Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54

Thread: iPhone 4

  1. #1
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Assistant Recruiter

    [AK]Clay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,004

    iPhone 4

    In case you're been living under a rock, the iPhone 4 got leaked out.

    http://gizmodo.com/5520164/this-is-apples-next-iphone


    Gizmodo bought the phone off the guy who found it, called Apple and said "Hey, I've got your phone". Apple blew them off. So he published his video on it.

    Apple freaks out, and basically has the cops raid this guys house like he's some kind of violent criminal - complete with bashed in door. Here's the best, (and most amusing) commentary on the whole thing - that pretty much sums up exactly my thoughts.

    http://www.theipadfan.com/evil-apple...ting-thoughts/

  2. #2
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Chief Operations Officer


    "This place is like someone's memory of a town, and the memory is fading. "
    [AK]Squidly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Burlington, NJ
    Posts
    10,621
    Your tale is factually deficient on several important counts.
    The sun has fallen down
    And the billboards are all leering
    And the flags are all dead at the top of their poles.

  3. #3
    Accept no substitutes. [AK]Bribo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Posts
    8,298
    It's not like Apple was kicking the doors down. It was a police task for created by the State of California specifically created to address computer crimes. Now, that task force may have overstepped their bounds (although they did have a search warrant).

    The real issue is whether Jason Chen and Gizmodo are considered journalists and if they are are they covered by the Privacy Protection Act. It all depends if Jason Chen and Gizmodo knew that the phone was stolen and the fact they paid $5000 for it.

    There's a reason why competing website Engadget said "No thanks!" when they were offered it first.

    But to paint Apple as the bad guy here I think is a bit disingenuous and ill-informed.
    [AK]Bribo

    If you were a zombie and I had to kill you, I'd feel sad.

  4. #4
    Moderator

    August Knights
    Chief Recruiter

    [AK]Abaddon's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    2,496
    Apple called the police and told them a crime had been committed ... after the phone was returned to them. Whatever transpired afterwards was because of that decision.
    [AK]Abaddon


  5. #5
    Lurking Moar Slaughter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    4,389
    The guy who found the phone never called anyone at Apple, he shopped the phone around. His friend who had been at the bar with him is the only one that called Apple.
    lol, <3

    Retired EQ, WoW Player.

  6. #6
    Moderator

    August Knights
    Chief Recruiter

    [AK]Abaddon's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    2,496
    If I recall correctly, Gizmodo also called Apple to tell them that they had the phone.
    [AK]Abaddon


  7. #7
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Assistant Recruiter

    [AK]Clay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by [AK]Abaddon View Post
    If I recall correctly, Gizmodo also called Apple to tell them that they had the phone.
    That is how I heard it. I expect Gizmodo's goal was Apple would claim it , and so confirm it was the real deal. Giving Gizmodo a great scoop with a few exterior photos of the confirmed Gen 4 phone. They wanted Apple to claim it. Instead, Apple mishandled this in every way imaginable, and now look like complete jerks. The cops look in their pocket - my nieghbor lost his phone a month ago in a bar - very similar circumstances. Noboby busted doors down arrested anyone, or siezed business assets to get him his phone back. If it was returned, imagine the reaction if he called 911 after it was returned. No body broke into Apple and stole this phone.

    As to media protection - if Gizmodo is incorporated, case closed. Though I find that whole clause to be disturbing - why is a citizen not afforded the same rights as the media?

  8. #8
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Chief Operations Officer


    "This place is like someone's memory of a town, and the memory is fading. "
    [AK]Squidly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Burlington, NJ
    Posts
    10,621
    They called Apple after they bought the device, took it apart and ran the story.

    You guys need to get your facts straight, both about what happened and what constitutes theft in California. I know it's vogue to paint Apple as the no-fun gestapo these days, but they're the victims in this case. When you report a crime, the police get involved. When you are a party to a crime, you risk having the police show up at your door in a bad mood. None of this is a shock.

    I like this quote from Jason Calacanis:

    "You see a silver Mercedes parked in front of your house. There are keys in it. You get in the car and see that it has a bunch of new features that the standard Mercedes you drive lacks. Oh, and it belongs to someone named Dieter Zetsche. You take the car and drive it home, then call automotive magazines and offer to sell this prototype you found, and know the owner of, for 10x the street value of the car (say, $1M). What are you now? Yes, a criminal! Whether the item is worth $600 or $60,000 is not relevant."

    The media thing is irrelevant. This isn't about protecting sources - this is about knowingly purchasing (aka fencing) stolen goods.
    The sun has fallen down
    And the billboards are all leering
    And the flags are all dead at the top of their poles.

  9. #9
    Moderator

    August Knights
    Chief Recruiter

    [AK]Abaddon's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    2,496
    Yeah, I realize that in California lost property is considered stolen if the finder does not attempt to return it to the proper owner.

    There are a couple of factors weighing against that being the case here:

    1) The initial finder apparently called Apple and could not find anyone who wanted to take the phone.

    2) Gizmodo called Apple and asked if they wanted the phone back (admittedly with the codicil that Apple had to draft a letter stating it was Apple's property).

    Main issue is this ... if your shiny new prototype is left in a public place, seems to me it's a free-for-all as far as media coverage goes. There's no NDA, no formal notice that this is a confidential piece of hardware, and no one broke into Apple to steal it. It's just an unusual iPhone that someone unfortunately chose to leave on a bar stool.

    But ... then we have the $5,000 payment. Unless the iPhone is ruled stolen, I think that would be considered a payment to a source for a news story. If the iPhone is ruled stolen, it's payment for stolen goods.

    I'm not sure how that will wash out.
    [AK]Abaddon


  10. #10
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Assistant Recruiter

    [AK]Clay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,004
    Why so jumpy? The facts I'm going on are straight from Gizmodo's article, published before the Meth lab law enforcement treatment ever happened. And repeated in the video that's linked. Calls and pictures are timestamped, if the claims are bogus, I'd like to know it. Do you have an alternate timeline to link?

    Oh, and for the record, IMHO Apple transfered ownership when it denied it was thier phone, which is probably why they didn't dissassemble until then.

  11. #11
    Accept no substitutes. [AK]Bribo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Posts
    8,298
    Here's a full time line with all the facts as we know them:

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/19459..._timeline.html

    My question is why didn't he just call the dude who owned the phone? He had turned it on and identified him through the Facebook app. He could have sent him an email or left him a message ("I have your phone."). It's obvious he did very little to get the phone back to its rightful owner. I think the State of California is agreeing with this and hence the investigation.
    Last edited by [AK]Bribo; 04-30-2010 at 02:45 PM.
    [AK]Bribo

    If you were a zombie and I had to kill you, I'd feel sad.

  12. #12
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Assistant Recruiter

    [AK]Clay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by [AK]Squidly View Post
    They called Apple after they bought the device, took it apart and ran the story.

    You guys need to get your facts straight, both about what happened and what constitutes theft in California. I know it's vogue to paint Apple as the no-fun gestapo these days, but they're the victims in this case. When you report a crime, the police get involved. When you are a party to a crime, you risk having the police show up at your door in a bad mood. None of this is a shock.

    I like this quote from Jason Calacanis:

    "You see a silver Mercedes parked in front of your house. There are keys in it. You get in the car and see that it has a bunch of new features that the standard Mercedes you drive lacks. Oh, and it belongs to someone named Dieter Zetsche. You take the car and drive it home, then call automotive magazines and offer to sell this prototype you found, and know the owner of, for 10x the street value of the car (say, $1M). What are you now? Yes, a criminal! Whether the item is worth $600 or $60,000 is not relevant."

    The media thing is irrelevant. This isn't about protecting sources - this is about knowingly purchasing (aka fencing) stolen goods.
    That's not a very compelling analogy. A pocket electronic device abandoned in a public bar is nothing like an automobile parked outside with the keys still in it. No one could reasonably expect a person's behavior towards the two settings to be similar. As to stolen goods, not stolen if Apple denies ownership. The guy who found the phone did contact Apple, he did something. Should he also have contacted the individual (Powell)? You bet! But legal obligation to do so is deniable - he contacted Apple who are the true owners. In any event, not Gizmodo's problem. And they did call Powell.

    The timeline is pretty consistent with everything I heard. So before admonishing folks for not having their facts straight, what facts aren't straight? And no, if you're planning on going there, I don't consider hiding behind "it was the police, not us, who broke down the door" to be valid. That whole event is so wrong on so many levels it's just creepy.

    I'm sure they have good lawyers - and they're going to need them. Because I bet there are plenty of sharks hoping to make their name pro-bono on Gizmodo's behalf on this mess. In the end, this will blow over - but Apple looks like a bunch of jackasses right now.

  13. #13
    August Knights
    Undersecretary of War


    Long Live Reaganomics!
    [AK]Hylander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Bethlehem, PA
    Posts
    5,497
    Just as an FYI - They had an EFF Lawyer on PCMag After Hours podcast discussing the issue. You at least get one sides legal viewpoint on the issue.

    http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect....h.04.28.10.mp3
    "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries." - Winston Churchill

    ---
    Hustedia.com | Husted Visuals | The Racing Historian


  14. #14
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Chief Operations Officer


    "This place is like someone's memory of a town, and the memory is fading. "
    [AK]Squidly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Burlington, NJ
    Posts
    10,621
    Gizmodo, EFF, and Jon Stewart are not the sources you should rely on for the truth of this story. The finder had the name of the owner, but didn't attempt to contact him. He in fact never called Apple. A friend offered to call Applecare, but didn't (Source: Wired)

    Someone behaved like douchebags here, but it wasn't Apple. It was the ass who found the phone and kept it - later selling it, and Gizmodo for purchasing an item of questionable provenance as well as publicizing the name of the engineer.

    Worth reading.
    http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gi...ototype_iphone

    Also worth noting that Gizmodo's account of what happened contradicts the story of the finder.
    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-finder/

    There's a lot of CYA going on right now.
    The sun has fallen down
    And the billboards are all leering
    And the flags are all dead at the top of their poles.

  15. #15
    Administrator
    August Knights
    Assistant Recruiter

    [AK]Clay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,004
    My sympathy's for the "finder" are more tempered. And his legal council needs to learn to stop showboating and STFU, because he's making statements that already are painting his client into knowing he did wrong. The guy's story is too convenient IMHO. A mysterious person finds the phone, hands it to our "finder", and then leaves. A "friend" is the one who calls Apple to return the phone. All stories that wash the "finder" and making it harder to prove/disprove his story. Not really inconsistent with Gizmodo's recalling of the tale though.

Similar Threads

  1. iPhone 5!
    By [AK]Clay in forum Smartphones
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-21-2011, 03:32 AM
  2. FPS for iPhone/itouch
    By [AK]Choozoo in forum General Gaming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-14-2009, 03:07 PM
  3. iPhone 3G
    By [AK]Clay in forum Smartphones
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 07-14-2009, 06:35 PM
  4. iPhone
    By [AK]Squidly in forum August Knights Round Table
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-07-2007, 06:51 AM
  5. iPhone
    By [AK]Palooka in forum August Knights Round Table
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-10-2007, 09:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •