Wired Outs Guy Who Found Apple G4

Lordbob75 said:

I think it should be a moot point whether or not the guy who found it committed a crime. The raid and subsequent court proceedings show that there are other problems in this court system. The raid was unlawful, and all material needs to be returned to the editor. Apple needs to make a public apology for violating his rights, and shut the hell up about.

Grow up.
I am so SICK of immaturity and stupidity in America.

~Lordbob

that makes two of us

loaba said:

Help me understand something; why is it okay to steal from a corporation?

It isn't, not anymore than a regular person.

In this case however, I would not exactly call it stealing. It may not have been completely honest, but it certainly isn't what Apple is calling it.

~Lordbob

Okay, from what I heard, it was "lost". Doesn't "lost" have an entirely different meaning from "stolen"?

[Quotes for lawful subpoena effect]

loaba said:

Lordbob75 said:

In this case however, I would not exactly call it stealing. It may not have been completely honest, but it certainly isn't what Apple is calling it.

~Lordbob

So Apple shouldn't vigorously protect its interests? Because that's what they're doing. Some of their methods may be distasteful to you, but then so is selling (and receiving) stolen goods.

I'm reminded of the principle in Breakfast Club - "mess with the bull, you get the horns." And while things didn't quite work to his advantage, I think it is fair to say that Apple represents a completely different kind of *bull.

*pun not intended, sort of...

I absolutely did not say that they should not protect their interests. I meant that perhaps they should reconsider urging an illegal search and seizure for something that they had already lost.

And Arkhi is right, it wasn't exactly stolen, it was lost.
EDIT: Your post above is correct as well. I never said that I thought he did enough, I just thought that Apples response was over the top.

~Lordbob

loaba said:

arkhi said:

Okay, from what I heard, it was "lost". Doesn't "lost" have an entirely different meaning from "stolen"?

[Quotes for lawful subpoena effect]

Under California law, lost means you need to make a pretty serious effort to return whatever it is you found. Right now, that's what is being debated. Did he, or did he not, take the appropriate steps to return the device. All current reports indicate that the guy did very little to return it.

Edit: BTW, the lost item in question is a prototype phone that was subsequently sold for $5000.00. We're not talking about a pair of sunglasses.

I never knew California had laws like that. Thanks for the info.

Alright, trying to cope up with the situation. Anyway, by my rough preliminary understanding of the said law, I guess Apple does have a right to seek legal action for its "lost product"* considered "intellectual property"*.

I guess it's only a matter of debate whether the raid was "lawful"* considering that they have already retrieved the "lost product"*, right?

*As defined under article 13 section 37 subsection 802.11 paragraph N of AMBA

loaba said:

Lordbob75 said:

I meant that perhaps they should reconsider urging an illegal search and seizure for something that they had already lost.

Are you talking about the Gizmodo guy? I believe they've successfully delayed that process by bringing some question as to the legality of the search. That could go their way. And Apple would still be right to have taken all possible steps to protect their interests. Win or lose, they're sending a message to the tech blogs; buy property that is stolen from us and we will take you down.

This was a shady deal all the way around, I still don't see why Apple should get burned for it.


PS - You want to say Jobs is a control-freak, who seeks to personally control every aspect of your i-Experience? Fair enough, I get that. But this response is completely different.

I do support that he is a control freak, but that is not part of this.

I meant that Apple wanted them to raid the house, completely unnecessarily.

I cannot comment on whether or not the iPod thing was legal or not, that is not for me to determine.

~Lordbob