To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oh they didn't know that it came from Apple? They had no idea as to where it should be returned?
They obviously knew that it came from Apple (even Gizmodo admits that it was absolutely clear once they opened the case... and it was incontrovertible once Apple contacted them). If they can be believed, their source made significant effort to notify Apple about the device and they both called and emailed Gray Powell (whom their source said was the owner of the phone) asking about returning the phone shortly after they posted the story to their web site. I would say that this qualifies as a reasonable effort to return it. It's not like the person who finds your lost stuff has to bend over backwards to get it back to you. They just have to make a reasonable effort. My only concern is that it doesn't seem like it should have taken them the week that they claim it did to determine concretely that the phone came from Apple. Since they would have wanted to publish such a hot story as quickly as possible, what would have caused them to hold onto it for so long?





Member since:
2009-12-04
When a company leaves their secrets laying around, they aren't really secrets anymore. They can't expect the general public (especially journalists) to help them cover their blunders up. How else could things be structured? We all know about the new iPhone now and some of us have probably told people that we know. Should we be searched under suspicion of disseminating Apple's trade secrets? There is no way to enforce a boundary on knowledge once it escapes the group of people that have actually agreed to keep it secret (without creating a dedicated group of secret police for the purpose). I have to say that I agree with Thom when he says that the only thing that Chen did wrong was to open the casing (it's definitely wrong to risk damage to other peoples' property, though I do think that this is more of a civil matter than a criminal one, since any damage to the unit caused by the case-opening could be fixed with money). As for Gawker paying for the scoop, I don't really have a problem with it as long as it doesn't somehow compromise the accuracy of the story (though it is a potentially expensive road for news outlets to go down). I strongly disagree with the idea that they were "buying stolen goods". It's more like they were buying the privilege to hold the prototype until its rightful owner reclaimed it (which he willingly let happen). That said, there could be more going on here than we know about, so it's probably good that an investigation is going on. It's just too bad that the police can't seem to understand that things would go smoother if they would address (and possibly act differently based upon) reasonable concerns with their actions from regular citizens. They demand absolute control of all aspects of the situation and won't take any suggestions from any one else (I think this is a result of the way that police are trained here in the U.S., as every officer I meet seems to act this way.).
Edited 2010-04-27 09:15 UTC