New
#11
And yet.....
iPhone 3GS Review - Iphone 3gs review - Gizmodo
by "alleged culprit"
Promotional action.?
And yet.....
iPhone 3GS Review - Iphone 3gs review - Gizmodo
by "alleged culprit"
Promotional action.?
That's one story I heard, though I don't know if we'll ever know the truth. If it was true though, then I'd say finders keepers is fair enough then.
Apple asked for 'lost' iPhone criminal probe - Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal:
Apple asked for 'lost' iPhone criminal probe
(ecerpt)
Wagstaffe [the San Mateo County DA] said that an outside counsel for Apple, along with Apple engineer Powell, called the District Attorney’s office on Wednesday or Thursday of last week to report a theft had occurred and they wanted it investigated. The District Attorney’s office then referred them to the Rapid Enforcement and Allied Computer Team, or REACT, a multi-jurisdictional, high-tech crime task force that operates under the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s office.
Let’s look at this from another point of view. Let’s say CBS found the new iPhone and put a story together about it then aired it on 60 Minutes. I bet Apple would never sue CBS or say the iPhone was stolen by CBS. Why? CBS is bigger than Apple they (CBS) have a lot of money and power including high paid lawyers so nothing would have happened Apple would have caulked it up to freedom of speech and then used the 60 Minutes story to help them promote their new iPhone. But since this is some little guy all Apple can do is bully him. Come on Apple do the right thing use this as great PR and stop all actions against the little guy.
(PC: Little guy is a metaphor for a small company and has nothing to do with size of people)
They do make a good point about the issue over at The Register.
I wonder if that's what would have happened if he hadn't gone and blabbed that he bought a "semi-stolen" device.Is it possible that Denton has overreached himself? We don't criticise him for paying for stories - we don't do that ourselves, but we're not about to get onto any moral high horse about it. It does however seem to us that the way he and his merry men went about this story was reckless. They've bought something they knew was hot, then they've compounded that error by telling the world how they got hold of it, and what they paid for it.
If they had simply said that the device had come into their possession, then they'd have still had the story, and Apple would still have known it was Gray Powell's...but where's the case?
You mean by calling Apple Tech Support? 'Cause that's as far as he went. After that, he sold the thing to Gizmodo for $5000.00. Under CA law, he didn't do what was necessary to try and return the phone.
Gizmodo is trying to claim that you can't raid a Journalist's office. What do you do about one who buys stolen property?
Oh yeah - remember, Apple did get their phone back, in pieces.