The police get involved in the lost iPhone case

April 23, 2010 | Dean Takahashi | Comments |

Police are investigating the case of the lost iPhone prototype, which was left by an Apple engineer at a bar and subsequently sold to the blog Gizmodo for $5,000.

CNET reported that Apple has spoken to local police in Silicon Valley about the circumstances behind the disappearance of the iPhone, and it’s believed the investigation is being led by a computer crime task force of the Santa Clara County district attorney’s office, which has jurisdiction in the county that includes Cupertino, Calif., where Apple’s headquarters are located.

Editors at Gizmodo.com, a site owned by Gawker Media, have disclosed a lot about how they came to get the iPhone prototype, which is believed to be a version of a product that won’t ship for months. Apple closely guards these prototypes, since its design and innovation are how it sets itself apart from clone phone makers.

A 27-year-old Apple engineer left the phone by accident at a bar in Redwood City, Calif. He frantically went back to find it, but it wasn’t there. Gizmodo editor Brian Lam wrote that whoever found it tried to return it to Apple but had no luck. Then the finder approached Gizmodo, which paid money for it. CNET said it couldn’t determine which party the police were investigating. Apple sent a letter asking for the prototype back and Gizmodo returned it, after taking the phone apart and spilling all of the secrets it could.

The incident has received huge coverage, with much of it focused on the unlucky engineer. Last year, an employee at one of Apple’s contract manufacturers, Foxconn, in China committed suicide after his employer’s security staff put pressure on him for losing Apple iPhone prototypes.

The investigation shows that Apple still takes its security and secrecy very seriously, as past attempts to sue bloggers have shown. And it also shows that the media may be on fuzzy legal ground when it buys property that clearly belongs to somebody else, in effect receiving a stolen good.

CNET wrote that under a California law dating back to 1872, anyone who finds something and knows who the likely owner is but “appropriates such property to his own use” is guilty of theft. A second state law says that any person who knowingly receives property that has been obtained illegally can be imprisoned for up to a year. On the other hand, the First Amendment protects the press from disclosing confidential sources.

[photo credit: Gizmodo]

Next Story: Roundup: Amazon profits climb, Google denies iPhone rumors
Previous Story: Kleiner Perkins’ Randy Komisar: Maybe Web startups don’t need venture capital

Bookmark

Google

Delicious

Facebook

Twitter

StumbleUpon

MySpace

Digg

Live

More…

Companies: Apple, Gizmodo

About the Author, Dean Takahashi

Dean is lead writer for GamesBeat at VentureBeat. He covers video games, security, chips and a variety of other subjects. Dean previously worked at the San Jose Mercury News, the Wall Street Journal, the Red Herring, the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register and the Dallas Times Herald. He is the author of two books, Opening the Xbox and the Xbox 360 Uncloaked. Follow him on Twitter at @deantak, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.

thinkitthrough

goodbye Gizmodo!

ThankYouDriveThrough

"Apple closely guards these prototypes..."

Oh really? They gave one to an irresponsible half-a-tard.

CannotUnderstand

Oh, they gave it to you? Sometimes one's baseless insults say more about you than your intended target.

disappointedinblogo

Reporting the story and not revealing the source is protected, paying for the information is protected, paying for the stolen property is theft. If the thief wanted to return it do what most people would do and give it to the bar tender. Call Apple? cummon, how about posting an inbox message on the engineers Facebook page, since they looked him up on his own phone to out him on the internet. Not much reputable effort in that I am afraid.

John

"the First Amendment protects the press from disclosing confidential sources"

No the constitution does not protect the press from disclosing confidential sources. The Supreme Court has ruled that withholding information from a criminal investigation is not protected under the 1st amendment. The many reporters put in jail from contempt of court is proof.

schnitt

Honestly the police have more important things to do then investigate a $500 phone, regardless how much projected income said phone will ever make.

Personally I would have put it in my blendtec blender.
Come on, we all want to know if the 4th version of the iphone will blend.

atlantaguy

Well, I saw the blog and photo sites from the guy who lost this phone. He seems to party a lot. At least based on the number of bar/club photos in his Flickr account. And he's from Raleigh, and young. Ok, I live in the South - people DRINK here.

So the question will be... does Apple want someone in a sensitive position in their company, who carries around very secret prototypes of their products, who is a heavy partier, working for them? Some may think it's no big deal, but the world of electronics is a serious business. If whoever found it had decided to do so, he could have taken this phone to any number of phone makers who could have got some nice heads-ups on the new tech in the device, maybe even being able to copy it in upcoming models of their own. This could cost Apple potentially millions of dollars, and you know how Apple likes to make and hold on to every single penny they can get from the consumers for proprietary (and secret until announced) items. So one night of drinking by a brainy frat boy could have cost his company mega-$$$.

My guess: Apple will now alter that model if it wasn't in the very final design phase, to throw off people who read the review. The guy will lose his job after having to sign numerous legal non-disclosure documents and a legal form stating he will not seek employment with a competitor. He'll then go back to Raleigh. Wait and see I guess.

Nada Lemming

It could have been left on my front step and I could have cared less. For gosh sakes, it's a phone. I don't worship the Reverend Jobs and the Apple Apostles.

Guest

I work for the car industry and when new car is being develop, they camouflage the skim or use an old skin that does not draw so much attention, why couldn't apple do that? obviously they strive for attention like a 16 high school girl. Also, this is a cheap marketing technique that gets everyone doing free advertisement for your products. Is is well known in the marketing biz that if you can get a news about the company, it is free ad.

guest=2

"why couldn't apple do that?" - They did.

bob

Errm, the fact that it is apple has NOTHING to do with it.

1. A product was found then stolen and sold
2. The stolen property was then disassembled with the full knowledge that it was stolen.

This is a simple case of stolen goods being sold , and a second party receiving stolen goods.

flipsasser

When did we start covering bloggers with freedom of the press? In what way have they ever complied with the laws governing the press? Ridiculous. They barely spell check their posts, let alone obey payola or libel laws. It's a shame if we're that willing to give up on our own source of information for a couple thousand quippy amatuers.

Objective reader

Freedom of the press is applied to all citizens of the united states. You require no license to be a member of the press. It's covered by freedom of speech.

Common Sense

Guess the cubicle n00bs at gizmodo didn't listen to mommy when she said "do the right thing" and return someones expensive mof!@$ing phone to them! Clearly Gizblowjo is nothing more than an tabloid hound. Hope Apple messes with them. I would.

David in San Diego

I am 100% First Amendment... it's one our proudest Rights. However, when you commit a crime, you forfeit some of these rights. Period. The magazine should be obligated, by law, to turn over the name, otherwise they should be charged with the crime. Period. End of Story.

david

the press has that freedom to protect it from the political system which might deem you a threat someday and want your name on a list.the founding fathers saw this firsthand and we have seen goverments change overnight,so think hard before you give up you rights so easily,you wont get them back....food for thought..

San Diego blowhard

David,

Who cares what you think? Your logic is absurd. Your knowledge of the law is absurd. Period. End of Story!

destroyeroftrolls

Trolls are out in full force.

LarryH49

It says the person attempted to give it to Apple but was unsuccessful. Is one try enough? How many strikes does Apple get?

hardcache

The Apple Employee never stated he lost the iPhone. At this point Gizmodo and the person who sold the phone to Gizmodo are the only one's alleging that the Apple Employee lost the iPhone.

The person who sold the iPhone to Gizmodo.com stated that he never attempted to contact the owner even though he knew who the owner was because he managed to identify him from the Facebook App profile on the iPhone because he was sitting next to him at a bar... yet this alleged 'finder' never attempted to contact said owner? Instead he dials some 1-800 number and has no documentation of these odd calls to Apple versus the apparent known owner? Seriously???

A few weeks pass and the iPhone is sold to the publisher. Then Gizmodo puts out this juvenile cover your ass story with this ridiculous naive narrative of the wonderful finder and Gizmodo's were not sure for legal reasons but we want convince you it really is the genuine next gen iPhone.

Apple is patiently gathering a case. It should surprise nobody when criminal charges are filed against an alleged thief and the publisher, Gizmodo, which allegedly purchased what it knew to be stolen property.

Publiusovid

Could this have been intentional? Sort of a trial balloon for comments that was certain to draw free attention to the next generation iPhone?

jphilpot

screw apple.... Why would they let something so secret be carried around in public.. There bad.. wasting tax payer money now...

disappointedinblogo

who do you think pays more taxes, Apple or you?

Charlie

People might take you more seriously if you didn't manage to include a capitalization error, four punctuation errors and a misspelling in a one-sentence post. People might also take you more seriously if your argument made any sense.