Gizmodo editor's apt. searched and computers seized over iPhone prototype

[DisgruntledVirus]

So, let me put a scenario to you "it's not theft, he 'found' it" people.

You're at a bar and you find an iPhone. It's in a case, so there's no reason to believe that it is a prototype. Would you 1. take it home or 2. hand it into the bartender?

If you chose #1, then you're at least an asshole and more than likely a thief. If you find lost property in a public establishment, then the easiest and most effective way to get the property back to the owner is to GIVE IT TO PROPRIETOR OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. That way, when the owner realizes that they lost their property they can retrace their steps and call all the places they recently visited and then go and pick up their property from said proprietor. That's what a non-asshole/thief does in these situations.

In this case, the guy who found the phone did not immediately hand over the lost phone to the bar, but started to play with it [1]. Then he TOOK THE PHONE away from the place it was lost, thereby making it impossible for the owner/loser to trace his steps back to the bar and retrieve it [2]. Then, he did not try to contact the dude who lost it [3]. Then he half-assedly tried to return it apple by calling the customer service line at apple (like the monkeys manning the phones would believe him or know what to do) [4]. Then he sold it for $5,000 [5]!

You think that this is ethical and should be legal? If so, you have no moral compass. The simple, ethical thing to have done was just hand it into the bartender/bouncer/hostess.

I definitely agree there.

Unfortunately, that is not what happened. I agree that Gizmodo was in the wrong, but legally they might be able to get out from being found guilty in court depending on the case, how it's presented, the lawyers, and jury (if one is involved).

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Well I'm not defending the finder, just saying there's a psychological aspect to it for the reasons people do what they do[that everyone is inherently selfish]. Personally I think he deserves to go to jail for exploiting the situation to make $5k. But it's not him I'm defending, it's the Gizmodo editor... he also did it for selfish reasons but he's sorta doing his job chasing a big scoop. He definitely went overboard[we all can't always be clear headed about these things when they present themselves] but I can't completely fault him for it either and I don't think he deserve to serve jail time because of the circumstances surrounding the event, especially with the web of lies from Apple at the time. If he paid 5k because he wanted it for himself, there wouldn't even be a debate. That's why if anything, I think it's fair game for Apple to go after Gizmodo the tech site through civil channels and not Jason Chen the "journalist" through criminal charges... last thing we need is another persn locked up for stupid reasons at the expense of tax dollars. That's the best way I can state my case. I'm starting to think I'm just repeating myself so I'm done after this.

Well stated.

 

[shortylickens]

My prediction: 2 years informal probation. This isn't the crime of the century, folks.

Obviously you know nothing of Apples business. The only reason they made a big stink about it is this was already public. If they had found him and nobody else knew about it..........
:ninja:

 

[NuroMancer]

So when you lose your iPhone I call APPLE, and not YOU? When you lose your Car, and I find it, I don't call you to get it back to you I call the Manufacturer?

That's the only thing I don't get. They said they called APPLE, the maker of the phone, not the owner of it. The owner being the one who actually lost it. And think that means they tried to return it?

Does that bug anyone else?

I agree,

So if I lost my 3Gs your going to call apple?

 

[Arkaign]

I agree,

So if I lost my 3Gs your going to call apple?

Huh? That's not even remotely the same thing. Prototypes, engineering samples, and similar items are invariably (or at least 99.999999%) fully owned by the corporation that pays for the development of them. There may be a loaner period to reviewers, engineers, testers, and so on, but unless you get a document saying that you're the owner, the product in question is still fully owned by the corporation.

A product that you purchased yourself is utterly different than what we're talking about here.

I'm not making much of a jugdement either way about this overall situation, but :

Prototype device != Privately Purchased Final Product.

 

[Anonemous]

http://gizmodo.com/5525728/63-ways-steve-jobs-could-strike-back#viewcomments