Here at Orange forums, we're always happy to hear about your experiences and love of Apples.

Wait, this wasn't a commercial for GlobalScale GuruPlugs? But but, so much camera time!!

The question is a matter of balance of power, and competition.

Will you still feel this is not a problem if Apple decides GMail can't access your Contacts? Will it be a problem for you when Apple inevitable decides you can only use an Apple app for certain tasks?

You know why they're doing this right? To restrict jailbreaking. Not because it's a harm to the phone carriers, but because 70% of their revenue is tied to iOS.

But then I guess you're okay with being told that "your" phone isn't really yours, you're just allowed to press the shiny buttons now and then. No problems here, child, adults are making the decisions for you after all.

We needed a balance for the "Evil Libruls are trying to destroy our Army, prisons and secret intelligence agencies!" side.

I put 'criminal' in quotes be cause honestly I don't feel he committed a crime. Is it a crime on the books? Sure, so's spitting on the sidewalk, carrying an ice cream cone in your pocket and a woman driving while wearing a house coat. My personal feeling is it's one of those laws prosecutors like to pile on, in the hopes maybe one will stick. It's totally up to the prosecutors discretion if they wish to pursue the case.

And 'police taskforce' wasn't a non-sequitur, Apple is on the steering committee of the task force that investigated these events and performed the highly unnecessary raid on the house of a Gizmodo writer. http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-04-30/business/20877418_1_iphone-tech-blog-gizmodo-steering

Where, in your world, is contacting the person in possession of the phone vigilantism? Do you think the only way to resolve a dispute is police in riot gear?

You have a lawyer contact the person in possession of the phone and offer a reward for finding the thing. Minimal fuss or drama. Have them sign some contract so your trade secrets stay secret a little longer and then you walk away.

And no, Apple is not 'any other person'. Apple is not a person, it's a corporate entity with a legal fiction of some person like rights. Like any other corporation they have an interest in minimizing bad press and not presenting themselves to the world as shady. Everything they've done in this case, and in the more recent case of a second lost iPhone, in regards to how they handled the event and their use of, indeed their ability to access the use of, strongarm police tactics, screams shady however.

Well, one, I will probably never own a $5000 phone, and if I could afford one I could afford to replace it.

In all honesty, yes, if through my stupidity I lost my $50000 phone I would not be shocked or surprised if someone else took it. This, btw, is why there are password locks to keep people out of your phone, remote wipe and insurance.

Let me ask you a question. With the limited and dwindling funds that state and federal government has at its disposal, would you rather they spend their time tracking and prosecuting violent offenders or tossing mad-dog phone picker uppers in prison?

Odd, you note that Apple had remotely wiped the phone prior to Gizmodo coming into possession of it, and then claim they rendered it non-functional. How does that sequence of events work?

BTW, Apple disabled the hardware, they've even got a patent application for it. http://www.iphonehacks.com/2010/08/apple-will-be-able-to-remotely-disable-iphone-after-detecting-unauthorized-activity-such-as-hacking-jailbreaking-unlocking.html

Before you say that this isn't enabled in iPhones, remember this was a prototype.

I put 'criminal' in quotes be cause honestly I don't feel he committed a crime. Is it a crime on the books? Sure, so's spitting on the sidewalk, carrying an ice cream cone in your pocket and a woman driving while wearing a house coat. My personal feeling is it's one of those laws prosecutors like to pile on, in the hopes maybe one will stick. It's totally up to the prosecutors discretion if they wish to pursue the case.

So, I guess you hate Gizmodo then.

Yes, because Steve did not have a well known and publicized history of throwing hissy fits when people reveal well known product details before his big spotlight moments. He's never crushed hobbyist blogs, had a guy fired for showing Woz, the same guy who built the first Apple an iPad for 2 minutes before it's official reveal.. nope, not spoiled there.

Also, interesting that the the same system you cheer for convicting this guy didn't find evidence to support extortion or theft charges against Gizmodo.

But they didn't just call the police. http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-04-30/business/20877418_1_iphone-tech-blog-gizmodo-steering They went to their special tech task force, which they have a seat on the steering committee of.

Yes, I'd try to get my phone back. Just they way I stated. Go to the house of the person possessing it, with a lawyer and perhaps an officer if I, being a normal person, could convince one to spend the time on my case, and politely say "Hey, you found my phone, that I lost. Kindly return it, and here's a small reward for finding it. Btw, keeping it is a crime and I'd rather not take it further but I will."

End of drama, minimal cost.

Instead, how many govt. man hours & public tax money were wasted on this, in a cash strapped state with honestly, way more important things to deal with.

Don't recall saying it was justice or that Apple somehow was asking for it, or that I hate Apple. Weird how you insert facts that fit your own version. There's a description for that.. oh yes, Weird Liar.

I did say that 99.99999% of times that this situation happens, the police wouldn't even bother writing down a report if you did bother reporting your phone stolen. The only reason it's gone this far is because Apple pushed it. They could have quietly gotten their phone back dozens of other ways, before the guy started trying to sell the story. It has GPS, they knew exactly where it was. Drive a lawyer to the guys house, give him a check and walk away, for far less than $5000, even including what they pay their lawyers.

Instead they tie up the court system for who knows how much but I'm sure it's more than 5 grand, because.... why exactly?

Perhaps the judges & prosecutors should stop selectively enforcing laws for the benefit of giant corporations that make more money per minute than this 'criminal' will in his lifetime.

When Joe Schmoe can call down a police taskforce to find his keys every time he drops them when he's out drunk, I'll start feeling like there was a crime here.