Comment by CWuestefeld | Hacker News Reader

Comment by CWuestefeld | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

My point wasn't that Apple is a business, and that other businesses should be treated the same.

I was working on an idea of "size of the crime multiplied by the number of people impacted" might define where the threshold lies. So murdering one person is significant in that it affects one person ultimately, and a good chunk of other people in the second order. Losing one's own phone affects a single person only, and not very significantly at that. Apple's losing their prototype is analogous in the actual act, but the effect on Apple's marketing multiplies it out big-time.

Other test cases for the thought experiment: bank robbery; simple assault; rape; creating a public nuisance. I think the idea can be applied successfully across all of these.

I don't know anything specific about the stolen iPhone case. I find the whole "zOMG I saw a picture of the new iPhone!!!1!!" thing to be ridiculous. So I can't address anyone's behavior in this instance.

That's, by and large, what most district attorneys and police departments do, and that's what's so troubling about this action and the priority it was given.

No one seriously believes that Gawker Media poses a continuing threat to anyone, including Apple. There's also no question about the disposition of the property; it's in Apple's hands. Further, the damage done is questionable. (I don't mean "frivolous." By "questionable," I mean that there's a legitimate dispute as to whether or not anyone suffered legally-recognized damages from the leak, as compared to, say, someone running a counterfeit-iPhone operation.)

In such a situation, most cops and DAs would put the investigation at the bottom of their pile, tell the victim to file a civil lawsuit, and then focus their resources at on-going criminal activity or crimes with substantial damages to the public.

Here, however, REACT raced into action with a particularly aggressive maneuver: a subpoena and unannounced seizure of a journalist's property. That's among the most aggressive actions they could have taken, and the decision-making behind it deserves an explanation.

Makes me want to mangle that Animal Farm line: "All lost phones are equal, but some lost phones are more equal than others."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com