4 ms·

Seems a bit overkill? JUST for a moment, forget about the your bias on Gizmodo or Apple... When's the last time you or someone you know reported something sto

Seems a bit overkill? JUST for a moment, forget about the your bias on Gizmodo or Apple... When's the last time you or someone you know reported something stolen, knew who took it and possibly had just as much evidence of who has possession, and there was no search warrant and raid done on your behalf? I experienced several examples where there was video evidence of the theft, the value of the goods were anywhere between $1000 to $5000, there was identification of the person and there was nothing remotely as swift or stern taken here to recover.

qq66 16y ago
Yes, but in those instances was the person who received the stolen goods loudly boasting about it to tens of millions of people?
- jamesbressi 16y ago
  How is that relevant or matter? (I mean that in the most polite way for arguments sake) Action is action. Theft is theft. Evidence is evidence. I can understand if you mean because the iPhone became "high profile", but that shouldn't make a difference in how our system works my friend.
  - anigbrowl 16y ago
    As has been observed by many, it's not simple theft. If this was about an expensive cashmere sweater belonging to Steve Jobs, I would agree with you completely. But there is a strong argument that the acquisition and subsequent publicity in this case infringed heavily on state and federal laws which protect trade secrets. You might or might not agree whether those laws apply here, but enough qualified people think they do that it explains the intensity and speed of the investigation.
    - chc 16y ago
      It seems like that just begs the question. It doesn't really explain why police action is so swift to protect trade secrets but so slow to protect actual property rights.
  - narag 16y ago
    Not only they said they had the phone, but also disclosed that they have paid for it and even knew who was the engineer that lost it. ISTM that they've shot themselves in the foot.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Erwin 16y ago
This was no ordinary police raid, but apparently some kind of special task force designed to deal with computer/high-tech crimes, trade secrets violations etc. Google cache link (they seem to be getting a lot of attention right now..): http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:ZibyEs1nEGwJ:www.reacttf.org/+http://www.reacttf.org/&hl=en&client=opera&strip=1 http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:ZibyEs1nEGwJ:www.reacttf...
ezy 16y ago
This is a prototype for a major release by a company. It's not just a $600 phone, it's a $6Mil (or whatever factor of million) phone. Whether that's a valid amount to attach to it, I'll leave up the lawyers and pundits, but that, I think, is a better way to understand it.
sh1mmer 16y ago
I don't know why people keep throwing around the $5000 figure as the value of the phone. Surely, it was worth more than that to Gawker, as their gains from the story. More than that as a prototype it's arguably worth much more than that to Apple for competitive purposes.

qq66 16y ago

Yes, but in those instances was the person who received the stolen goods loudly boasting about it to tens of millions of people?

jamesbressi 16y ago
How is that relevant or matter? (I mean that in the most polite way for arguments sake) Action is action. Theft is theft. Evidence is evidence. I can understand if you mean because the iPhone became "high profile", but that shouldn't make a difference in how our system works my friend.
- anigbrowl 16y ago
  As has been observed by many, it's not simple theft. If this was about an expensive cashmere sweater belonging to Steve Jobs, I would agree with you completely. But there is a strong argument that the acquisition and subsequent publicity in this case infringed heavily on state and federal laws which protect trade secrets. You might or might not agree whether those laws apply here, but enough qualified people think they do that it explains the intensity and speed of the investigation.
  - chc 16y ago
    It seems like that just begs the question. It doesn't really explain why police action is so swift to protect trade secrets but so slow to protect actual property rights.
- narag 16y ago
  Not only they said they had the phone, but also disclosed that they have paid for it and even knew who was the engineer that lost it. ISTM that they've shot themselves in the foot.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

Erwin 16y ago

This was no ordinary police raid, but apparently some kind of special task force designed to deal with computer/high-tech crimes, trade secrets violations etc. Google cache link (they seem to be getting a lot of attention right now..): http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:ZibyEs1nEGwJ:www.reacttf.org/+http://www.reacttf.org/&hl=en&client=opera&strip=1 http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:ZibyEs1nEGwJ:www.reacttf...

ezy 16y ago

This is a prototype for a major release by a company. It's not just a $600 phone, it's a $6Mil (or whatever factor of million) phone. Whether that's a valid amount to attach to it, I'll leave up the lawyers and pundits, but that, I think, is a better way to understand it.

sh1mmer 16y ago

I don't know why people keep throwing around the $5000 figure as the value of the phone. Surely, it was worth more than that to Gawker, as their gains from the story. More than that as a prototype it's arguably worth much more than that to Apple for competitive purposes.