iPhone 4G
Out of context: Reply #136
- Started
- Last post
- 143 Responses
- mg330
Everyone who thinks Apple is the bad guy here (and judging by so many of the idiotic comments on the web, plenty think they are), think about it this way:
Let's say an editor working on the next Harry Potter book happens to leave a copy of it in a coffee shop. A person finds it and and quickly discovers that something's not right: they've got a big bound stack of pages that they can likely find out is an unreleased book - the next Harry Potter book that nobody knows hardly anything about.
Then they shop it around, find someone to sell it to. That person reads the whole thing, and posts key excerpts from the book that can influence someone in terms of their choosing to buy or not buy it, essentially revealing trade secrets not meant for public consumption. Or, let's say they put the whole damn thing on the web for anyone to read, ahead of the release date.
Are they guilty? Yes. What are they guilty of? IMO this is the same with Gizmodo: they knew damn well what they had on their hands and should have been scared shitless to even mention what they had on their blog.
I can't possibly imagine being mad at Apple for their involvement in any of this. They are working with a task force to determine how their trade secrets, intellectual property, and unreleased technology still in development were disseminated to the public months in advance of their official public release.
Apple is doing what any company would do, and what any of you would do if your intellectual property were violated and non-public information were provided to the public.
- mg33 would you download a CAR?georgesIII
- LOL - what does that even mean!mg33
- i would if i could. even if i could, does it run?pango