Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th May 2010 22:10 UTC
Legal We haven't discussed the lost iPhone 4G from Apple for a while now, mostly because there was nothing new to report. Now that the 10-page search warrant affidavit has been made available to the public, we finally have a much more complete picture of what exactly went down.
Thread beginning with comment 424530
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: O.K.
by plan9 on Sat 15th May 2010 00:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: O.K."
plan9
Member since:
2010-05-15

Exactly. I work for a GSM carrier ( small, private company), and there is no substitute for trying the unit in the field. So the premise that Apple failed because they allowed someone to test it doesn't make sense to me. And after reading about the whole ugly story, I'm inclined to give Apple a break on this one.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: O.K.
by mrhasbean on Sat 15th May 2010 01:26 in reply to "RE[4]: O.K."
mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

They decided to allow prototypes to leave the premises, at which point they cease to be trade secrets


Field testing is the only way to really test something, simulations can only go so far. Motor vehicle manufacturers have upcoming models in the field long before they are released, often running gear is disguised under the skin of a previous model, and sometimes they use camouflage stickers to hide their designs. If they didn't still class them as trade secrets why would they go to these ends to keep them hidden?

But of course, this is Apple vs <insert whoever here>, so it will always be Apple's fault, right Thom?

I still believe the police overreacted, and I still believe that the finder and the Gizmodo editors are judged far too harshly


So they refused to hand back someone else's property unless that party did something - check the definition of extortion - and the police reacted too harshly? Hmmm ok.

Yes, these guys made mistakes and broke the law, but in the end, this is just a phone. The device is returned, nobody got hurt, nobody died, and Apple will still sell a massive boatload of these phones come summer.


So attempted extortion is ok as long as it fits those criteria? Where do we draw the line then?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: O.K.
by sachindaluja on Sat 15th May 2010 02:50 in reply to "RE[5]: O.K."
sachindaluja Member since:
2007-02-15

But those motor companies wouldn't expect their test drivers to park the next-gen prototypes in a crowded parking lot while they drink booze on Saturday night.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: O.K.
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 15th May 2010 08:15 in reply to "RE[5]: O.K."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

So attempted extortion is ok as long as it fits those criteria? Where do we draw the line then?


As usual, you are twisting my words. I come to expect no less of you, but still, it's getting old.

I didn't say anywhere that "it's ok". All I said was that the police overreacted. Do you know the definition of to overreact? It's like this, basically: the police should put more manpower in a murder case than in a burglary. The police should put more effort into solving a burglary than into someone who lost his phone at a bar.

I know class justice is perfectly acceptable in the US, and that most US citizens have no problems with the police caring more about those with money than about those without, but I come from a more civilised and more developed nation, with only a fraction of the US' (heavy) crime rates. As such, I'd say that doing something about the abundant amount of heavy crime in the US (drug trafficking, murder, severe violence, rape) is far more important to US society than retrieving a damn phone which some employee who failed miserably at his job left in a bar while out drinking.

But hey, I guess you find the police protecting Apple more important than the police actually doing something that benefits society.

Yes, a crime took place here. Yes, something should be done about that. However, I'd say that a country with such severe crime problems has more important matters to attend to than a stolen phone.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: O.K.
by cycoj on Sat 15th May 2010 22:31 in reply to "RE[4]: O.K."
cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04

Exactly. I work for a GSM carrier ( small, private company), and there is no substitute for trying the unit in the field. So the premise that Apple failed because they allowed someone to test it doesn't make sense to me. And after reading about the whole ugly story, I'm inclined to give Apple a break on this one.


What I'm wondering is if it was even legal for to connect it to the network. I remember it didn't have FCC approval. After the FUD about jailbroken iphones being dangerous for cellphone towers Apple themselves disregard the safety regulations in place to prevent someone accidentally taking the network down.

Reply Parent Score: 1