a tablet from Star Trek.* /s
Obviously, "theft" is a very complicated definition, because it hinges*** on the definition of "property", which even American lawmakers don't always agree** on. In a world where anything you receive by mail is YOUR PROPERTY, this guy stole nothing. No theft if it's his.
It's his. HIS, but only if the laws in his location state that anything you receive by mail is YOUR PROPERTY.
I hope it's clear enough. I do NOT know if his situation is such, but I know it is a possibility. Discounting it and calling him a thief just because you disagree with that possibility? Seriously? I often agree with your comments, but I'll have to disagree this time.
Just to hammer my point down, a quote from a US government site: http://www.mass.gov/ago/consumer-resources/consumer-information/retail-rights/mail-order-and-unsolicited-merchandise.html ;
Unsolicited Merchandise
In Massachusetts, you are entitled to keep, without further obligation, merchandise delivered to you which you did not order. This rule applies whether the merchandise was mailed to you, or delivered by some other method.
Massachusetts is not North Dakota or Pakistan, it's in America. (Sorry, North Dakotans, just kidding).
With that, I wish you a great evening (or probably afternoon in sunny America)!
***No theft in a world where no property rights exist, for example.
**In the same interesting line, I read a very nice argument about "acceptable violence". The example went this way: Imagine a guy A who just punched another one B and took an apple from B. A and B are both adult males of the same general strength. Is it acceptable violence? Let's add an element to the story. It so happens that B had stolen the apple from A's kid daughter. Is it acceptable violence? This example just goes to show that context is essential to understanding a story. Acceptable violence depends on context, property depends on context, theft depends on context.
*Also for stealing people's money by manufacturing a phone that can be easily bent by a normal guy and teenagers in stores. Theft is such a risky term to define. (In case it's not clear, BendGate is ridiculous, but just pointing out how, if you consider a phone should not be bendable by a human, Apple is guilty of selling phones that do not meet such a standard, hence scamming people, which is a kind of theft. It all depends on your assumptions. Most people would agree on 'normal use' for a phone not including trying to bend it, and at least a few law-makers agree on 'normal property' for something you're sent by a megacorp being it belongs to you now.).
At least use a comparison that is in any way relevant.
I’ll keep that in mind the next time I steal something. I’ll just mail it to myself, thus making it mine and not stolen¡
It’s pretty clear. Prototypes are the sole property of Apple. Theft would be to take said prototypes therefrom without the permission thereof.
I guess people are hook in to Apple iPhone 6 thats why it reaches a hundred
At least use a comparison that is in any way relevant.
It’s pretty clear. Prototypes are the sole property of Apple. Theft would be to take said prototypes therefrom without the permission thereof.
The comparison is relevant in that it demonstrates you can actually see anything as "theft" if your assumptions, as yours on this, are wrong. I'm not saying my assumptions are right, mind you, just that there are other options out there.
As for "it's pretty clear", obviously it's not clear at all, since there is "debate". You also clearly ignored the very undeniable quote I made of the State of Massachusetts rule about mail. Could it be you don't appreciate being proven wrong? Don't worry, so do I, it's a human feeling
What really astonishes me is how you can just deny reality because it doesn't suit you, where reality is defined as "some people might actually think different and not be automatically wrong". Also, "think different" is kind of an Apple slogan, just for the record.
With that, I'll leave you enjoy your day and be happy!
Your assumption about my “assumption” is wrong. Try again.
Okay. Try to steal something from me and mail it to yourself, claiming immunity. We’ll see how that goes.
Because it’s completely irrelevant, referring only to third parties.
That’s obvious; you refuse to acknowledge that stealing something from someone is theft! How pathetic are you?
I’m “sorry” that reality–in which when you steal something from someone, that makes it theft–doesn’t suit you. That’s your problem, unfortunately. Get over it soon.
How pathetic are you?
Well well, see who's getting down to ad hominem now. Point made I guess.
Well well, see who's getting down to ad hominem now. Point made I guess.
Enjoy your delusions, because that’s all they are. You’ve no refutation; I was never wrong.