Sign in or Join FriendFeed
FriendFeed is the easiest way to share online. Learn more »
Kevin Fox
Wow, this is gonna be a big thing: Apple's Next iPhone - http://gizmodo.com/5520164...
Wow, this is gonna be a big thing: Apple's Next iPhone
Wow, this is gonna be a big thing: Apple's Next iPhone
Wow, this is gonna be a big thing: Apple's Next iPhone
Hope Gizmodo's got good lawyers... - Kevin Fox from Bookmarklet
I hope that the final product isn't as ugly. - Akiva
This is definitely a bigger thing than the Asteroid audio extender that brought down ThinkSecret (and almost brought down AppleInsider). I don't think shield laws really apply here. - Mark Trapp
Oh wow, why would they do that? I mean, I get it, they want to be first, but that seems like a BIG lawsuit waiting to happen. - Georgia
What would the grounds be here for a lawsuit? - Brian Sullivan
Supposedly it was found in a bar in Redwood City. Not sure what Apple could sue them for. - Dan Hsiao
The Apple employee involved could claim that it was stolen, not lost, and now Gizmodo is handling stolen goods and profiting from it. - Tudor Bosman
it's the PayPhone! - Big Joe Silence
Gruber seems to think Gizmodo is being disingenuous about "finding" the phone: http://daringfireball.net/linked... - Mark Trapp
Doesn't Apple know EXACTLY where this phone is? Why don't they send someone to get it? - Stephen Mack from iPhone
@Spidra: but you don't have to take MY word for it! - Big Joe Silence
Good point Stephen. Surely they could use Find My iPhone to track its location. - Roberto Bonini
If they just manage to get that deal with Verizon, I am gonna be a happy girl. - Spidra Webster
Gizmodo *may* be in trouble because they: A) violated trade secrets by willfully exposing confidential information that had been secret -- B) reportedly paid an individual for the phone, knowing that it was not that person's property -- C) willfully damaged that property which they knew they had no lawful claim to (they opened it to photograph the guts). There's certainly sufficient grounds to serve a lawsuit that will cost Gizmodo a lot of money to defend, even if they end up defending successfully. - Kevin Fox
Can't use Find My iPhone since it was remote wiped and is stuck at the activation screen. - Aaron Draczynski
And of course, D) They haven't returned it after Apple asked for their property back. - Kevin Fox
[IANAL, but you already knew that] "However, according to the trade secret law, the only groups of people that cannot be prevented from using the trade secret information protected by law are those who do independent means in discovering the secret without practicing illegal measures or breaching state laws or agreements." http://www.mesrianilaw.com/Violati... - Micah
One could easily argue that knowingly purchasing an item from a person with no lawful claim to the item is an illegal measure. - Kevin Fox
Come to think of it, that non-lawyerly disclaimer from the halcyon days of slashdot should be updated to iAnal. - Micah
ianalbipooti - Kevin Fox
From Nick Denton's Twitter feed, it looks like Gizmodo is itching for a fight: http://twitter.com/nicknotned - Mark Trapp
Wow, you're right. Looks like they think this might be their Drudge/Lewinsky moment. - Kevin Fox
Yep..... - Roberto Bonini
That's an interesting parallel. - Micah
Most of the legal stuff presented here though would not involve a civil lawsuit but some sort of criminal proceedings. I am guessing that complicates matters a lot does it not? - Brian Sullivan
Micah wins the thread. - John Craft
Brian: How so? Apple doesn't care about getting damages. They want to make sure the next time a reporter 'finds' pre-release hardware they're too scared to splash it on the web. - Kevin Fox
Apple doesn't get to choose if criminal proceedings go forward do they or have they taken over the police and criminal justice system there? - Brian Sullivan
But if the lost/stolen/how it came into their hands question is even a tiny bit in dispute Giz walks - WarLord
Brian: claims for misappropriation of trade secrets are generally pursued through civil proceedings, even if such misappropriation occurs through the aid of criminal activity. - Brian Chang
I'm still guessing if SJ was "nicer' he's have gotten a phone call instead of phto spread - WarLord
I really doubt it. Gizmodo's resentment, from what the editors are posting, is directed towards the highly-connected media who have advance access, not Apple. As Nick Denton retweeted, "BREAKING: Gizmodo extends massive middle finger to Jim Goldman, tells Mossberg to suck it long, suck it hard" - Mark Trapp
Hmmmm, from a purely legal standpoint, unless the phone was stamped "Property of Apple Computer," Apple would be hard-pressed to make a claim that the phone itself constitutes "confidential information." And with no evidence of ownership or a tag that reads "If found, return to:..." Giz could claim they thought it was an interesting fake. In any event, once it left the possession of the original owner, unless it was stolen, Giz is probably safe. - Kevin (aka ThreadKilla)
The more important keeping your secret becomes the more fun it is to pierce the veil ;) - WarLord
KevinP: Presumably the black plastic case did have such warnings, but even if not, Gizmodo has clearly demonstrated that they knew who the phone's owner was and that it was a prototype. If Joe Blow shared a twitpic of a cool phone he found he might not have a problem, but Gizmodo showed clear knowledge, intent, and financial gain. - Kevin Fox
Otto: Leaving a briefcase full of money on a cafe table doesn't mean that the person who finds it and keeps/sells it is free and clear. 'Sucking it' has precious little to do with the law. - Kevin Fox
Just to be clear, I really don't care either way. I'm not calling for Gizmodo to be brought to justice. I'm just anticipating what I think will happen. We'll see. - Kevin Fox
But without a non disclosure agreement of some type going to be hard to claim trade secrets - WarLord
WarLord, not at all. If illegal means were used to acquire the information then trade secret law holds. If Gizmodo paid for the phone then there's probably a case to be made. - Kevin Fox
I find phone play with it all weekend take pictures etc return phone Monday - dunno how the trade secrets play tha - WarLord
Warlord: I buy a secret phone from a guy who says he found it. I know it's secret and I open it up, analyze it, then write an exposé about Apple's secret phone, then it's a different story. - Kevin Fox
Otto: I see where you're going with this, but my guess is that Apple will say that a bag of money clearly labeled 'First National Bank' is not subject to 'finders keepers'. It can be clearly demonstrated that Gizmodo knew who owned the phone and found financial value in keeping it from them and actively pursuing the secrets within the phone. There is no way that this is a simple 'finders keepers' case. That much, at least, should be clear. - Kevin Fox
Something tells me that Gizmodo is banking on people being sympathetic to them being David vs. Apple's Goliath. This plays along with the fact that a lot of people are turning against Apple now that they're no longer the underdogs. Personally, I hope Gizmodo gets brutalized by the system is what they did was actually illegal. - Akiva
I think Giz picked an excellent way to swat steveie j with a rolled up newspaper build some steet cred and traffic plus get mucho sympathy from MSM if Apple decides to sue - WarLord
I agree Akiva. I'm excited to see the new phone, and I even find enjoyment from Gizmodo's scoop, but I do think they should be investigated and, if found to be breaking the law, prosecuted for it. - Kevin Fox
I think WarLord just proved my case. - Akiva
The Enquirer regularly gets sued for libel and they regularly make multi-million dollar payouts. It's part of their business model. Maybe this is part of Gizmodo's. They probably ran the math and decided it's worth the legal costs. - Kevin Fox
The one thing that Gizmodo has done for me over this is make me disappointed over the new iPhone's style which looks absolutely rubbish. At least it'll make it easier for manufacturers to produce more accurate-looking knock-offs. I mean, hell, it already looks like a knock-off. - Akiva
Otto: We just don't have enough information. We don't know whether Apple asked the bar owner if anyone had found the property. We don't know if it was 'found' by a bar employee or another patron (in which case McAvoy doesn't apply). We don't know whether the phone was placed on a bar or whether it fell out of a bag or purse, and the answer to that question alone throws the applicability of McAvoy in to question. - Kevin Fox
Akiva: if I were a betting man, I'd wager that what we see here is a prototype or test phone, not the final design. - Mark Trapp
Mark, what I've read is that this is very close to the final design with just a few physical tweaks on the way. I certainly don't expect it to be identical but I also don't expect it to be that much different. - Akiva
If you have a hand in obtaining stolen goods... It's pretty much a slam dunk. - Johnny from iPhone
OK, but how many tech news website have guys positioned in every bar? - Johnny from iPhone
I'm telling you. People want to see Apple punished for two crimes: one, being too successful; and, two, being exclusionary. If there are two things that some people can't tolerate, it's a winner and being told that they're not part of the secret club. - Akiva
Akiva -- where in this discussion is there anything about punishing Apple? - Brian Sullivan
I just wonder two things: How likely is it that an Apple employee permitted to carry pre-release hardware off campus would 'forget' it in a bar (not very) and how likely is it that someone who stole a phone which turned out to be a very valuable piece of proprietary technology would claim that it was 'found' (very). - Kevin Fox
Look at some of the comments. WarLord writes 'I think Giz picked an excellent way to swat steveie [sic] j with a rolled up newspaper', Otto writes sarcastically about 'big, scary Apple', just for instance. My comments aren't limited to what's been written in this thread, either. There is growing disdain for Apple just like there's growing disdain for Google. - Akiva
It seems to me the discussion is revolving around punishing Gizmodo/Engadget? - Brian Sullivan
The discussion is revolving around whether Gizmodo broke any laws, with a tangential discussion of how much Apple 'deserved it' as though that will have a bearing in court. - Kevin Fox
At a start, Techcrunch didn't pay for the files. Secondly, Techcrunch actually contacted Twitter beforehand to talk about it and cut a deal on which information they would and would not reveal. This is why they weren't sued. - Kevin Fox
Mentioning 'it was found in a bar' just sounds like ass-covering to me. - Johnny
It's the equivalent of 'my dog ate my homework'. - Akiva
Otto: Fine, I'll put it a different way: I assume that people frequently end up in possession of phones that do not belong to them through various means. I further assume that those who acquire them through illegal means say they acquired them through legal means. I also assume that a secret proprietary phone is less likely to be accidentally left behind than an average phone. These assumptions were the basis for my comment, If you don't hold those assumptions that's fine, but I do and thus I said so. - Kevin Fox
Otto: Robot pirates or sea-faring ones? I was going to say 'or one-eyed pirates' but that could apply to both. - Kevin Fox
The articles are very well 'written'... - Johnny
;-) - Kevin Fox
Kevin, I think you're walking a dangerous slope with your reasoning. In our justice system the defendant (in this case, the bar owner is my assumption) should always be presumed innocent until proven otherwise (ie: we should believe the claim of "I found it after someone left it behind" until there is more data that proves differently). - Chieze Okoye
(Split my comment in two) Additionally, you're using your assumption ("I further assume that those who acquire them through illegal means say they acquired them through legal means.") to prove its own converse. That is, you're implying that because someone who does something wrong covers it up with a certain explantion, this bar owner having that explanation indicates that he did something wrong and is covering it up, which, as far as I can see based on what is known, is definitely a fallacy. - Chieze Okoye
Chieze: I'm not saying that Gizmodo is guilty. I'm stating that there's the basis for a lawsuit. My argument about thieves lying about how they procured a cellphone isn't an attempt to say that anyone saying they found a phone is lying, but that saying they found a phone does not preclude the possibility that they did not find the phone. - Kevin Fox
It's called speculation... or it's more modern term 'The Internet' :) - Johnny
Put as simply as possible: I think it's possible that Gizmodo paid someone for a stolen, proprietary phone for the purpose of revealing its trade secrets for financial gain. I don't know if this is the case, but I think it's possible and I'm guessing that Apple will pursue this in a legal forum. That is the extent of my claim. Is everyone okay with that? - Kevin Fox
Oh, yeah, it's definitely possible. And I agree with you and definitely think that there's enough here to make it worth Apple's time to pursue legally as well, but if the bulk of their proof is "our employee reported it stolen" I don't think that they will have met their burden of proof for their claim. - Chieze Okoye
Gizmodo may walk... but I suspect that Don Jobleone will be planting a big fat kiss on their lips. They just lost aaaaaaaall access they had - Johnny
I suspect Giz would not reveal a C&D yet if they received one. If their goal is to get as much traction and traffic out of this story as possible, its better to drag out everything bit by bit. First the reveal, tons of traffic. Tomorrow, they post the C&D. Tons more traffic. If they post everything today, they don't get the repeat visitors. - EricaJoy
what if Gizmodo has already returned the phone to apple? - Chris Heath
I wouldn't think that'd change the outcome of any trade secrets lawsuit. The damage would already have been done. - Kevin Fox
"They just lost aaaaaaaall access they had" - Nick Denton's twitter feed seems to imply that Gizmodo did this precisely because the DIDN'T have access: http://twitter.com/nicknot... - John Craft
umm I'm guesing after read that tweet he doesn't much care what Apples response is - WarLord
INYIM: That's completely possible. I wonder how *that* conversation would have gone, that resulted in teh expose they published anyhow. I'm also interested to head Engadget's story. Based on the photos they published hours before Gizmodo went public I'm guessing both were approached by the 'finder' and Engadget ended up not getting the phone (outbid or declined to try). There's totally a Wired expose piece waiting in the wings here. - Kevin Fox
Giz used to have enough access to at least go to the iPod/iPhone press conferences. - Andrew C (✔)
who knew there was this much drama centered on a PHONE ;) - WarLord
Isn't this the same Gizmodo that pranked a tech conference by turning off all the display monitors and got banned as a result? No surprises, hope these douches get what's coming to them. Engadget FTMFW - LANjackal
I know I shelled out for a 3GS last year, but, if this thing is sporting an A4 and some serious new features, consarnit, I might be sucked in yet again. I HATE YOU, APPLE. - Mike Nayyar
Mike, same here. I'm expecting to be sucked in. Again. - Akiva
I thought this comment on Gizmodo was interesting: http://gizmodo.com/comment... The crime, assuming a crime has been committed, would be Conversion, which is a form of theft. However, since Apple hasn't taken steps to get a restraining order on Gizmodo (if they had, it would've already been effected), the argument is that Apple is okay with the leak. A little more info on criminal conversion here: http://friendfeed.com/itafrom... - Mark Trapp
If one had any doubt of how big of a douchebag company Gawker is, one need only read that post. Not only do they divulge who lost the phone for no reason other than to make a spectacle of a guy's mistake, they paint a hilariously false account of everybody trying to do the right thing to make it seem like they (and the person who stole the phone) are in the clear. Gawker paid $5,000 for a phone they, and the person who sold it to them, knew was someone else's property: http://news.yahoo.com/s... They can go rot in a ditch. - Mark Trapp
1UP Mark - Akiva
Hey, what's up with that Zune? - Eric - Poppa Large
Apple demands the phone back: http://gizmodo.com/5520479... The reply back to Apple confirms that the phone was stolen, although Gizmodo claims they didn't know that when they bought it. - Mark Trapp
It's said that IT IS FAKE. - 老巫