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 424537
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
More from the OSnews legal dept.
by Piot on Sat 15th May 2010 01:17 UTC
Piot
Member since:
2009-09-17

"Is the behaviour of the original finder ethically questionable? It sure is. Is Gizmodo's behaviour ethically questionable? Yeah, pretty much."

But its still Apple's fault, ain't that right Thom?

Reply Score: 5

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

According to Thom buying and selling someone else's property is only ethically questionable. Destroying evidence and lying is only ethically questionable.

Oh and according to Thom trade secrets are nonsense even though they can be worth millions to a company.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

According to Thom buying and selling someone else's property is only ethically questionable. Destroying evidence and lying is only ethically questionable.

Oh and according to Thom trade secrets are nonsense even though they can be worth millions to a company.


I stopped taking you seriously about three months ago. You're the kind of person who'd side with BP if they were to claim their spilled oil constitutes a trade secret and sued the press for reporting on it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

"Is the behaviour of the original finder ethically questionable? It sure is. Is Gizmodo's behaviour ethically questionable? Yeah, pretty much."

But its still Apple's fault, ain't that right Thom?


There are various parties who were less than ethical, however they wouldn't even have had the chance if it wasn't for Apple's gross negligence.

So lets put it another way, if I leave my front door wide open and then get burgled, then my issuance doesn't cover replacements as the burglary is classed as my fault (I gave an opportunist an easy target).
This doesn't change the fact that the burglar broke the law but had I not left the door wide open, there wouldn't have been a burglary in the first place.

So yes, other people may have broken the law (or at the very least, acted completely immorally) - however Apple are completely to blame due to their gross negligence.

Reply Parent Score: 2

macUser Member since:
2006-12-15

"Is the behaviour of the original finder ethically questionable? It sure is. Is Gizmodo's behaviour ethically questionable? Yeah, pretty much."

But its still Apple's fault, ain't that right Thom?


As always, blame the victim. Thom, do you also blame women being outside if they're kidnapped and raped? How could they be so stupid, right?

Apple put too much trust in their employee it seems... Stupid Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 1