Posted on 04/26/2010 4:17:17 PM PDT by Smogger
(s)
Sir you are violating the Obamanomics wealth creation law of 2010 through your malicious refusal to upgrade your phone to a new model. (produced by a campaign donor)
(/s)
I would hope so. I had a PDF copy of the book or something on my PC a while back.
Exactly. And the irony is that reason the guy couldn't give it back is that, due to Apple's penchant for secrecy, their support people didn't know enough to accept it back. They thought it was some kind of joke. LOL!
All true . . . except in this case, there’s no innocent buyer.
This guy is lucky so far in that Apple has only crushed him ~ next, they scrape him off the plate into the garbage pail.
“Exactly who stole anything here?
Whoever took it from where the Apple guy laid it and then sold it to Gizmodo for $5K. “
Hmmmn - what about ‘finders keepers’? After all, Apple didn’t claim it when it was offered.
And, whatever happened to mens rea? Or did that also disappear into the collectivist, police state mentalist that Ca. has so well demonstrated in this case?
Given the shooting ability of the average cop, a magazine was emptied at the dog but there were no hits.
This is “the new design” and any copyrights are going to run for 125 years!
The Apple people are full of themselves and full of crap. A few weeks ago I went to one of their ‘Genius Bar’ locations to pick up a computer my son had left to be repaired. It just so happened that on this day they were launching a new product. To create some sort of false excitement, they had a velvet rope set up outside the store, like one you would see at an exclusive night club, with a security guard manning it who was not letting anyone enter the store. This was in the middle of a Saturday afternoon. Finally I said this is nuts I’m going in and walked right past the guard. Inside their were about 10 blue-shirted Apple employees for every customer and there were only about 5 customers inside. I asked one of the Blue Boys to tell me what the hell was going on, but he just walked away like he was very busy! What a nut house! Finally, I was able to get the laptop and leave, but only after several other hip Blue people tried to sell me some more of their crap! These people think they are gods gift to technology and that they are doing you a big favor by letting you buy their overpriced products!
ah they they have documented three attempts to return the phone AND
apple’s own letter does not accuse anyone of anything illegal.
Yup.
The device was left in some bar for crying out loud, and to quote “SeaHawkFan, :”The guy tried to give it back and Apple wouldn’t take it, the phone was abandoned property. Where’s the theft?”
You will notice Apple wasn't going after the device ~ they had that ~ they went after his pictures of the design.
Apple refused to take it back, when the original finder contacted them. That makes it abandoned property.
“The kid who busted into Sarah Palin’s emails probably thought what he did was legal ~ he's going to jail for a long time:
You are kidding right?
For the Sarah Palin email case to be the same as this one, the original finder of the iPhone, would have had to break into Apple's headquarters and stolen the device. That far from the case. The device was left at a bar.
The analogy here would be if Sarah Palin printed off her email, then left the printed email at a bar, and some kid found the email and read it. No one would be charging the kid of that is what had happened.
There is no “I attempted to return it therefore it is now mine” exception carved into our common law, nor is there a “I have no admission from the owner that a crime has been committed, therefore I cannot be investigated by the State” affirmative defense.
Then, someone on FR appears to claim "no harm, no foul."
Whatever Apple's representatives said over the phone, the cold, hard fact is NO BILL OF SALE WAS EXECUTED so the fellow who possessed it didn't own it! Because he didn't own it his legal options were fairly limited.
You have no other choices.
There's no "I made a phone call and they said it's OK" exception.
california law requires an attempt to return it.
that part was done.
THEN the owner has three years to claim it.
that part was done.
the item was returned.
What is the crime? refusal to return? the item was not stolen because there was a verifiable attempt to return and immediate return upon demand.
You may be right, but it was not the FBI who raided this house. It was California State LEOs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.