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.

Comments

What's the point?

[nbvb]

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.

Re:What's the point?

[phlawed]

Exposing the name of the guy likely isn't going to change Apple's reaction to the loss of the device.
But it sure harms the guy who lost it, and I think that was really, really rotten form.

Re:What's the point?

[Chyeld]

Because they are assholes and exposing him lends credence to their story, the story that pulled in so many hits that the entire Gawker group of blogs had to turn off comments for most of the day to handle the load being generated. The story that most of the non-Gizmodo sites were calling bullshit on because no one thought that it'd be plausible that they could come into possession of one of the phones in the way that they explained. The story that is likely to get get someone on their staff in trouble for being in possession of stolen goods, industrial espionage, and etc.

And, since they've realized this, they are doing their best to cover their asses by doing everything they can now to look like they were simply attempting to get it back to him rather than paying $5k to get an exclusive look at it.

Re:What's the point?

[lbmouse]

Exposing him publicly might just save him. Makes it harder for Apple to just sweep this under the rug and he might garner public sympathy. Who hasn't lost something?

Re:What's the point?

[McFadden]

Granted he's had a bad week, but it's also generated a reasonable degree of sympathy for the guy. I'd be surprised if Apple would want to court the bad publicity it would bring by firing the guy.
Make a mistake at Apple? Get fired? Doesn't come over well, especially when the public can now put a name and a face to him.
An anonymous engineer would have been easy to let go. This might just have saved his bacon.

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

Says the man who never lost a single thing in his entire life.

Re:What's the point?

[Wyatt Earp]

He didn't just make a mistake. He left a prototype in a bar while out drinking. That's flat out incompetence and he should be fired for it. I have zero sympathy for the guy, this growing trend of business people and government officials leaving sensitive equipment and data behind is just pure incompetence and being lax.

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you still feel the same way if it was a laptop containing 200,000 SSNs or a few million credit card records?

No, but here's the thing: it wasn't.

In other news, a man dropped a quarter on a concrete floor. He should probably be severely reprimanded, because, hey, what if it had been a baby that he had dropped? Ever think of that?

Re:What's the point?

[suomynonAyletamitlU]

Right. I mean, given how tightly Apple controls these things, it's not like they don't already know who lost it. Poor SOB probably had to face his superior before news got out that it had been leaked, and if he didn't, he wouldn't have survived any decent effort to find out which unit was missing.

If anything, this just means Apple can't obliterate his career without anyone else knowing why. ...not to say they'd do that, or not, I dunno.

Re:What's the point?

[Zantac69]

There are things that are ok to lose...and there are things that are not ok to lose.

Your house keys, your car keys, your wallet, your purse, your shoes, your underwear, YOUR cell phone...all of those things are of relatively small value and the impact is felt by you.

Other things have intrensically more value - computers and/or media with SSNs/CC/medical records info, advanced prototypes you are playing with from the lab, 250 grams of purified plutonium...these things you dont carry around in your pocket or in your bag. You keep a close watch on these items because they can be VERY valuable to others and/or affect many other people.

So dude got outed - yeah - tough break for being stupid and careless with something valuable. Dick move by Gizmondo outing him to the world - you know damn well Apple already knew who did it and turned his ass into a playground but Gizmondo's move was salt in the wound.

How bad was it? Honestly - we all kind of have the idea that the thing is coming out in a few months...so it only spoils a little of Apple's fanfare.

Re:What's the point?

[Deathlizard]

Steve Never Forgets. Especially when you Ruin Steve's party.

If I was that guy and I didn't get fired over this I would be resigning because I guarantee that Apple would make my job such a living hell that I wouldn't fear Satan anymore because I would have first hand experience going in.

Re:What's the point?

[N1AK]

[blockquote]He didn't just make a mistake. He left a prototype in a bar while out drinking.[/blockquote]

A prototype mobile phone which, assuming he was given it to test, there will always be a risk of losing. If my employer asked me to road test a phone, but I'd be fired if I lost it then I'd pass. If apple couldn't afford the risk of letting the device be lost, why did they give it to someone who has a chance of losing it in a public place?

Re:What's the point?

[farble1670]

that being said, if he liked his job, why would he ever use a top-secret prototype as his day to day phone? these things do happen. did apple have a rule against taking the proto off property? out in public?

unless there was a rule to never bring the phone out in public, then i can't see how they could fire him. simple state the phone was stolen. could he be help accountable for that? there are many ways a phone could be stolen that doesn't involve negligence by the user. i.e., you get jumped outside the bar.

yes okay they *can* fire him for anything they want, but it doesn't do wonders for moral when management goes around firing people because they were attacked outside of a bar.

Re:What's the point?

[Rary]

He didn't just make a mistake. He left a prototype in a bar while out drinking. That's flat out incompetence and he should be fired for it. I have zero sympathy for the guy, this growing trend of business people and government officials leaving sensitive equipment and data behind is just pure incompetence and being lax.

It's a prototype of a new phone. It's not a list of undercover CIA operatives.

Get some perspective.

Re:What's the point?

[jvkjvk]

Maybe they thought he'd have some damned personal responsibility?

Road test or field test doesn't mean drunken test.

I'm so glad that you have all the facts.

From what I understand, this was a field test phone. You know, the kind you take with you out and about, and use, perhaps day in and day out.

I imagine that you have never lost anything important?

To declare that 'personal responsibility' keeps you from accidentally losing something makes you look like an idiot. It's akin to saying - "Just be Perfect! That solves Everything!!"

We live in a complex world. Even the base physical layer is quite complicated. This could have slipped out of his pocket when he sat down, for example. The mental layer is even more complicated. Juggle too many things and something WILL drop. You probably won't even know which one till much later.

Regards.

Re:What's the point?

[pacergh]

And, since they've realized this, they are doing their best to cover their asses by doing everything they can now to look like they were simply attempting to get it back to him rather than paying $5k to get an exclusive look at it.

The problem is that they're covering their asses by creating additional privacy liabilities. This is an invasion of this poor guy's privacy. The First Amendment likely won't protect them here, either. This guy isn't someone famous and it was not necessary, for the story, to out him.

The result of this unethical move is that the guy who lost the phone may now reasonably lay down economic losses for his inability to find a future job plus pain and suffering because of the publicity he received. Add on to that potential punitive damages because of the very questionable method Gizmodo used to acquire the phone and you have a case an good Plaintiff's attorney should take.

So, by covering their asses, and adding credibility, and acting like children in taunting Apple, Gizmodo has ruined some poor guy's life and opened themselves up to even greater liability.

Stay class, Gizmodo.

Re:What's the point?

[pacergh]

As others have said, it's almost certainly a CYA move on Gizmodo's part.

If by CYA you mean they've opened themselves up to even more legal liability, then yes.

They need to consult their lawyers before they pull this crap.

This is an invasion of this poor guy's privacy. The First Amendment won't protect them, either. This guy isn't famous in his own right, and disclosing him served no real purpose for the story. They're unethical behavior now has them on the hook for legal liabilities for his economic losses, pain and suffering for the exposure, and possible punitive damages for the nature of the outing and the questionable methods they used to acquire the device.

I hope this guy sues them. Any good Plaintiff's attorney knowing anything about invasion of privacy should jump at this case.

Stay class, Gizmodo.

Re:What's the point?

[h4rr4r]

So Steve Jobs thinks getting 9 women pregnant will get you a baby in 1 month?

If I heard that claptrap I would not be motivated just be forced to realize the boss is a total dumbass.

Re:What's the point?

[Rakishi]

Trunk of your car, god you're incompetent and shouldn't have a work laptop. Hell, you should be fired on the stop for such gross negligence. Do you know how trivial it is for someone to open your trunk while breaking into the front of your car? One little lever and it pops right open. Do you know how often cars are broken into nowadays? Doubt there's a car thief around who doesn't know people store the valuable stuff in the trunk.

He'd Be In Trouble Anyway

[longacre]

Apple obviously knows who has these prototypes, and they knew this one was lost because they remotely shut it down.

Re:He'd Be In Trouble Anyway

[Kagato]

Sure, Jobs is infamous for firing people who look at him cross-eyed. Given the small team size and secrecy for these kinds of projects he wasn't going to be a household name. The privacy would afford him the opportunity to position his exit from Apple on his own terms. Now when a recruiter types in his name on Google the first thing that will come up the article about him losing the phone.

Profit Motives

[tsj5j]

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.

Shame on Gizmodo.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

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.

Re:Shame on Gizmodo.

[Bigjeff5]

It actually probably protects him quite a bit, assuming this wasn't a marketing ploy to begin with.

Think about it, they know which phone it was because they wiped it the day after it was lost. More than likely the employee himself reported it missing (again, assuming it wasn't a marketing ploy) in order to protect what little chance he had to keep his job. Obviously they've known since day one who lost it, either way.

By publicly outing the guy, he is going to have a lot of people who think he should keep his job in spite of the mistake. That's what they call "public pressure". Now Apple could harm their public image by firing the guy, or they could improve it by keeping him on. That's a lot more support than a nameless employee is going to get.

You won't be able to tell if it is a marketing ploy, by the way, unless they fire the guy. If they fire him, it almost certainly is not a marketing ploy. If he keeps his job, it could have been a ploy all along, or it could just be Apple deciding it would be worth more than this guy's job for them to look merciful to their subjects... I mean employees.

Re:Shame on Gizmodo.

[UnknowingFool]

Now Apple could harm their public image by firing the guy, or they could improve it by keeping him on. That's a lot more support than a nameless employee is going to get.

The guy made a mistake. People get fired for mistakes. Apple is within their rights to fire the guy. Yes I feel badly for the guy to get fired for making a mistake and he may get a lot of sympathy. Apple may get some bad press but nothing they do is remotely immoral or illegal in any way. If anything it sends a message to other Apple employs: Don't screw up like this.

Apple probably already knew

[nine-times]

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.

Sources

[ianare]

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.

Semantics, bah

[new death barbie]

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.

Re:Semantics, bah

[IndustrialComplex]

Because they abandoned it. At the time, they obviously didn't want it. They might have even left it there for you, and are simply changing their mind later. Either way, it isn't stealing because you never took it from them. In fact, you took it from nobody.
You found it. The decent thing to do would be to just give it back, but it's not uncommon to ask for a finder's fee before returning it (though it is uncommon if someone lost it for such a short period of time).
Seriously, what kind of dumbass is this guy? You still found it, you didn't steal it.
"Right" is subjective, but I'd agree that giving it back is the decent thing to do. It still isn't theft.

You are so completely wrong I don't know where to begin. Are you basing your opinion on the case of Finders v. Keepers?

First, it doesn't matter if it is unattended, it is not your property. You removed it from the place the owner placed it. That IS theft. There is leeway for the owners of an establishment to move the item to a lost and found area, but it certainly does not become their property it remains the property of the person who owned it and left it on the table/bar/etc. Depending on the jurisdiction, you can go through a process to dispose of the item (Sell it, trash it, keep it, turn it over to the state, etc) Most jurisdictions clearly define the process and what you are required to do.

Is your justification based on the size of the item in question? That doesn't matter and doesn't alter the ownership of the item.

If someone parked a porsche on the curb and left the keys on the front seat, do you think you wouldn't get charged with grand theft auto if you simple "moved it to get it out of the rain"?

I can see you are trying to justify the theft here, but in the end Gizmodo IS in posession of stolen property.

Re:Still not convinced

[RobertM1968]

I agree... if it were me, I'd be waiting at the place the next morning the minute they opened...

Re:Still not convinced

[swb]

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.

Re:Still not convinced

[click2005]

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.

It *IS* a marketing ploy.

[cpotoso]

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!

Re:It *IS* a marketing ploy.

[osu-neko]

Except that if *I* were going to put field units out, I would make sure they'd have no logos whatsoever printed in them. Seems a quite elemental "security" consideration if you *really* wanted to keep a secret...

That's why you would suck at security. It would be far more suspicious to see a completely logo-less phone running the obvious iPhone OS than to see what appears to be an iPhone 3GS running it.

Seriously, I do hope your job doesn't involve security or secrecy to any degree. You really, really suck at it...

'IT' is coming...

[xxEtineSxx]

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.

Re:not too bad

[Wyatt Earp]

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.

And if any of you doubt that they're wankers

[Bertie]

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.

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[Ctrl Alt De1337]

It's true that Apple often leaks things for PR, but it doesn't do it like this. It plants things in publications like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times by calling up journalists, giving pointed hints, and leaving no paper trail. That way, both Apple and the publication have plausible deniability about everything: for Apple, it was just some rumor, and for the papers, it could have been a misunderstanding.

Apple sure as hell leaks things, as every tech company does in some way, shape, or form. This, however, is not how it operates. Specs and price points get leaked, not actual hardware. The iPhone is its big baby, and Steve prefers to have a big reveal on stage in San Francisco when announcing his precious new devices.

Re:Still not convinced

[SoupGuru]

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?

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[Low Ranked Craig]

There seems to be a lot of bad information surrounding this and as usual Slashdot is going off half cocked without the full picture, let alone RTFA. Gizmodo is not my favorite site, and frankly I think some of the editors over there are assholes (Jesus, I'm talking to you) but some of them are pretty good like Mark and Rosa. Anyway:

First, they didn't out their source: This guy isn't their source, he's the guy that lost the phone. Their source found the device and contacted Apple to attempt to return the device but in typical large company fashion, the people at Apple who knew the device was missing never got that message from the people the guy talked to, and Apple basically blew the guy off.

Gizmodo paid their source for the phone after Apple failed to respond to him. So the guy found a phone, tried to return it to the owner, the owner didn't respond so he sold it. I don't see a problem here.

Gizmodo found out who the guy who lost the phone was and contacted him. Whether or not they had permission from him to publish his name is unknown, but they did talk to the guy. I don't see the entire point in naming names here, but the dude did lose the phone and it is his fault (unless you believe the Apple did it on purpose theories) so while I probably wouldn't have released his name, I don't really have a problem with it as it seems to be a legitimate if somewhat tabloid story.

And finally, after publishing the story, Apple contacted Gizmodo to return the phone and they complied. http://gizmodo.com/5520479/a-letter-apple-wants-its-secret-iphone-back.

So, in the end Apple got their device back, we got to know what the next iPhone will look like, and Gizmodo made a shitload of money from all the traffic the story generated. I just hope that guy gets to keep his job. If not Gizmodo should hire him.

Even if it was a deliberate leak, this employee is

[sdnick]

going to lose some job opportunities as a result of getting outed. Real dick move by Gizmodo.

MOD PARENT UP

[Rodness]

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.)

Re:MOD PARENT UP

[Captain Centropyge]

Like you're perfect, never making any mistakes or having a lapse in judgment? Give the guy a break and stop being a douche.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Etc., etc....

I'm not saying the guy didn't do something stupid. But does losing a phone have to ruin the guy's career..? Apple's still going to sell tons of these new iPhones. They'll still make a ton of money. I don't think that this is really going to hurt Apple much, if at all. Give him a stern talking to, a reprimand, whatever. Is the quality of his work worth keeping him? It might be. But I doubt they'll let him test another prototype anytime soon.

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[pnewhook]

Gizmodo or the guy who found it didn't report the device to the police so its stolen. And if they paid someone for the device knowing it wasn't his property, then thats fencing stolen property. Additionally Gizmodo had no newsworthy reason to publish the guys name.

I'm hoping criminal charges get laid here.

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[iamhassi]

"So the guy found a phone, tried to return it to the owner, the owner didn't respond so he sold it. I don't see a problem here."

Ok, here's a car analogy since /. loves car analogies: "Well, I was at this bar and found these car keys, so I drove the car around and tried to find the owner. After a few weeks I couldn't, so I sold the car."

If you find something that's not yours you are suppose to try and contact the owner and if you can not, give it to the police. Anything else and it's theft. How else can it work? Are we suppose to trust thefts to be honest?

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[nobodyman]

Their source found the device and contacted Apple to attempt to return the device but in typical large company fashion, the people at Apple who knew the device was missing never got that message from the people the guy talked to, and Apple basically blew the guy off.

This is what their source claims but personally I find this suspect. What if his "trying" involved calling tech support and saying "hurr hurr I have an 4g iphone"? because that's what it sounds like from the article:

No one took him seriously and all he got for his troubles was a ticket number.

He thought that eventually the ticket would move up high enough and that he would receive a call back, but his phone never rang.

I see, so he randomly dialed some numbers and then dialed tech support. Way to go all out, buddy. How about actually contacting the owner ?? After all, he had access to the owner's facebook account as well as his home/work phone number before the 4g was remotely disabled. It seems like an obviously half-hearted attempt because the finder did not want return the phone but wanted to appear like he did.

I don't see the entire point in naming names here, but the dude did lose the phone and it is his fault...

Yes, it is absolutely his fault, and he was probably going to suffer harsh consequences already. However, Gizmodo decided to heap public humiliation on top of this. He was already going to get fired, but now he is a laughingstock who will have a seriously hard time getting another job in the industry because of his newfound name recognition.

This guy was already screwed but Gizmodo decided to utterly destroy his career and reputation -- all for a few more clicks. Total dick move.

Re:Slashdot:

[bonch]

So, I subscribe to Slashdot's RSS feed, and here are the articles:

Hidden Cores On Phenom CPUs Can Be Unlocked
Study Finds Fast-Food Logos Make You Impatient
Gizmodo Blows Whistle On 4G iPhone Loser
What Will the Browser Look LIke In Five Years?
History Repeats Itself, Mac & the iPad
BitTorrent CEO On Net Neutrality
Amazon Fights For Privacy of Customer Records
The Nuts and Bolts of PlayStation 3D
Quantum Cyrptography Now Fast Enough For Video
An Early Look At Next-Gen Shooter Bodycount
IE8's XSS Filter Exposes Sites To XSS Attacks
Source Code To Google Authentication System Stolen
What Is the Future of Firewalls?
Adding Some Spice To *nix Shell Scripts
SEC Proposes Wall Street Transparency Via Python
Roger Ebert On Why Video Games Can Never Be Art
Fatal Flaw Discovered In Invisibility Cloaks
Network Solutions Sites Hacked Again
EU Piracy Estimates -- Just How Inaccurate?
Why Computer Science Students Cheat
US House Passes Ban On Caller ID Spoofing
Palm WebOS Hacked Via SMS Messages
George Washington Racks Up 220 Years of Late Fees At Library
Why Aren't SSD Prices Going Down?
Cows On Treadmills Produce Clean Power For Farms
This Is Apple's Next iPhone

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.

A half-hearted attempt at best

[nobodyman]

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.

Just damaged tech journalism

[mpfife]

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.

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[xaxa]

Yes, it is absolutely his fault, and he was probably going to suffer harsh consequences already.

Unless some policy has been broken (e.g. not removing development phones from the lab) I don't see any reason to fire the engineer. In allowing the phone out of the Apple building Apple are taking a risk. Would you fire him if he'd been mugged?

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[Anonymous Coward]

So the guy found a phone, tried to return it to the owner, the owner didn't respond so he sold it. I don't see a problem here.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, the central issue is with that persons ethics. He finds a phone in a bar and *TAKES IT HOME* instead of leaving it at the bar for the person to come back to and retrieve it. He could have taken just the contact information and still left the phone there.

If you don't see the problem here, you might be a douche too.

Re:Slashdot:

[HaZardman27]

They're shiny!

Re:I'm confused

[v1]

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.

Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong

[nobodyman]

If the guy who found the phone wasn't willing to call some random phone number in the middle of the night, and instead intended to wait until morning to make that call, well certainly that's not being polite...it's blatent theft.

Well, he *did* call random numbers... just not the obvious ones (how about work# of the guy who just left without the phone?) So let's throw out that argument.

And if he didn't anticipate that the phone would be locked down by morning and thus didn't write down the number on a piece of paper while it was still working in the middle of the night, then that's not a lack of psychic ability...it's blatent theft.

Look, he remembered the guy's name and facebook page, that's why he's in this mess in the first place, right?

You're trying to paint this guy as some polite, moral character. In actuality it's some douche who found a lost phone, accessed his facebook account, attempted to look through all his photos, and then sold it to the highest bidder.

And for the record, I never called it blatent theft, I'm just calling the finder a dickhead. There's no law against being a dickhead.

Re:Not Quite

[Tintivilus]

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?

Bottom Line

[engele]

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.