If you haven't yet heard, Gizmodo (a technology weblog about consumer electronics) has posted a complete report with photographs and videos revealing Apple's next iPhone.
This is a huge deal because Apple Computer is always super-secret about its products before their official release so it can control when that information is released to create the maximum buzz and so it can continue to see its inventory of older items. (Disclaimer: My entire office runs on Macs and iPhones and I have owned Apple stock for over 10 years.
So how did Gizmodo come into possession of this iPhone prototype?
Here's the short version: an Apple engineer had one of the phones for beta testing. He went to a bar on his birthday and went home without the phone. Another patron (rumored to be drunk) took the phone home and actually played with it for a bit before it was "killed" by MobileMe's remote wipe (erase) capability. This patron then sold the iPhone to Gizmodo for $5,000 and Gizmodo then dissected the prototype and published its now famous pictures and videos for all the world to see.
So what does this have to do with a Connecticut criminal defense lawyer's blog? Well, this whole scenario provides a teachable moment with regard to Connecticut criminal law. (And given my professional background, which includes being an Instructor at the University of Connecticut School of Law and at Gerry Spence's Trial Lawyers College, I love teachable moments.)
Was it okay for gizmodo to pay for this prototype of the iPhone? Was it okay for gizmodo to take the phone apart and then publish its findings on the web before this product was released? Or might a crime or crimes have been committed? Well, I think the folks at gizmodo better "lawyer up" because they are going to need competent criminal defense counsel.
But how can they be in trouble if they didn't take the phone from the bar? Doesn't "finders keepers, losers weepers" protect them? After all the Apple engineer lost it, a patron found it, and gizmodo bought it.
The answer is no because while finders keepers might help you with a candy bar you find on the playground, it doesn't help in most real-world situations involving anything of real value.
If this happened in Connecticut, the guys from Gizmodo would probably be arrested for conspiracy to larceny. See Connecticut General Statute 53a-119 which defines larceny, in part, as follows:
A person commits larceny when, with intent to deprive another of property or to appropriate the same to himself or a third person, he wrongfully takes, obtains or withholds such property from an owner. Larceny includes, but is not limited to: ...(4) Acquiring property lost, mislaid or delivered by mistake. A person who
comes into control of property of another that he knows to have been lost,
mislaid, or delivered under a mistake as to the nature or amount of the
property or the identity of the recipient is guilty of larceny if, with
purpose to deprive the owner thereof, he fails to take reasonable measures
to restore the property to a person entitled to it.
From the start, the Gizmodo guys knew or should have known they were dealing with property of another that had been lost or mislaid; and that the guy from the bar had no right to sell it for $5,000.
And from what I understand from other lawyers, the laws in California are similar with regard to lost or misplaced property. So these gizmoids better hire some excellent criminal defense attorneys--and fast.
And their problems won't stop with allegations of larceny. There are other criminal laws implicated too, such as computer crimes and trade secrets. But that is for another day.
