3 ms·
They bought stolen goods, period. Sorry, at which point did the theft occur?
by hyperbovine 17y ago
They bought stolen goods, period.
Sorry, at which point did the theft occur?
- epochwolf 17y agoWhen the guy who found the phone didn't turn the lost phone in at the bar or a police station.
- danudey 17y agoCalifornia 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 real. Misappropriation = theft.
- Judson 17y agoIt is interesting that everyone always points to this california law, and the key word thrown around is misappropriation, though, according to wikipedia, misappropriation is meant to mean something like: "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.
- mbreese 17y ago> according to wikipedia I don't mean to sound glib, but I'm fairly certain that wikipedia is not an expert on California legal codes.
- mrkurt 17y agoNor are most Hacker News posters. At least Wikipedia cites sources. :)
- mbreese 17y agoVery true... but most HN posters at least have some sort of identity that they like to protect. And karma helps too... With wikipedia you can never be sure that someone doesn't have an axe to grind. At least it's usually obvious here. :)
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- hyperbovine 17y agoSo then... Jason Chen must be the guy who sold the phone to Gizmodo. Correct?