OK, so if the guy who found it tried to return it to Apple and Apple said “nope, not ours”, how is he guilty of violating the California law that says you can’t sell found property that you know belongs to someone else?
Well, that might possibly be a mitigating factor in his favor, but it probably is canceled out by the fact that he sold it to that writer for $5,000, telling him that it was Apple's prototype... LOL ...
But, aside from that, let's say that this guy finds something that he thinks belongs to Apple, but it doesn't. He still has to do something to get it back to the legitimate owner -- but he didn't. Instead, he went to sell it to a writer, tell him that it was Apple's and then get $5,000 for it.
That's one problem. But, I don't know if they've found that guy yet. I suspect one reason why they got a judge's warrant to seize the writer's equipment (besides the crime that the writer committed) -- was to find out who this guy was who found the iPhone in the first place.
In any case, it's the writer who is in a heap of trouble, I would say, because he makes no bones about it being Apple's iPhone ... :-)
The guy who found the iPhone will probably get a "plea bargain" in order for the writer to be "nailed big-time" ... doncha know... LOL ...
If I were that guy who found the iPhone, I would be "laying low" about right now, and maybe even go out of town for a while... :-) ... and the police may not find him.
If Apple denied they owned the phone then the seller may be guilty of falsely claiming it was an iPhone, similar to selling a faux purses on the street corner.
The web publisher may be guilty of making a false claim that the phone belonged to Apple. I happen to know that publishers can print any lie they want and the only consequence if somebody can prove libel.
If Apple denied ownership then the complexion of this case completely changed.
Well if Apple disclaimed the product then how was he to “know” it was an Apple product? What he did know was that Apple said it wasn’t Apple’s. If anything he sold it under the false pretense that it was an Apple product.