Tracking a Move Via "Find My iPhone" 216
Posted
by
kdawson
from the unintended-consequences dept.
from the unintended-consequences dept.
dmolnar writes "I recently helped my girlfriend move her stuff from Chicago, IL to Oakland, CA. The movers were scheduled to arrive at 8AM on the 5th of July, and we were stressing the day before about all the things that could go wrong with a move. We realized that if we knew where her stuff was, it'd make us feel better. This is a story about using the $99 iPhone to track the move ... and about a somewhat surprising potential use of Find My iPhone to track your friends' iPhones without them noticing."
Re:Iphones are not $99 (Score:3, Interesting)
I too enjoyed the part where he advocated defrauding AT&T. I sure hope they give him a call.
Re:Privacy concern? (Score:3, Interesting)
Cheap cell gps tracking (Score:1, Interesting)
I've been using my i415 with prepaid boost mobile and a program called Instamapper. Instamaper is free and for me it works without a data plan. So I don't pay anything extra to use it.
-t0ny
Re:Iphones are not $99 (Score:5, Interesting)
hehe, you think people haven't, for decades now, been buying shit with the intention of using it for n days and then returning it? You think there hasn't been a court case finding on it? It's well established law. If you buy something with the intention of returning it, you're not acting in good faith. It's simple fraud.
Re:Iphones are not $99 (Score:4, Interesting)
hehe, you think people haven't, for decades now, been buying shit with the intention of using it for n days and then returning it? You think there hasn't been a court case finding on it? It's well established law. If you buy something with the intention of returning it, you're not acting in good faith. It's simple fraud.
Eh? If I buy a product that comes with a contract saying "you can return it for whatever reason within the first 30 days for a full refund" then returning it for any reason is _not_ fraud.
Taking advantage of the agreed terms of a contract is perfectly legal.
Re:UK Phone Contracts (Score:1, Interesting)
A nice example is my brother & sister in law. Combined their paying £110 per month for their shiny blackberrys.
Oh, We get free email! We get free IM! We can call each other for free!
sure, sure, whatever...
Re:Iphones are not $99 (Score:3, Interesting)
Here in Portugal we have the *right by law* to return those kind of products before 15 days after buying them. ISP contracts too, if you find that it sucks (for example, you have massive ping or you only get 3 of the 15Mbps from any servers but their own) you can cancel it, with full refund.
But I don't believe it gets much abused. What are abused are nice warranties like some shops give you: My friend bought a 20GB IPod, an year after goes to the store and complains about it shutting down randomly (false) and they give him a new *40GB* version. And year after, he repeats it and gets a 80GB version. :|
This is why we can't have nice things
Re:Iphones are not $99 (Score:4, Interesting)
Actual citation needed.
The RIAA called downloading music a crime before it became criminal, there's nothing in that article to support the assertion that it's illegal to 'wardrobe'.
Re:Iphones are not $99 (Score:3, Interesting)
It's well established law. If you buy something with the intention of returning it, you're not acting in good faith. It's simple fraud.
Citation needed.
I've just spent some time googling around on this one. The term for this seems to be "Wardrobing". There's a stub article, [wikipedia.org] but nothing about law. Nor did any turn up in any of my searching. If it's well-established law, I'd expect it to be a FAQ answered by many retailers. It's not.
I also fail to see how it is fraud, unless there are complicating circumstances, such as trying to return an item purchased at another store, or keeping the accessories, or other underhandedness... But if there's no deception, and they have a "for any reason" return policy, how could it be fraud?
On a practical note, several times I have returned things to a local chain with a 100% refund policy, and stated directly that I had no intention to keep it unless I was either too lazy to return it, or unexpectedly impressed with the product, and since neither had happened, please take it back... And they always have. They've certainly never suggested that it was illegal, or even against the spirit of the return policy. (I also think it's ethical, given the circumstances. That's certainly debatable, but outside the scope of this post.)
Re:Much cheaper... (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, if you want to be serious. (Score:3, Interesting)
I was making a bit of a joke but if you want to be serious, I can do that, too.
I know of two cases where this scam was successfully overcome by the victim. In both of them, the victim told the guy who knocked on the door to come on in and get his money. When the fraudster stepped inside, the victim's mate (in both these cases, the scammers thought they were dealing solely with a defenseless woman) proceeded to beat the scammer varying degrees of senseless and then walk him back out to the truck to order the cargo unloaded. The cargo was duly unloaded (in one case, they just put everything on the front lawn, but at least they unloaded) and the scammers then beat a hasty retreat, never to be heard from again.
People who pull scams like this generally have been on the wrong side of encounters with the cops before. They don't want to involve them again and are loathe to dial 911 unless the shit has really hit the fan and someone's bleeding. Thus, the judicious application of force or the threat of it, if done properly and in a low-key way, is a valid negotiating tool with cretins like this.
Now, arming yourself and starting a confrontation is probably a bad plan. But arming yourself, finding your stuff, and stealing it back when the bad guys aren't around may be a workable one. YMMV.
Personally, I've only used movers three times in my life and I've been very careful to select established, reputable firms. I don't hook up with dodgy characters to save a few buck. I think that's a better strategy, overall. But I am willing to grant that some physical force or the threat of it, employed properly so that the authorities are never involved, can be a reasonable approach.
Sound better?
PS - I had a scumbag brother-in-law who used this kink in the law to great advantage. He ripped off dozens of old ladies by finding out when coin collectors died. He would then approach the widows, offer to market the collections of their deceased spouses, pay them a small "advance" on what he assured them would be a big return, then leave with the coins. He never paid them another dime. There were a number of criminal complaints filed and his defense was always the same. "I paid her for the coins. There was no deal for anything else. This was not a theft. It's just a contract dispute." He beat the rap several times before, finally, the state got so many complaints that they opened a combined fraud case on him He settled for some pitiful amount of restitution and five years probation. From personal experience, I believe that people who pull these kinds of scams are cowards who won't call the police unless they're forced to and deserve a beating for their actions. So I don't apologize for taking a hard line on these situations.