D.A. weighs charges in "lost iPhone prototype" case

Thought the story of the "lost iPhone HD" prototype was over? Don't bet on it. It's possible that charges may be filed in the case.

While many believe in the old adage of "Finders, Keepers," it seems that legally, it just isn't so. In fact, Gizmodo, which obtained the lost iPhone prototype after a payment of $5,000, explained the issue itself thusly:

(Our legal team told us that in California the law states, "If it is lost, the owner has three years to reclaim or title passes to the owner of the premises where the property was found. The person who found it had the duty to report it." Which, actually, the guys who found it tried to do, but were pretty much ignored by Apple. )

In addition, C|Net noted:

Under a California law dating back to 1872, any person who finds lost property and knows who the owner is likely to be but “appropriates such property to his own use” is guilty of theft. If the value of the property exceeds $400, more serious charges of grand theft can be filed. In addition, a second state law says that any person who knowingly receives property that has been obtained illegally can be imprisoned for up to one year.

Any prosecution would be complicated because of the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press: the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that confidential information leaked to a news organization could be legally broadcast, although that case did not deal with physical property and the radio station did not pay its source.

BITS reported that sources, speaking under condition of anonymity, told them that authorities in San Mateo County in California (the bar where the prototype was found was in Redwood City) are considering whether to file criminal charges. The D.A. could act by early this coming week, and could file felony charges, as according to California law, if the property doesn’t exceed $950, the case will be classified as a misdemeanor. Since Gizmodo paid $5,000 for the device, a felony charge could be possible.

According to the report, charges would most likely be filed against the person or people who sold the prototype iPhone. However, it is possible the buyer (Gizmodo) could be charged as well.

Stephen Wagstaffe, San Mateo County’s chief deputy district attorney, explained that in some instances of missing property, “we call it misappropriation of lost property; it’s a crime but it’s not theft [...] knowledge is a very important factor in a theft case.”

In other words, as some have said, the real question is did Gizmodo know the iPhone was Apple property. As we wrote earlier, since the device was clearly labeled with "DVT" on the back, a common term for an engineering test milestone, being "in the biz" as they are, they probably should have known it was a prototype.

At least, it's a good lesson for all of us. Ignore "Finders, Keepers" and hand over any property we might find.