Slashdot Mirror
Gizmodo Blows Whistle On 4G iPhone Loser
Stoobalou writes "Not content with its iPhone scoop, Gizmodo has probably ruined the career of a young engineer. The tech blog last night exposed the name of the hapless Apple employee who had one German beer too many and left a prototype iPhone G4 in a California bar some 20 miles from Apple's Infinite Loop campus. Was that really necessary?"
It also came out that they paid $5K for the leaked prototype and that Apple wants it back.
Leaks? Typical Apple marketing.
Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
You know, I find that completely over-the-top.
If the story is accurate, then what's the point of exposing the poor sod's name?
What purpose does that serve? The guy's obviously had a rough week; why pile on and make it worse?
It's likely that he's going to be terminated (from his employment, not physically), if he hasn't been already. I'm sure there's some "handling company materials" guideline or somesuch on the books at Apple that will be enforced.
So why expose him publicly?
I don't get it. This just seems like nonsense to me.
Apple obviously knows who has these prototypes, and they knew this one was lost because they remotely shut it down.
Airplane Photos, Airline News, Planespotting Guides
I think the site has done a good job on the analysis.
Gizmodo was a greedy site who wanted more hits, the author's an asshole who just wanted to cause more trouble for that guy for kicks.
Sure, he lost a prototype, but does he deserve his career ruined at other firms too? Definitely not.
Especially problematic in the tech industry where employers are sure to run a Google search on prospective employees.
I don't care if it's an iPhone, a new version of the Nexus One, a new USB enabled stapler or what have you, this is really really scummy of Gizmodo and I hope they burn in hell.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Gizmodo are jerks and I will no longer go to their website. Outing this guy in the fashion that they chose is just reprehensible.
I find it hard to believe that Apple would just hand these things out without keeping track of who had them. It probably didn't take too long to figure out whose phone was missing once the first photos were published.
This is a phenomenally stupid move on gizmodo's part. They violated one of the most important rules in journalism : keep your sources safe. Let's see how many anonymous tips they'll get now.
Okay, I find something, I know who it belongs to, and I choose to keep it, rather than return it.
How is that not stealing?
What if... the guy left the bar, so I took his phone. He got to his car, realized his mistake, and came back to get it, but it was gone? Did I 'find' it, or did I 'steal' it?
What if the guy left it for a few minutes to take a leak, and I took it then?
Sure, the engineer screwed up, but legal or not, it ain't right to keep the phone.
It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.
Stop with the Apple slashvertisments already. it continues like this, soon /. is i., news for fanboys, stuff that really doesn't matter.
I agree... if it were me, I'd be waiting at the place the next morning the minute they opened...
StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
It sure sounds like a marketing stunt.
I would expect that a sensitive field prototype would be required to have a 1 minute passcode lock and automatic total device wipe (including firmware) after a very small number of failed passcode entries.
Relying on remote wipe seems silly, since any serious industrial spy would put it in an RF-proof jacket ASAP and only examine it in a room sealed from outside RF to prevent remote wipe.
Now it may be that this isn't considered a terribly sensitive prototype -- maybe an early manufacturing sample being used for final testing before they ramp up to final production. They don't *want* it in the hands of the public, but they also wouldn't fire an employee who was let loose in the streets with it.
Off the top of my head...
People who are undecided might wait for the Iphone G4 instead of whichever Android phone is best at the moment.
It lets them gauge market interest in certain features (or missing features) while still allowing them to change the specs
because it was just a prototype.
It gets the Iphone more press for something other than the 'its locked down' or 'this app was rejected' stories.
I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
It *IS* a marketing ploy. There is *NO* reason why the apple and iphone names/logos should have been imprinted into this device if it is a prototype/testing device. Without the logos and with a good locking mechanism (as stated by others) this should only have appeared to be some knock-off device. As usual, all the stupid media (including /.) picks up on this and apple gets free publicity. Duh!
Has anyone considered that this is a flat out publicity stunt to get mouths watering in light of the release of the HTC Droid Incredible. Quite frankly, this stinks like a PR department.
"It's all been said before."
So developers shouldn't work at BWM, Daimler, any defense contractor in the world, iPhone/iPad/iPod, Phillips, Siemens or any biomedical developer in the world?
The list of companies that make "closed, locked down products" is vast and in comparison, Apple is pretty open with the iPad/iPhone, else the jailbreak people wouldn't have been doing it since launch.
Just look at the note they wrote the guy:
"Hey man, I know things seem really tough right now. We had mixed feelings about writing the story of how you lost the prototype, but the story is fascinating. And tragic, which makes it human. And our sin is that we cannot resist a good story. Especially one that is human, and not merely about a gadget — that’s something that rarely comes out of Apple anymore. But hopefully you take these hard times and turn things around. We all make mistakes. Yours was just public. Tomorrow’s another day. We will all be cheering for you."
I mean, honestly, come ON.
So, unlike you or me, he didn't think of just returning it to the bar knowing that if the person had lost the cell phone, that would likely be the first place he'd come looking?
What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
going to lose some job opportunities as a result of getting outed. Real dick move by Gizmodo.
Finally, someone who doesn't think this guy is the victim. HE IS THE WEAK LINK!! (I wish I had mod points. Sorry.)
When Apple said "here, carry around this priceless prototype phone and test it out" they most assuredly gave him a lecture on being careful and not losing it.
And he got plastered and lost it.
If I were Apple, if I didn't fire him outright I sure as hell wouldn't trust him anymore. So on second thought, if I can't trust him anymore, adios.
And if I were hiring developers for a secretive project, I sure as hell wouldn't hire him either.
Gizmodo* did us a favor by telling us his name. Now his prospective employers know he can't be trusted to hang onto things entrusted to him.
(* Gizmodo is totally not innocent IMO, but a discussion of Gizmodo's actions is not the point of this comment.)
So, I subscribe to Slashdot's RSS feed, and here are the articles:
A whopping three Apple articles out of the last 26, and two are from a developing story about a lost iPhone prototype. You people claiming Slashdot is full of Apple articles are full of shit. If you don't like Apple stories, use that thing on the right side of the window called a scrollbar and scroll past them.
P.S. Nice sockpuppeting in your own thread, AC.
Yup, and that's why I call bullshit. This guy had the name, home/business phone number, and facebook account. Yet he didn't leave a message on any of those options? Supposing the phone is bricked he *still* has the facebook option.
It seems pretty obvious that he didn't want the phone to be recovered, but made a half-hearted attempt to cover his ass.
Very unprofessional - and very, very short-sighted of Gizmodo which has now damaged tech journalism.
Thought experiment: What was gained/lost in this exchange?
People now know Gizmodo will out your name if they can find out who you were. Instead of just saying, "we know the employee's name and have verified they are in fact an employee of Apple" - that should have sufficed to add all the credibility they needed and a touch of class. Instead, they out the guys name publicly in a move that smacks of high-school nerd dramatics "SEE! We're so clever in our hackery that we can even get the guy's name and publish it all over the inter-webz!"
Results:
They look like a dangerous news outlet. If someone does have a big tech story that requires confidentiality, they'll look at Gizmodo, and possibly tech journalism in general, and think twice about talking to someone that is an outer of names. I certainly wouldn't trust my privacy to these guys now - even if it's the case that I go to them. They have come off very unprofessional and amateurish. Welcome to The Inquirer-level journalism standards Gizmodo - you just hurt your own industry.
They're shiny!
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
I noticed that too. Owell.
BUT, thinking on it, several things come immediately to mind:
1. Apple won't fire the engineer. that's bad press. They WILL however remove him from the engineering team and drop him into a job he probably doesn't like, forever. his job security is absolute, but his engineering career at apple is zero. that's the penalty for this level of "oops".
2. the poor guy's engineering career outside apple is also severely damaged by gizmodo's irresponsible release of his name. "carelessly lost a secret prototype that immediately fell into the hands of the press" doesn't look good on a design engineer's resume'.
3. "finders-keepers" rarely applies in the legal world. Not in California in particular. If you find something of value that you can reasonably assume was lost, you're obligated to turn it in. You may receive a finder's reward, but there's no requirement. Since he sold it for 5 grand he basically has no legal ground to stand on. he obviously knew it was valuable and lost.
4. buying something that you can reasonably assume is valuable and was lost is also illegal. Now gizmodo will be on the hook as well.
5. Apple was already going after Gizmodo and will almost certainly win the phone back as well as settle for some damages. or it may go to court if apple wants high damages. (would not surprise me)
6. Apple may further press legally to expose the identity of the finder of the phone. Gizmodo is not likely to have a leg to stand on here unless they somehow conducted a totally anonymous meeting and acquisition. (unlikely) We should be hearing the name of the greedy SOB sometime soon.
7. Apple may further press for legal action on the finder.
8. The finder really made a bad decision. Consider if he had instead: called/emailed apple and told them he found the phone and would like to have them come pick it up in person, not making any demands at all. (since he's not legally entitled to do so) Take lots of pictures of it and memorize it thoroughly. When they come to pick it up, they WILL be carrying an NDA for him to sign. Hand over the phone, and begin negotiations for the pictures and the NDA. All legal. He could have made a good deal more that way. Apple would have easily paid him 20 grand for the pictures and NDA signature. Instead, he's probably going to end up having to return the 5 grand for selling stolen property, ("theft by finding" I think is the legal term in CA?) and then face additional legal action.
Too bad all around, most everyone loses. Except maybe Gizmodo, which may come out ahead after all of this, depending on what sort of settlement Apple seeks.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Sorry buddy, but that relationship is commercial. Therefore any announcements of that relationship is an advert.
Wow. Here in the land of normal people, we *welcome* the announcement of these commercial relationships. It's called "full disclosure". Would you rather *not* know who a commentator is taking money from?
Regardless of what people think off the top of their heads. When you find a phone in a bar, store etc. you ask if the place has a "lost and found" and turn it in. It's likely the owner will come back for it. You don't take it home and play with it. Also selling it to a website is not particularly ethical, knowing that it is a prototype. On Gizmodo's side, they didn't know that the phone was not stolen and took the seller at his word, then went ahead and instead of calling Apple to return what didn't belong to the original guy, or them, they took it apart and reported on it. It's always fun to read about these 'leaks,' but in this case there were clearly some unethical things done. This hurts everyone except Gizmodo and the seller. It was selfish on both Gizmodo and the sellers part to put the report and pictures online. I did go look at the pictures though, and now I feel badly for supporting Gizmodo by checking it out and adding to the page count.