backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by eddieroolz.. on Apr 29 at 6:07 PM


  (Source: Gizmodo)
Wired apparently didn't think buying potentially stolen goods was a good idea

On March 28 Wired.com reportedly received an unbelievable email claiming that a tipster had obtained a misplaced fourth generation iPhone.  According to the site, they entered a brief discussion about coverage on the device.  The discussion quickly terminated though when the source start hinting he wanted money. Wired declined to buy possibly stolen property and thus walked away from the year's biggest tech scoop.

Gizmodo on the other hand had took the bait.  Now, not long after police raided the home of a Gizmodo editor, police reportedly have located the seller as well.

A source close to the transaction is quoted by 
Wired.com as claiming that the seller made an earnest effort to return the phone to Apple.  They claim they tried to contact Apple and searched for the iPhone user on Facebook, but couldn't find them.  

They claim the $5,000 "sale" described by 
Gizmodo was really merely for an exclusivity agreement, not the sale of the actual device.  Describes the source, "The idea wasn’t to find out who was going to pay the most, it was, Who’s going to confirm this?"

The finder is reportedly a college-aged Silicon Valley man.

If the search warrant against Chen is any indication, the man may soon face criminal charges.  Police obviously aren't buying the exclusivity fee claim, particularly after 
Gizmodo admitted in writing to buying the phone and numerous staffers at the site commented on the device's purchase, including site owner and Gawker President Nick Denton.

The police reason that if the finder wanted to return the phone, why didn't he just turn it in to police?  That, after all, is the legal approach if you discover something valuable that didn't belong to you.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Just because its Apple? Big F-ing deal,
By chick0n on 4/28/2010 10:39:47 AM , Rating: 5
Wow, don't the cops got something better to do ? I mean wow for f's sake its just a f-ing Phone. they have to use all these manpower/resources to track 1 person down.

I don't see them work so hard to catch some "real" bad guys out there like Terrorist or some shit.

So what throw him in Jail for 10 years ? When my Credit card got stolen someone charged 10K to it. I reported to the cops, what happened now ? 2 years of course nothing.

Talked about FAILED America, EPIC y0




By bupkus on 4/28/2010 11:45:15 AM , Rating: 2
Apple is a powerhouse of tax revenue to the state of CA and certainly to its local municipalities.

Really, dude, did you expect otherwise?


By Elooder2 on 4/28/2010 12:47:54 PM , Rating: 2
They're investigating a possible crime. A shoplift is a crime. Pickpocketing is a crime. The police are there to prevent crime and catch criminals. The other agencies are there to prevent terrorism and the prevention of terrorism is not an activity that is ever done very openly because that would diminish its effectiveness (any open "prevention of terrorism" is mainly just for show and to calm the masses).
The whole thing has not much to do with Apple being "special" to the state of CA, but with the fact that a crime may have been committed. The police are just doing their job.

Oh, and I'm not American...


RE: Just because its Apple? Big F-ing deal,
By HefeRME on 4/28/2010 7:05:27 PM , Rating: 2
yeah.... it's just a phone... a phone that generates millions of dollars for Apple


RE: Just because its Apple? Big F-ing deal,
By mindless1 on 4/28/2010 8:19:12 PM , Rating: 1
... regardless of whether the phone was ever found, regardless of whether the person who allegedly took it was found, let alone convicted.

The answer is simple. If Apple doesn't want any prototypes out in the wild, plainly tell the staff that and prosecute the person who took it off the company property for theft, NOT someone who found it in a bar.


By eddieroolz on 4/29/2010 6:07:42 PM , Rating: 3
I suppose that you obviously did not read the original story where it said "a test engineer was testing the prototype in real-world environment"?


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki