Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 2 days, 9 hrs ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 2 days, 11 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 3 days, 2 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 4 days ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 5 days, 6 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2010-04-27
, 08:16
|
|
Posts: 423 |
Thanked: 486 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ London, England
|
#42
|
Originally Posted by JohnLF
Hi John
Grey area to me. They are not buying a stolen item because it was found left in a public place, surely?
I'm no lawyer but my ex GF is, I remember her saying that (in UK at least) that if you find something and you know who it belongs too (even if you don't, you are obliged to hand it in to the police) and do not return it, it's basically (in law) the same as stealing.
Therefore, if you buy something off a person who has found/stolen an item, you would be receiving stolen goods, especially, as in this case, Gizmodo knew it was lost/found/stolen.
There was a case recently of a couple who found a winning lottery ticket and banked the money...They were arrested, tried, convicted and had their bank accounts emptied to return the money...Not quite the same but similar principle.
I would never buy an apple product but i'm inclined to side with them on this...
Of course, this is assuming USA has similar laws...hmmmm!!!
Last edited by Dancairo; 2010-04-27 at 08:25.
|
|
2010-04-27
, 08:18
|
|
Posts: 151 |
Thanked: 77 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#43
|
I agree with this on one level, but on another Gizmodo didn't know what they were getting themselves into.
Oh well, ignorance of the law is no excuse.. Gizmodo should have contacted a lawyer to ask what the limits were before posting Apple's intellectual property.
Oh well, ignorance of the law is no excuse.. Gizmodo should have contacted a lawyer to ask what the limits were before posting Apple's intellectual property.
|
|
2010-04-27
, 08:24
|
|
Posts: 1,751 |
Thanked: 844 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Sweden
|
#44
|
Originally Posted by Jeffgrado
Well.. Apple = 1984 = true.. This only confirms it.
A company needs to legally protect their brand. If that means setting a precedent like this for future similar cases, then it's what needs to be done. Apple is a publicly traded company, so it has obligations, even if that means some bad-will for PR.
In other news, Nokia is littering the streets with prototypes in hopes of some attention.
lol! And.. Nokia = 1968 = True
|
|
2010-04-27
, 08:26
|
|
Posts: 423 |
Thanked: 486 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ London, England
|
#45
|
Originally Posted by Jeffgrado
In other news, Nokia is littering the streets with prototypes in hopes of some attention.
Excellent Jeff
|
|
2010-04-27
, 09:07
|
|
Posts: 99 |
Thanked: 75 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#46
|
The way I see it gizmodo broke the law and then told everyone about it online.
I'm no fan of Apple, but I'm not sure why people are having a go at Apple about this.
I'm no fan of Apple, but I'm not sure why people are having a go at Apple about this.
|
|
2010-04-27
, 09:16
|
|
Posts: 99 |
Thanked: 75 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#47
|
Originally Posted by nermaljcat
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/13/5/s485
The phone wasn't stolen, it was lost/found.
One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.It was lost, until the guy sold it. Then it became theft.
 |
|
2010-04-27
, 09:23
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#48
|
I can understand Shield law being used to protect whistleblowers and other informants that leak information for the benefit of the people, but this whole thing is just about Gizmodo capitalizing on Apple's trade secrets for their own blog's benefit. Nothing more.
__________________
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Follow the MeeGo Coding Competition!
|
|
2010-04-27
, 09:27
|
|
Posts: 7 |
Thanked: 8 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ Dublin, Ireland
|
#49
|
And in another FAIL, Giz broke the news on a day when they had pre-sold the entire days advertising to Kodak for a fixed fee so they didn't earn any extra from the additional 3.6M visitors.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/bu...l?ref=business
Last edited by Royalridge; 2010-04-27 at 09:28. Reason: Added link to source.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/bu...l?ref=business
Last edited by Royalridge; 2010-04-27 at 09:28. Reason: Added link to source.
|
|
2010-04-27
, 09:32
|
|
Posts: 278 |
Thanked: 303 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Norwich, UK
|
#50
|
Originally Posted by SirMuttley
Actually thats not where it directly becomes theft, but where it becomes rather more unclear.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/13/5/s485
One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.It was lost, until the guy sold it. Then it became theft.
As was reported, the guy tried numerous times to return it to apple, and the reports say that he was told by Apple what he has is just a knock-off, and not to bother them about it.
Granted, he was probably only talking to monkeys on apple's helpdesk and only got a TR for his trouble, but if theyre the only point of contact apple will provide to him, then by the law you just quoted he clearly did make "reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and restore the property" by contacting them, whereupon the owner told him the device wasnt theirs and they didnt want it.
Both the guy and Gizmodo clearly had strong evidence the device was Apple's, so no effort was reasonably needed to locate any other potential owner, and he made all reasonable effort to return it to Apple before selling it (as reported, anyway).
In other news, Nokia is littering the streets with prototypes in hopes of some attention.