221–230 of 306 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's one word that can't be used to describe this case, it's "clear". Nothing is clear yet, except that Apple is mad.
Except that Apple hasn't had anything to do with this case. Criminal, not civil.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently he recalled it well enough for Gizmodo to ID the Apple employee and make him (in)famous. So the finder or the Gizmodo people could have used another computer or smartphone to get in touch with him...it's not as if the prototype was the only internet-capable device in silicon Valley :)
Gizmodo: "Weeks later, Gizmodo got it for $5,000 in cash. At the time, we didn't know if it was the real thing or not. It didn't even get past the Apple logo screen. Once we saw it inside and out, however, there was no doubt about it. It was the real thing, so we started to work on documenting it before returning it to Apple. We had the phone, but we didn't know the owner. Later, we learnt about this story, but we di…
Wouldn't the owner of an Apple prototype most likely be...Apple?
Surely you're not asking me to buy the idea that they thought it was the engineers's personal property, and that if they sent it to Apple, it might never find its way back to him. That's an insult to even an average intelligence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I find it pretty despicable they made no honest attempt to get the prototype back to Apple. Apparently they did, and were ignored. Nobody has come up with anything that refutes this so far. I look at it as: someone made an innocent mistake losing a phone, someone found a phone and called a company, Apple's bureaucracy fucked up and didn't respond as soon as it should have.
Wonder if sjobs@apple.com with attached pictures would've worked. An honest effort isn't "Oh, we called and employee # 1034434393 was clueless." It's on par with a lost wallet. They had all the information.
Though, I upvote you, because all this time, I thought it was steve.jobs@apple.com :/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I find it pretty despicable they made no honest attempt to get the prototype back to Apple. Apparently they did, and were ignored. Nobody has come up with anything that refutes this so far. I look at it as: someone made an innocent mistake losing a phone, someone found a phone and called a company, Apple's bureaucracy fucked up and didn't respond as soon as it should have.
My memory could be off but wasn't it the guy who found the device and sold it to Apple that supposedly made the effort to return it?
Did you mean Gizmodo? Or am I completely out of the loop on this one?
I'm glad. Around this whole thing, there seemed to be this aura of "teehee, it's ok, we're on the internet!" It seems like they don't believe they could have possibly done anything wrong. It's not that I can't imagine the glee they'd feel when they were offered the opportunity to buy the prototype. But since that glee was not followed up by any second thoughts -- for exmaple, about receiving stolen property, or trade…
So what about photos of a new car prototypes? There are a bunch of magazines devoted to those. Or reviews of to-be-released movies? Or photos of celebs in public? Not terribly happy about companies using the Police to break down doors to manage their PR.
http://www.carandsuv.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Vauxha...
...just like Apple did with the Fake 3G skin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citation? (And I'm not asking to be snarky. I need more information before I decide to run for public office and change the law :)
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/court-self-i... That page has a link to the District Court ruling in Boucher .
That's a little different than "we think you might possibly have something on this computer", which is still untested.
Also, they appealed. Considering child porn gets you more time than homicide these days, I would wait until the case if over before deciding that encrypting your hard drive is a waste.
You can always decrypt, you can't always encrypt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, sjobs@ would have been better, but whoever received the call at Apple and didn't route it to the right people (or whoever ignored it for a week) seriously let the company down.
Do we know what the guy that called Apple actually said? Just imagine if I called Google and told them I had a lost Nexus One.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They bought stolen goods, period. Sorry, at which point did the theft occur?
California law says that if you find lost goods and appropriate them for your own use (e.g. selling it to a news site for five grand), it's theft. The proper response would have been to make an honest effort to get ahold of Apple and/or Gray Powell directly (e.g. call the company switchboard), and, failing that, turn it in to the police. Instead, he sold it for a profit to a company (Gizmodo) who believed that it was…
"failure to care for property you were entrusted with"
If the phone was returned, in order, to Apple - maybe it was in a contract he signed with Gizmodo, I don't think misappropriation occurred here as the found phone was eventually returned.
I'm not saying that Gizmodo is in perfect legal standing, but if this case wasn't so high profile, it would have already been dropped by now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you practice a restore on a backup that you don't quite know for sure is a usable backup? That's a big fear of mine. I'm not about to wipe my system clean and hope the test works 100%.
If you backup to a hard drive, you can simply swap your main and backup drives every now and then. If you have three drives, you can always be using one as main, one as local backup, and the third locked up offsite as the "house burns down" backup. Then swap the offsite and local backups every month. I'm just starting to do this and it feels great. I thought about the money I pay for renters insurance, and then I rea…
There's externally bootable drives, and I guess that's my only easy option.
