gizmodo.com — Alisa was robbed on the subway a couple of weeks ago, and now someone else has contacted Apple about replacing the phone due to a software malfunction. Alisa found out about this because her email account is still associated with it, but neither she nor the police can persuade Apple to return the phone to her
Jan 1, 2010 View in Crawl 4
jarasmenJan 2, 2010
I don't know about US law, but around here selling stolen goods is actually a crime, and if it's found it gets taken back to the rightful owner. I also don't know about filing a report so late. Shame she didn't do it earlier, the phone's IMEI could be locked, or something (how would Apple react to servicing a phone with a locked IMEI?).The only thing I found funny is how she's so disgusted about the unlock on her phone, like it's as morally objectionable as kicking babies.
blackinthmiddleJan 2, 2010
@candre23Lololololol, you're really trying hard to nail me. You're not doing a very good job, but you're trying.Let's start with the basics. What you posted is *not* part of the article. It's in the comments section. So now I'm required to not only read the article, but every comment? EVEN THE COMMENTS THAT WERE WRITTEN *AFTER* I READ THE ARTICLE?????? Lolololol, look at when she posted her comment. Now if you had a brain, you might have said to yourself, "Well I guess it *is* possible that he read the article before that comment was posted." Nice try though.Now since you're want to go traipsing through all of the comments to back up your points, I'll do the same. From the comments section:"I'm a NYC police officer and here's why this story seems strange to me:We deal with cell phone robberies all the time. Reports for such incidents MUST be taken by the precinct of occurrence. In other words, she would NOT have had to go 'downtown' an hour away. No way, no how. Even IF she HAD to go to the precinct to make a report, it would have been in Brooklyn and within the radius of a mile or two and she would have been transported by police car. I do believe that her phone was stolen and that's certainly unfortunate but this story seems off for sure."I've said it in other places. This story doesn't make sense. Her excuse for not giving a police report seemed very fishy. As the officer above said, even if it was too far for her, they would have driven her down there.Fine, she goes on to say that now she has a police report, yet Apple still won't help. Notice how you're quick to jump to her side, yet slow to ask the basic question: WHY WON'T THE COPS ARREST THE THIEF? The cops agree they believe the phone is stolen. A police report has been filed. The cops even know where the thief lives. The cops won't arrest the guy. And you, like many other lemmings on this site, you see the name "Apple" and take out your pitchforks against them!Again, you guys are like the man whose woman cheated on him yet you're angry with the other man and not your woman.
johnnysoftwareJan 5, 2010
And filing a police report is a serious crime. So, is there a redacted photograph of the official police report online so people can get clarification that she really got a real police report filed? They give you stuff so you can show your insurance company and all, right? So, there should be a document.
johnnysoftwareJan 5, 2010
People have been stealing stuff from each other since the dawn of time. Authorities have been having to handle two people both claiming a piece of property was theirs for a thousand years. Apple gets a phone for repair. Someone else says it is their phone. Say they have the receipt but the other person says they bought it from the first person, or has an eBay recipe for it. It is messed up, and hard to adjudicate by a third party like Apple.Hey, I think most of us remember this story from when we were kids - <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon#Wisdom" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon#Wisdom</a> It shows how hard it can be to untangle contested claims of ownership.Why isn't Gizmodo gnashing their teeth at criminals who steal iPhones at Christmastime? Do they like iPhone thieves, or they just do not care. Apple did not steal the phone. Supposedly, somebody else did that was in NYC. I kind of feel sad because they will not help this girl out, but they made so much money off the ad impressions from posting this article. Surely, between the two of them The Consumerist & Gizmodo probably made enough money off the page views of the article about her, they can help her out a bit to buy a new iPhone.Personally, I do think it it bad when people steal stuff during the holiday seasons. And then other people make a buck off of it, it's a shame.
johnnysoftwareJan 5, 2010
@alex7575alex7575 : First of all, search this entire page, nobody called her a "cry baby". Nobody, nobody - blamed her for getting robbed. Nobody said she deserved to get robbed, so I don't know why people are saying people are "blaming the victim".People are skeptical. There are a couple contradictions and a lot of inconsistencies. It is a kind of a weird tale. That's not necessarily her fault. He got out what facts she could. It's up to the journalist to fit them together, figure out what the missing pieces are, and answer the questions readers are naturally going to ask - in the article, *before it goes to print*. Because otherwise, they are just a Dictaphone, not a reporter.Now, both The Consumerist and Gizmodo put enough creating writing into the article to make it a smear piece on Apple. A real journalist would have called Apple for comment, and verified with police that she had filed a police report. Consumerist went went to press with "hearsay"?If they were playing the role of a consumer advocate news reporter, they would have contacted Apple and AT&T, told them the facts and probably presented the evidence - and asked them what they are going to do about it. They would have also printed what the relevant laws are and probably reeled off a few crime statistics and indicated how often this situation arises and what you can do to come out as well as possible if it happens to you.It's not any of those kind of articles though.And "The Story" was an amorphous, constantly-shifting blob. It kept changing. You read one set of facts in the article. Then you read contradictory facts from the subject of the article in the comments section. Then you see the blob has split up into a blob clone, which is now forked off as a new, independently edited story at Gizmodo - the jailbreak people.The only thing I learned, is that some bloggers are definitely not journalists. They don't do the things normal TV reporters and newspaper reporters have been doing for decades when writing about consumer issues.
johnnysoftwareJan 5, 2010
@candre23: Terrible example. For one thing, cars are required to be have an active registratistration and title that correctly identifies who the owner is. When a car is sold, the title needs to be transfered. Every year or two, the registration needs to be renewed. And the driver has to have a current license with their photo/name/address on it.So when a cop chases down a stolen vehicle, he is not going to have to search all over someone's house for it. It's going to be outside, plain as day, with a big fat license plate on it. If the "thief" has a signed-over title to the car, then obviously he is the current owner. If not, and the original owner does, then in the eyes of the law, the original owner probably is. The documentation makes it pretty clear.A cell phone, on the other hand, can be sold for cash, has no title, and has no registration. As people pointed out, warranties frequently are not transferred.For a cell phone, they are usually tied to a carrier when you purchase them. But the victim indcates that the guy used a tool promoted by Gizmodo, of all people, to strip away the security of the phone and hijack it for use with a different carrier. That cut the cord with AT&T. It is kind of out of their hands. Shame jailbreak published 2000+ pages on their site with info about jailbreak in them. Definitely a drag for the lady who bought the iPhone. Maybe AT&T could have bricked it for her and made it easier to retrieve, perhaps tracked it with its GPS chip. Not now, though. WTG, Giz.Plus, notice how you have *substituted* the POLICE for Apple in your "analogy". How about we just leave police as the subject? If she went to the supposed address with the police, then maybe they could search the guy or his house, with a warrant. Apple is not the police. If you think the police should be doing what you said, like you said - with the phone instead of car then why are you even thinking about Apple? Are they cops?
johnnysoftwareJan 5, 2010
"You called Gizmodo to report a robbery?"
cabo82Jan 20, 2010
Police should take the case, cus its not just a phone that its worth $200, add to it music, files, emails, that can contain private information. Not a lot of people have their iPhones password protected So its not only your phone but information that could lead to identity theft.