By now, everyone is familiar with the facts – Apple engineer Gray Powell left the next-gen iPhone he was testing at a bar called the Gourmet Haus Staudt, where he spent the night celebrating his 27th birthday. Later that night, an unknown individual came into possession of the iPhone where he then proceeded to sell it to Gizmodo for a reported 5 grand.
According to Gizmodo’s telling of the story, this individual, upon discovering that he/she was in possession of a iPhone prototype, made a good faith effort to return it to Apple by calling Apple customer support. Curiously, though, this individual never even attempted to call the bar it was left in to see if anyone had called inquiring about its whereabouts.
Which is a shame, because Volcker Staudt, who owns the Gourmet Haus Staudt, recently told Daily Finance that Powell, in the days following its disappearance, “called constantly trying to retrieve it.”
“The guy was pretty hectic about it,” Staudt recalled.
While Gizmodo is trying to cover its ass by asserting that the iPhone seller did everything in their power to return the device to Apple, anyone with half a brain can see through Gizmodo’s BS.
Daily Finance appropriately calls them out:
Put simply, Gawker Media brazenly, publicly flouted the law. It subsidized a crime: the selling of stolen merchandise. Then it published a misleading, whitewashed account of the seller’s actions meant to make it look as though he was not acting with criminal intent. It published this account in order to disguise its own culpability in the matter.
For a variety of reasons, it’s unlikely that Apple is going to initiate legal action against Gawker, but make no mistake about it, Gizmodo couldn’t have cared less if the phone was stolen or if an honest effort was made to return it to Apple. All they cared about were there precious pageviews, which to be honest, is fine, but it’s pathetic and insulting to read Gizmodo editors try and cover up their tracks and play all innocent. Maybe editors like Brian Lam should follow in the steps of Gawker leader Nick Denton and simply own up to the fact that they paid out money in exchange for a device they knew they weren’t supposed to have, and that Apple’s property rights never factored into their equation.
April 21st, 2010 at 2:52 am
Gawker network sites, and gizmodo especially, are kited, seo run, money only sites that steal content and push spam harder than anyone else.
I hope they get burned so hard, I just want to be sure that the sheeple don’t believe their lame “OMG HELP US APPLE ARE SUING US, BAD APPLE!” stories when they wet themselves.
We don’t need no water…
April 21st, 2010 at 10:35 am
I lost all respect for Gawker after this. Whoever found it could have simply driven over to Apple in Cupertino and talked with Security in the front lobby. I’m sure they would have been very happy to have it back. Heck, they could have even asked for Gray Powell at the front desk. But if they did that, they couldn’t be the blogger with the big scoop. This is what really separates bloggers from journalists.
April 21st, 2010 at 2:01 pm
I think most honest people who find something at a store/bar gives it to a clerk or the hostess – telling them someone left this … the guy who found it probably decided to keep it in hoping he’d get a reward and then realized he had something more valuable … of course, Gizmodo had their own agenda but what about that guy who picked it up? calling Apple tech support for help? that’s just idiotic. If I find a wallet in Macy’s, do I call macys.com? as you note, hinkey.
April 21st, 2010 at 3:40 pm
How do you refer to someone who buy something stolen?
I never liked Gizmodo, I liked less when they offered 110K for a even stolen iPad, and I wish Apple smash them as a insect…
April 21st, 2010 at 8:58 pm
Naming the chap that lost the phone served no purpose whatsoever. True tabloid mentality. What comes around.. goes around.
April 24th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
The phone wasnt SOLD to gizmodo, the finder had had no luck in calling cupertino and apple, etc.
Once Giz wanted it and offered money for the exclusive, they PROMISED to return it to apple if it was indeed theirs. Thats not SELLING the phone, it was giz paying to ensure that their reporting on the “scoop” was exclusive. BIG difference.
May 7th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Just to enlighten people, no one really knows how hard all involved parties tried to return the phone. It’s all here say at this point and furthermore, if I found it, I would have gotten it to them, no problem. If I was greedy at all, I would have said, “Give me a free iPhone when it’s released and a years worth of paid service.”
It’s not hard to really step back and do what’s right (I don’t mean lawful, but right.)
As soon as Giz knew, admitted and revealed they broke laws and revealed their own disregard for the golden rule.