Is Apple doing itself harm in case of missing iPhone?

April 28, 2010 By Dan Gallagher and Rex Crum
Apple logo

While law-enforcement officials ponder the legality of computer equipment seized from the home of a blogger, analysts on Tuesday say Apple Inc. may be doing itself harm in the case of a missing iPhone prototype that ended up on the Internet.

The company has long been known for its penchant for secrecy -- and has gone after reporters and bloggers in the past for reporting what it considers to be company secrets. This time, with an investigation now in the hands of prosecutors, analysts believe that Apple is at the very least likely to land a big black eye, in terms of negative publicity.

Roger Kay of Endpoint Technologies Associates said in an interview that Apple blundered by making the case a criminal one, as opposed to a civil case.

"There is no way that this is not negative in some way for the company," Kay commented. "The question here is what is Apple hoping to get?"

He added that Apple and Chief Executive "have in the past known how to back out of mistakes pretty quickly." But the state is now the "wild card," as it is running the investigation.

"Apple has been drifting into looking like the wrong side of their famous Big Brother ad for some time," observed Rob Enderle, a longtime technology analyst. "This could easily turn out to be one of the biggest mistakes the firm has ever made because the investigation ... could showcase other Apple problems as this story snowballs."

The chief deputy district attorney for San Mateo County, Calif., Stephen Wagstaffe, said Tuesday that computers and other gear taken from the Bay Area home of Jason Chen, an editor for the popular gadget blog Gizmodo, will not be examined until the office determines whether the material is covered by California "shield laws" that prevent law-enforcement authorities from examining material gathered by journalists.

On Monday, Gizmodo reported that Chen's house had been raided by the Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team task force, which seized several computers and related gear.

Earlier this month, Chen and his employer said they paid $5,000 for an apparent prototype of an that was found in a bar in Redwood City, Calif. The device allegedly was left by an Apple employee and was found by another patron, who sold it to Gizmodo. The blog ran a detailed story on the new device, which is widely believed to be the next version of the popular iPhone that Apple is expected to introduce sometime this summer.

Apple complained to local authorities, reporting the matter as a theft to the San Mateo County prosecutors. Chief Deputy District Attorney Wagstaffe said the company was referred to REACT, a multicounty law-enforcement team that investigates high-tech crimes in Silicon Valley.

Wagstaffe said the DA's office actually has not searched the equipment taken from Chen's home. Gawker Media, owner of the Gizmodo site, claims the equipment is covered by California's shield laws.

Legal specialists in the San Mateo district attorney's office are examining the question, and hope to make a recommendation to the REACT team by the end of the week.

"We can do this one completely aboveboard. We're not going to lose any evidence by waiting to search this equipment, and we're not going to invade anyone's privacy if we determine not to use it," Wagstaffe said, adding that his office was dealing with "a fairly novel area of law."

It is not known exactly what information the company gave to the REACT team to spark the investigation. An affidavit used to secure the search warrant will not be filed publicly until 10 days after the warrant was executed, according to Wagstaffe. That affidavit could contain more information about what the company told investigators.

The chief deputy district attorney also indicated that the search warrant is not considered executed until investigators actually search the computers themselves. He said the REACT team will make the decision on whether to search the machines once his office makes a recommendation.

Yet the case brings to light "Apple's excessive control over local law enforcement," according to Enderle, and may even play into local politics in an election year.

Gene Munster, who covers Apple for Piper Jaffray, does not think that the news will hurt the stock or that the company itself in the long term, except for the possible effect of people delaying a purchase of an iPhone during the June quarter in the hopes of getting a newer device later in the year.

"It's been a great PR event for Apple, because people are fighting over the iPhone," Munster said in an interview. "It shows the amount of interest Apple has."

Shares of Apple were down nearly 2 percent to $264.16 by early Tuesday afternoon -- part of a heavy sell-off in the tech sector as well as on the broader market.

But the company's image could suffer, as it already has employed heavy-handed tactics to keep its products under wraps.

This also is not the first time it has gone after a blogger. Apple sued sites called and Think Secret in 2005 for revealing details of unreleased products. Think Secret later agreed to shut down as part of a settlement deal with the company.

Enderle said the company also doesn't buy any favors with the press this way, even if Apple does not consider bloggers to be part of the established press. "The age-old advice is don't attack folks who buy ink by the barrel. That likely should be updated to not attacking folks who have page hits in the millions."

Explore further: Gizmodo editor's home raided in iPhone prototype probe


Related Stories

Nokia expands patent dispute beyond Apple iPhone

December 29, 2009

(AP) -- Nokia Corp. is broadening a legal dispute it already has with Apple Inc. over the iPhone, saying almost all of the company's other products also violate the Finnish phone maker's patents.

Apple wants its iPhone back

April 20, 2010

A 27-year-old Apple software engineer has been outed as the unfortunate employee of the notoriously secretive company who left behind an iPhone prototype in a California beer garden.

Verizon CEO has told Apple of iPhone interest

April 6, 2010

(AP) -- Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg says the company has told Apple that it wants to carry the iPhone. But he declined to say when - or even if - the popular smart phone will be available for Verizon Wireless customers.

Recommended for you

Enhancing solar power with diatoms

October 20, 2017

Diatoms, a kind of algae that reproduces prodigiously, have been called "the jewels of the sea" for their ability to manipulate light. Now, researchers hope to harness that property to boost solar technology.


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet Apr 28, 2010
Kind of a strange article. In short, lots of speculation based on nothing. It only makes sense when Rob Enderle's name comes up in it.

Enderle is an idiot.

Doubt me, try this Google searh "Rob Enderle idiot"
not rated yet Apr 28, 2010
Kind of a strange article. In short, lots of speculation based on nothing. It only makes sense when Rob Enderle's name comes up in it.

Enderle is an idiot.

Doubt me, try this Google searh "Rob Enderle idiot"

3,130 Results from said Google.
not rated yet Apr 28, 2010
seems to me the warrant is unwarranted, and the best they could hope for charge wise is "receiving stolen property", which, since the journalist got the device second hand from a person who found the phone, which in and of itself means it wasnt stolen, it means that charge doesn't even apply in this case.
This seems to just all be a publicity stunt.
The employee who lost the phone should be the only person paying consequences for the loss of the phone. I wouldn't doubt that he was told to leave it at a bar...
not rated yet Apr 28, 2010
This subject is covered by an interesting article with an interesting discussion on OSNews: http://www.osnews...o_Editor
5 / 5 (1) Apr 29, 2010
Leaving that phone could have been a ploy for free advertisement of the new phone.
5 / 5 (1) Apr 29, 2010
The phone wasn't stolen. It was lost, found and sold to highest bidder. It was freely returned after Apple asked for it and Apple wasn't even asked to reimburse the five thousand. Sounds to me as if Chen and Gizmodo have the basis for a very costly (for Apple) lawsuit. Not to mention that falsely reporting a crime is itself a crime.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.