new iphone "leaked"

[DrDawkinstein]

The problem I see is that they know exactly who it belongs to. Are you entitled to take someone's property just becuase they misplaced it? It definitely sounds like a decent case could be made for theft. I'm not the least bit familiar with protections allowed for journalists, but theft couldn't possibly be one of them, could it?

 

according to all accounts, no one stole anything. the guy from Apple left it on the bar. Apparently, the people who found it tried calling Apple, but Apple didnt believe them. So they called Gizmodo.

 

now Apple is pissed. tough ****.

[Metal Man]

I am still waiting to find out what happens to this Software Engineer who lost the phone to begin with.

 

I work as an engineer in a Classified environment and if I pulled something stupid like this I would definitely get fired and/or sued, and maybe even charged criminally.

 

I can't imagine making the decision to bring sensitive information out into the bar with me while I drink. I wouldn't say I am rooting for the kid to get into some trouble but I guess I will be a little annoyed if this goes completely unpunished.

[DrDawkinstein]

I am still waiting to find out what happens to this Software Engineer who lost the phone to begin with.

 

I work as an engineer in a Classified environment and if I pulled something stupid like this I would definitely get fired and/or sued, and maybe even charged criminally.

 

I can't imagine making the decision to bring sensitive information out into the bar with me while I drink. I wouldn't say I am rooting for the kid to get into some trouble but I guess I will be a little annoyed if this goes completely unpunished.

 

except you do not know the conditions which Apples developers are hired under. or the conditions of this project.

 

while security remains a top priority, it has been well documented that Apple's engineers (AND executives) often use unreleased products in public environments. before the original iPhone was launched, pics surfaced all over the net of Apple employees using them in coffeeshops, restaurants, book stores, etc.

 

there HAS to be some real world usage before they go live.

 

understanding all of that, Apple also has to understand the risks that come along with it.

 

IMO, the kid should not be punished. not from what we've seen so far. only if he himself took the prototype out of the office without permission (but i highly doubt that is the case).

[Metal Man]

except you do not know the conditions which Apples developers are hired under. or the conditions of this project.

 

while security remains a top priority, it has been well documented that Apple's engineers (AND executives) often use unreleased products in public environments. before the original iPhone was launched, pics surfaced all over the net of Apple employees using them in coffeeshops, restaurants, book stores, etc.

 

there HAS to be some real world usage before they go live.

 

understanding all of that, Apple also has to understand the risks that come along with it.

 

IMO, the kid should not be punished. not from what we've seen so far. only if he himself took the prototype out of the office without permission (but i highly doubt that is the case).

 

Depends on what kind of confidentiality agreements he signed.

 

In any case I don't disagree that they might have expected some kind of security leaks to happen "accidently", but you have to admit this shows some poor judgement, which is in many cases is a fireable offense.

[shrader]

Yes, the guy's picture was posted -- and again, it was after the device was already analyzed.

 

If you lose something, it's not "stolen property." You lost it. If you're lucky, someone returns it to you. If you're not lucky, you lost it.

 

Maybe in the legal sense it isn't theft, but it's downright dirty. Whoever took it knew exactly who it belonged to and chose to make some cash off of it. I don't see how that is ok.

 

And why is it scary if bloggers are given the same rights as journalists? If you're talking about you making up your own blog for fun, then sure. But this guy is a paid blogger -- his parent company pays him to find news on electronic gadgets. What he did was reporting and journalism.

 

You pretty much got my point. If one gets it, they all get it. Maybe scary isn't the right word, but I cringe at the thought of these thousands of wannabe writers out there all of a sudden thinking they're important.

[DrDawkinstein]

Maybe in the legal sense it isn't theft, but it's downright dirty. Whoever took it knew exactly who it belonged to and chose to make some cash off of it. I don't see how that is ok.

 

 

 

You pretty much got my point. If one gets it, they all get it. Maybe scary isn't the right word, but I cringe at the thought of these thousands of wannabe writers out there all of a sudden thinking they're important.

 

thats not necessarily true. SOME, not all, bloggers are currently able to get press credentials for all types of events.

 

not much different than if i wanted to print out a newsletter. just because i do, doesnt make me a credentialed and protected journalist. but i am technically a journalist.

 

there can always be criteria put in place.

[Fezmid]

You pretty much got my point. If one gets it, they all get it. Maybe scary isn't the right word, but I cringe at the thought of these thousands of wannabe writers out there all of a sudden thinking they're important.

So someone being PAID to do research and publish it on a website should be treated the same as someone who just throws random thoughts on a webpage....?

 

Whoever took it knew exactly who it belonged to and chose to make some cash off of it. I don't see how that is ok.

 

If you read the thread, you'll see that the person who found it DID try contacting Apple first. I'm not sure if that's true or not, but if it is, does that change your mind?

[Canadian Bills Fan]

Uh Oh

[shrader]

So someone being PAID to do research and publish it on a website should be treated the same as someone who just throws random thoughts on a webpage....?

 

I know people who do exactly that and yes, many of them do deserve to be treated just the same as the guy posting something from him mom's basement. DrDank is right on about how criteria can be established, I just don't have the slightest clue how they go about it.

 

If you read the thread, you'll see that the person who found it DID try contacting Apple first. I'm not sure if that's true or not, but if it is, does that change your mind?

 

If they put in a reasonable effort, sure, but I just don't buy it. I wish I could remember where I saw the pictures of the guy, but the whole thing seems fishy to me. Is the person taking the pictures the same person who claimed the phone after he left it?

[Fezmid]

If they put in a reasonable effort, sure, but I just don't buy it. I wish I could remember where I saw the pictures of the guy, but the whole thing seems fishy to me. Is the person taking the pictures the same person who claimed the phone after he left it?

 

I'm not sure I follow... Some guy found the phone at a bar in California. Tried calling Apple, they blew him off. He called Gizmodo, who paid him $5k for the phone. Guy ships phone to Gizmodo editor who takes it apart and takes pictures, writing information about the new phone on the blog site. Cops break down the door into Gizmodo editor's house and seize all of his stuff, despite being told he's a journalist.

 

I think the state of California is about to become a bit poorer, but that's just my guess...

[Dante]

Yes, the guy's picture was posted -- and again, it was after the device was already analyzed.

 

If you lose something, it's not "stolen property." You lost it. If you're lucky, someone returns it to you. If you're not lucky, you lost it.

 

And why is it scary if bloggers are given the same rights as journalists? If you're talking about you making up your own blog for fun, then sure. But this guy is a paid blogger -- his parent company pays him to find news on electronic gadgets. What he did was reporting and journalism.

Exactly. WTF makes them so special? Most of them are biased shills anyway.

[shrader]

I'm not sure I follow... Some guy found the phone at a bar in California. Tried calling Apple, they blew him off. He called Gizmodo, who paid him $5k for the phone. Guy ships phone to Gizmodo editor who takes it apart and takes pictures, writing information about the new phone on the blog site. Cops break down the door into Gizmodo editor's house and seize all of his stuff, despite being told he's a journalist.

 

I think the state of California is about to become a bit poorer, but that's just my guess...

 

I'm just wondering just how much of an effort was made to return it. I'm guessing not much.

 

The big question in my mind though is what exactly are journalists entitled to do? Does that journalist label give them a free pass to take apart and spill the details of a product that they know is not theirs? It doesn't seem right to me.

 

Also, is it the state on the hook or the judge who signed off on the warrant?

[Fezmid]

I'm just wondering just how much of an effort was made to return it. I'm guessing not much.

 

The big question in my mind though is what exactly are journalists entitled to do? Does that journalist label give them a free pass to take apart and spill the details of a product that they know is not theirs? It doesn't seem right to me.

 

Also, is it the state on the hook or the judge who signed off on the warrant?

You normally sue the party with the most money... I guess that would be the judge.

[Dan]

I'm just wondering just how much of an effort was made to return it. I'm guessing not much.

 

The big question in my mind though is what exactly are journalists entitled to do? Does that journalist label give them a free pass to take apart and spill the details of a product that they know is not theirs? It doesn't seem right to me.

 

Also, is it the state on the hook or the judge who signed off on the warrant?

By all accounts, they returned the phone to Apple. So, I'd say they made a pretty good effort to return it. Let's not forget that they paid $5,000 for something they were told was the new iPhone. Their first order of business was to confirm that it was, indeed, a new iPhone. They could have been the victims of a scam, just as easily.

 

I just don't see how anyone can blame the Gizmo people. It's their job to do research and get the latest scoop on new technology.

 

If you're a reporter for the AP and someone calls you with a scoop about a senate scandal. The reporter does research to confirm it; then prints a nice big story that he/she broke. He/she doesn't go to the Senator and apoligize for hearing this scandalous informaton and nicely give back the documents that prove they were doing something bad. So, why is this situation any different?

 

A reporter got one of the hottest scoops of the year; researched it; then reported it to the world. Now Apple is pissed. Well, I say they need to do more to avoid dumb employees drinking in bars than try to shut the Gizmo reporter up.

 

And, as far as I'm concerned, if you're being paid to find and report information; your a journalist/reporter. No matter if its a small newspaper or website with 1 subscriber or not. You may suck at writing and reporting, but that's neither here nor there.

[shrader]

A scandal is a bit different than someone's property.

[Fezmid]

A scandal is a bit different than someone's property.

 

Fine. Someone calls a reporter with a scoop about a senate scandal that they found proof of on an iPhone that a senator left at a bar. The reporter does research to confirm it; then prints a nice big story that he/she broke. He/she doesn't go to the Senator and apologize for getting this information from a lost iPhone and give the phone to the Senator, forgetting the entire story ever existed. So why is this situation any different?

 

Look, if someone broke into the guy's house and stole the iPhone, you'd have a point. If someone broke into Apple's R&D and stole the iPhone, you'd have a point. But someone LOST it. And Gizmodo DID return the property as well. They just happened to photograph it first. Apple hates being upstaged, and they're using your tax dollars to "punish" the journalist.

[DrDawkinstein]

Fine. Someone calls a reporter with a scoop about a senate scandal that they found proof of on an iPhone that a senator left at a bar. The reporter does research to confirm it; then prints a nice big story that he/she broke. He/she doesn't go to the Senator and apologize for getting this information from a lost iPhone and give the phone to the Senator, forgetting the entire story ever existed. So why is this situation any different?

 

Look, if someone broke into the guy's house and stole the iPhone, you'd have a point. If someone broke into Apple's R&D and stole the iPhone, you'd have a point. But someone LOST it. And Gizmodo DID return the property as well. They just happened to photograph it first. Apple hates being upstaged, and they're using your tax dollars to "punish" the journalist.

 

this is exactly what it comes down to, and nothing else. the only thing apple likes doing more than creating technology is suing other companies/people out of existence. and im a mac fanboy.

[Booster4324]

this is exactly what it comes down to, and nothing else. the only thing apple likes doing more than creating technology is suing other companies/people out of existence. and im a mac fanboy.

 

Despite the fact I disagree with the way this was handled, there is a legitimate need for a company to protect their brand.

[DrDawkinstein]

Despite the fact I disagree with the way this was handled, there is a legitimate need for a company to protect their brand.

 

i get all that, and agree with a lot of their suits in the past, as some people have ripped them off badly. but they do not need to apply that heavy hand here. they got their phone back the day that they confirmed with Gizmodo that it was real and it was legit. now, theyre just trying to bully an individual to scare anyone who may think of doing the same thing ever again. it's not right.

[Booster4324]

i get all that, and agree with a lot of their suits in the past, as some people have ripped them off badly. but they do not need to apply that heavy hand here. they got their phone back the day that they confirmed with Gizmodo that it was real and it was legit. now, theyre just trying to bully an individual to scare anyone who may think of doing the same thing ever again. it's not right.

 

You aren't really going to get a fight with me as I mostly agree. Just saying that their legal/marketing department may see it as a fight they will lose, but need to fight for future issues. The key issue of course, what is a journalist?