• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Gizmodo gets its hands on the new iPhone prototype

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know it's not the same thing, but what if a game writer broke an NDA to get a huge 'scoop' on a game before anyone else could? Do they face anything besides being blacklisted by the industry? I'm asking because I bet people triumphing Gizmodo for doing the consumer a big favor by scooping this would be more hostile towards the game journalist instead of saying 'What's wrong guys, they were doing their jobs as journalists?'

Only instead of breaking NDA, they broke California law.
 
mattiewheels said:
I know it's not the same thing, but what if a game writer broke an NDA to get a huge 'scoop' on a game before anyone else could? Do they face anything besides being blacklisted by the industry? I'm asking because I bet people triumphing Gizmodo for doing the consumer a big favor by scooping this would be more hostile towards the game journalist instead of saying 'What's wrong guys, they were doing their jobs as journalists?'

Only instead of breaking NDA, they broke California law.
Click to expand...
NDA is a legally binding document as far as I know. By breaking it you are liable to be sued for breach of contract. I think it can be tossed out if someone else breaks it before you and it is out in the open. See reviews of movies, etc.
 
mightynine said:
Scorcho, honest question: your employer hands you a new product. This product is not be handled by the public before 9am on date X. You decide at 8am on date X that you're going to show said product to someone, despite being told not to do so. Your employer finds out about this and fires you for not complying with the clearly stated rule.

Are they unfair?
Click to expand...
nope, the employer is not unfair. but neither is it unfair that the dude who found my wallet last week (true story) didn't bother to have the courtesy to drop my ID cards/drivers license in the mail while deciding to keep the money and run fraudulent charges on my credit card. i take the blame for dropping the wallet while getting out of my gf's car. oh wait, 'dropping' the wallet.

perhaps i'm also to blame for having an overly Hobbesian view of the mankind, but that's how shit unfolds sometimes, and far be it from me to level trite platitudes about the situation or people involved.
 
scorcho said:
but neither is it unfair that the dude who found my wallet last week (true story) didn't bother to have the courtesy to drop my ID cards/drivers license in the mail while deciding to keep the money and run fraudulent charges on my credit card.
Click to expand...

:lol
 
KHarvey16 said:
:lol
Click to expand...
meh. technically it was two weeks ago and CitiCard sent a replacement overnight. i've also submitted a contest to the charges, which should be handled swiftly by CC as well.
 
scorcho said:
meh. technically it was two weeks ago and CitiCard sent a replacement overnight. i've also submitted a contest to the charges, which should be handled swiftly by CC as well.
Click to expand...

But it wasn't unfair. How can you contest?
 
KHarvey16 said:
But it wasn't unfair. How can you contest?
Click to expand...
because credit card companies provide the means for its clients to contest charges even when a card is lost or misplaced.

or would you prefer 'lost' or 'misplaced'?
 
scorcho said:
because credit card companies provide the means for its clients to contest charges even when a card is lost or misplaced.

or would you prefer 'lost' or 'misplaced'?
Click to expand...

You're not making any sense. Are you saying you contested not because a stranger using your card without your permission was unfair, but simply because it was something the card company offered and you wanted to check it out?
 
quadriplegicjon said:
Same person that made those claims also said these obviously bullshit lies:

Quote:
News accounts depicting the $5,000 payment as a “sale” are incorrect, this person said. Rather, the agreement with Gizmodo was for exclusivity only. “It was made very explicit that Gizmodo was to help the finder return the phone to its rightful owner or give it back,” this person said. “Gizmodo said they could help restore the phone.”
Click to expand...


*snicker* Yeah. Right. Sure hope they got that in writing.
 
KHarvey16 said:
You're not making any sense. Are you saying you contested not because a stranger using your card without your permission was unfair, but simply because it was something the card company offered and you wanted to check it out?
Click to expand...
fairness in what regard - a legal sense, or the murky moralistic one that's been paraded in this thread?

btw, i've already judged by your tag and snarky :lol response to the 'theft' of my wallet that you are an asshat. let that frame the rest of this discussion as i sip another glass of corsedonk.
 
scorcho said:
fairness in what regard - a legal sense, or the murky moralistic one that's been paraded in this thread?

btw, i've already judged by your tag and snarky :lol response to the 'theft' of my wallet that you are an asshat. let that frame the rest of this discussion as i sip another glass of corsedonk.
Click to expand...

If Websters were looking for a sentence using the word unfair, I think "It was unfair that the man used my lost credit card to purchase goods without my permission" could be at the top of their list. I can't think of a frame of reference from which that situation isn't unfair. You have argued yourself into a corner and have just started digging.

I wasn't laughing at your "robbery." I was laughing at your ridiculous characterization of a person using your card as not unfair.
 
KHarvey16 said:
I wasn't laughing at your "robbery." I was laughing at you ridiculous characterization of a person using your card as not unfair.
Click to expand...
because I don't consider it a question of moral fairness, simple as that. it's a misappropriation of someone else's property by someone who realized he/she could get away with it. my fault for losing it in the first place, not the person who 'stole' it from me.

again, that's my inner Hobbes shining through. carry on.
 
scorcho said:
because I don't consider it a question of moral fairness, simple as that. it's a misappropriation of someone else's property by someone who realized he/she could get away with it. my fault for losing it in the first place, not the person who 'stole' it from me.

again, that's my inner Hobbes shining through. carry on.
Click to expand...

No, it's your inner not-using-that-word-right shining through. You're complicating this in an effort to save face. Put the shovel down.
 
KHarvey16 said:
No, it's your inner not-using-that-word-right shining through. You're complicating this in an effort to save face. Put the shovel down.
Click to expand...
what word - fairness? Hobbes? asshat?

i think i've been dead on with that trifecta.
 
KHarvey16 said:
Does this appear to be working from your vantage point?
Click to expand...
i should get bonus points for clarifying a stated position instead of posing superficial questions that masquerade as profundity.

what sense of fairness are you driving at?
 
scorcho said:
what sense of fairness are you driving at?
Click to expand...

See, I knew you understood.

The sense of fairness suggested by the very definition of the word and how it's understood by everyone but you, apparently. Finding a person's credit card and using it without their permission is as basic an example of unfairness as one could ever hope for. The fact this needs to be explained and reiterated is embarrassing.
 
KHarvey16 said:
See, I knew you understood.

The sense of fairness suggested by the very definition of the word and how it's understood by everyone but you, apparently. Finding a person's credit card and using it without their permission is as basic an example of unfairness as one could ever hope for. The fact this needs to be explained and reiterated is embarrassing.
Click to expand...
i find it more embarassing that, instead of explaining your definition of fairness, you've now pointed twice to my own situation as some symbol of it without explaining why that's the case.

fairness can embody either a legal definition or a moralistic one (with convergence in the middle), and it's obvious which side i see both my and this situation in. as such i don't paint myself a victim for someone finding and using my credit card/money since i take full blame for putting myself in the position to begin with. i don't find that situation 'unfair', especially since i was able to quickly close the account with a minimal charge to contest.

you're talking in abstraction and i'm explaining it as someone who just went through the experience. if you want to continue this feel free to PM, otherwise i'm leaving this debate as is in this thread.
 
scorcho said:
i find it more embarassing that, instead of explaining your definition of fairness, you've now pointed twice to my own situation as some symbol of it without explaining why that's the case.

fairness can embody both a legal definition or a moralistic one, and it's obvious which side i see both my and this situation in. as such i don't paint myself a victim for someone finding and using my credit card/money since i take full blame for putting myself in the position to begin with. i don't find that situation 'unfair', especially since i was able to quickly close the account with a minimal charge to contest.

you're talking in abstraction and i'm explaining it as someone who just went through the experience. if you want to continue this feel free to PM, otherwise i'm leaving this debate as is in this thread.
Click to expand...

It's like arguing with someone that the sky isn't blue. Fair has a meaning and the situation you described is unfair. It just is. You even implicitly agree to this by contesting the charges. Your attempt to turn this into some huge philosophical debate is more a reflection of your own desperation to not concede your point. Like I said, just stop digging. You aren't fooling anyone.

StopMakingSense said:
Guys, seriously.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much about the foundation of his arguments concerning the events discussed here in the thread. It's shaky and pointing it out has some relevance no matter how tedious he tries to make the exchange.
 
quadriplegicjon said:
Do you actually believe that? Same person that made those claims also said these obviously bullshit lies:
Click to expand...
Yes, that's what I believe, largely informed by the way the stories have been portrayed in several tech blogs and websites (here's the one I remembered first) up to this point and, until someone denies that's what happened (mainly denies that Apple was not instrumental in the search of Jason Chen's home) I see no reason to think anything else. The fact that the roommates claims about non-selling a phone temporarily while they desperately tried to hunt down a phone number for this "Apple" company no ones heard of before seems laughable doesn't mean I'm going to assume they just made up a story about people going to their apartment looking for the phone.
 
scorcho said:
what's fairness? things that are fair. what's unfairness? unfair things!


you really do live up to your username! i take heed now.
Click to expand...

Let's say fair means without dishonesty or injustice. This definition is surely supported by the dictionary and surely reveals your judgment to be foolish. Using the card is clearly dishonest and clearly not just. You yourself support this by contesting the activity.
 
Stewart has such a warped sense of fairness. i feel sorry for him.

:lol i inexplicably lose signal along the FDR while heading to work. <3 AT&T
 
calder said:
If anyone is still confused about why, yes, there were clearly crimes committed should check out this pretty simple
Click to expand...
Trade secrets are only protected by law if you take precautions to keep them secret. If you abandon your top-secret Krabby Patty recipe on the table at a bar and someone reads it, you don't have legal recourse. That's just careless on your part. Very different from someone breaking into your vault and stealing it.

Personally, I think that since this guy contacted Apple to try to return it and they rebuffed him, that he was entirely right to contact a media agency that would widely spread the word about what he'd found. That sort of press coverage would be very effective at getting the attention of people who lost it, hence ensuring it would be rapidly returned it to its owner.
 
Celsior said:
Really there is no way Apple looks good in any of this.
Click to expand...

How? Outside of the fact that it was one of their prototypes, they've done nothing. They just asked for their phone back and then said "no comment".
 
Mudkips said:
What felony?

Person A finds an item.
Person A sells an item to person B.
Person B posts about said item on the internet.

Person B did nothing illegal.

Buying an item that is known to be stolen is wrong and illegal.
The item was not stolen.
Click to expand...

Again, the felony is not stealing, but misappropriated property.
 
On a 1-10 scale, I care about this "scandal" a whopping 0.

What I do care about is seeing more pictures of the new iPhone. From every angle and port. DAT VIBE SWITCH. Going to be a rough month.
 
calder said:
Apple looks like raging assholes with their "hey can we search your apartment for our phone" bullshit and scary ability to get the police to toss your home if they are mad at you.
Click to expand...

man-in-tinfoil-hat.jpg
 
I should be doing hw said:
Have their been any photos of the higher res screen in action yet?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the phone was stuck in "connect to iTunes" mode so there was nothing to really see.. That picture was presumably the same res as the usual iPhone so not even that would really show it off.
 
BocoDragon said:
I'm pretty sure the phone was stuck in "connect to iTunes" mode so there was nothing to really see.. That picture was presumably the same res as the usual iPhone so not even that would really show it off.
Click to expand...

I thought Gizmodo said that even the 'Connect to iTunes to Restore' screen was a lot higher-res than current/'old' iPhones.
 
Freestyler said:
I thought Gizmodo said that even the 'Connect to iTunes to Restore' screen was a lot higher-res than current/'old' iPhones.
Click to expand...
Yeah they made a point to say that it was much better looking but never showed any evidence of that. How hard is it to put two phones side by side and take a photo? Especially when they tore it apart and took photos of everything else.
 
Freestyler said:
I thought Gizmodo said that even the 'Connect to iTunes to Restore' screen was a lot higher-res than current/'old' iPhones.
Click to expand...
I may have missed that.

In any case, not being able to see pics of that screen doesn't seem like some big tragedy.. :P I'd rather wait for the real unveiling to truly judge that screen.
 
I should be doing hw said:
Yeah they made a point to say that it was much better looking but never showed any evidence of that. How hard is it to put two phones side by side and take a photo? Especially when they tore it apart and took photos of everything else.
Click to expand...


Because they forgot to take a photo of it before they broke the phone by taking it apart, no doubt.
 
man... will this die down when all the internet geeks and fanboys actually get their hands on the new iphone or will this go on for months and months?



I just hope it was worth all this hassle
 
Gizmo knew it didnt belong to to the guy who was selling it and bought it anyway. That alone is a crime.
I cant believe people dont understand that simple detail.
 
Shiggie said:
Gizmo knew it didnt belong to to the guy who was selling it and bought it anyway. That alone is a crime.
I cant believe people dont understand that simple detail.
Click to expand...
Bu-bu-bu-bu JOURNALIST
 
Gary Whitta said:
Wow, I'd better not call the police next time I suspect some valuable property of mine has been stolen, apparently that would make me an asshole.
Click to expand...

call the police before or after you know who has it, wrote them a letter asking for it back, and they said OK and returned it?

If you suspect criminal activity, why not just involve the police immediately? why decide to make the burglar a penpal?
 
Gary Whitta said:
Wow, I'd better not call the police next time I suspect some valuable property of mine has been stolen, apparently that would make me an asshole.
Click to expand...
Unlike you, I'm completely disinterested in all the parties involved and was merely correcting his assertion that Apple has simply been a passive bystander.
 
brian-hogan.jpg


http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-finder/

The person who found and sold an Apple iPhone prototype says he regrets not doing more to return the device to its owner, according to a statement provided by his attorney Thursday in response to queries from Wired.com.

Brian J. Hogan, a 21-year-old resident of Redwood City, California, says although he was paid by tech site Gizmodo, he believed the payment was for allowing the site exclusive access to review the phone. Gizmodo emphasized to him “that there was nothing wrong in sharing the phone with the tech press,” according to his attorney Jeffrey Bornstein.

Wired.com identified Hogan as the finder of the prototype by following clues on social network sites, and then confirmed his identity with a source involved in the iPhone find.

Hogan has been interviewed by law enforcement investigators but has not been charged with a crime. His attorney says he is willing to cooperate with authorities.

It’s generally considered theft under California law if one “finds lost property under circumstances that give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner” and yet appropriates the property for his own use “without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him.”
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Apple posts a very cringe ad for new iPhone - A ferret gets triggered
48
749
PonyStation4 replied
Foldable iPhone renders
2
79
1K
Trilobit replied
No, you´re not getting old: iPhone keyboard is broken
15
648
TheUnicornGuy replied
Robotic Hands
13
578
Miyazaki’s Slave replied
Ultra clear look for the iPhone is wild. Here's how to get it.
48
2K
ShirAhava replied
Top Bottom