4 ms·
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 understan
by jamesbressi 17y 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 17y agoAs 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 17y agoIt 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 17y agoNot 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.