HTC, if you read this: I bought the HTC Droid when it came out (4 years ago, something like that) and I replaced it with a HTC Droid LTE (and one for my wife too).

Please don't do this sort of stupid stuff. I can't in good conscience buy another phone from your company, ever, unless you apologize to the boy, his family, and anyone you went after for leaking the info (reinstate the job of anyone fired over that).

For the kid: a formal apology letter from the President of HTC, on company letterhead, plus a $1,000 in cash to cover any expenses incurred, plus a handwritten note by the President apologizing profusely, further thanking him for promoting HTC products, taking an interest in technology, along with a personal exhortation to study hard, work hard, listen to one's parents, and do good for oneself and one's community.

Then, perhaps, I will reconsider my personal ban on HTC products.

For those of you who roll their eyes: I had a bad experience with Audi in 1997. Swore to never buy an Audi again. Last year I bought a BMW. This year I leased a Mercedes-Benz. Yeah, we went to the Audi dealer, and yeah, my wife liked a couple of them, but I said no, so they lost out on $35,000.

You may think the consumer is fickle, and you are right: the consumer is fickle and irrational. You publicly insult children, you get automatically added to the shitlist, and you stay there forever. Any questions?

Sure one question; Do you think you're little rant is more important to them than guarding their IP and controlling the release of their products?

Because it isn't. And I can't seriously believe you are telling HTC to apologize. The tweets, though misguided, are barely threatening. And whoever works for the company that the kid knows deserves to get fired. They shouldn't have let the phone come into anyone else's possession, especially a kids.

"It's not going to be a good week for you, my friend" is definitely threatening, at least to the ear of someone who has watched crime and gangster movies. While these kinds of communciations shouldn't be on Twitter in the first place, HTC would have been far more professional to say "This is a violation of our IP rights and we are commencing aggressive legal action."

The whole point of being a gangster is saying things that are not threatening verbatim in a way that is threatening only in context. Example: "I'm going to give you an offer you can't refuse". It has a very different implication when given by your banker versus given by your loan shark.

Actually, these days I think it means the same thing from your banker and your loan shark...

Oh, you bet. The first rule of business is "the customer's always right."

And I fall squarely in their definition of "the customer".

That's a mindlessly simplistic view of it. Do you seriously think HTC corporate hierarchy is going to change their policy on protecting IP and apologize to a person who unlawfully disseminated information on their products just to please the 10's of people that might be outraged over this?

You can't please all the people all the time. Sometimes the customer is an idiot not worth your time.

They will if this person represents a significant portion of their revenue - just like any action taken by a large company.

At least Chris put his opinions out there in public. All too often people complain about a company in every single medium except for one that may actually make it to a relevant recipient.

..Which is also why I hope he also has sent this directly to HTC. I know Hacker News is read by quite a few [important] people in tech, but unless he also directs it to the proper avenues this rant will have as much effectiveness as someone complaining at a bar.

>apologize to a person who unlawfully disseminated information on their products //

Can you expand on this - I watched the video, what part was unlawful (stating the jurisdiction and legislation/caselaw that apply would help)?

Dude - it's stolen property, plain and simple.

Can you think of a jurisdiction where that's not illegal? Lol.

The kid either stole it, or he somehow knowingly came into possession of stolen property.

Just because you find something, doesn't make it yours.

The right thing to do, when you find something that is obviously stolen (and there is no way an NDA phone would not be) is to return it.

Stealing something is illegal, and buying something that's stolen is also illegal.

It's like Gawker, and the whole stolen iPhone fiasco.

Much as I detest Apple, Gawker were definitely in the wrong there.

And this kid didn't help things by trying to lie again, and again, and again afterwards.

Just say, whoops, I "didn't" know it was stolen, and hand it back - no harm, no foul.

Trying to weasel your way out so you can keep your stolen shiny bauble isn't cool.

>buying something that's stolen is also illegal //

Usually that's limited to "if you know it, [or should reasonably suspect it] to be stolen".

I can imagine many scenarios in which he used the phone in the video without it being stolen, and more in which it was stolen and he wasn't aware of that.

"Hey my Dad found this phone left at his work, he's taking it to the Police Station in the morning; do you want to have a look at it?"

"I won this phone in a game of poker, want to buy it?"

However, I thought you were claiming it was illegal to make the video.

How did he break the law?

Not any more.

You're right, unless they publicly revert.

Which they might. We'll see.

Your reply reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Judge Snyder lets Bart out of any kind of personal responsibility under the "Boys will be boys" rule. I'm sorry but I don't agree. People should be held responsible for their actions and perform their job duties to what is expected. This child's parent should absolutely be held responsible. We live in a society that wants to take no responsibly and sue everyone and everything for our own stupidity.

tldr: take responsibility for your own actions. Parent should have never given a secret device to a child.

The kid did nothing wrong (unless he stole the phone, obviously). Even in the article it says "the person who will be held accountable will ostensibly be the party who signed an NDA to get the handset, not Jamkatel himself", which is exactly the way it should be handled. It's not clear that the kid is in trouble at all.

Err, no, the kids seems like a sneaky little ratbag who tried to weasel his way out when he realise he'd done the wrong thing.

First, he tried to claim is was fake.

Then he said he didn't post the video.

Then he claims his parents work for HTC.

Sure, HTC's wording is probably not exactly kid gloves, but it sounds like - we're going to sue your sorry a*se to get our stolen property back.

> sneaky little ratbag

Is that the phrase we're using for "scared teenager" these days?

Then why insult the kid?

What insult? Is there more to the story than the article is letting on? Because there is nothing in that article even close to an insult.

The real owner of the phone is the one that is going to be in trouble not the kid. However the article did say that neither of the kid's parents work at HTC which most likely means he stole the phone from somewhere. He deserves everything he has coming to him.

He's a kid. He might have stolen the phone, or it might have been given to him by someone at his school, or he might have found it on the street, on a park bench, or at a public library. We just don't know. "most likely stole the phone" isn't a true statement.

He's a kid. Is this how we treat children in this day and age? Is this the civilized thing to do?

I don't think so.

Anyway, HTC could simply have said: "Thank you for finding our phone. Please ship it back to us in this prepaid box, and we'll give you a nice reward" (like a flatscreen TV, a Sony PS4 and $500 worth of games, or some equivalent). That would have been completely sufficient.

I'm not saying what the kid did was wrong or not. What I'm saying is that HTC could have handled the situation a lot better, a lot more professionally, and that I hold them to that.

Look, if it's stolen property, it doesn't matter if it's you that stole it or not, my parents taught me to give it back to the owner.

That's how it works - "finders keepers" never applies, ever.

I don't know, maybe this kid's parents forgot to teach him.

But either way, just from a use your brain perspective, if you do have stolen property, the last thing you want to do is go bragging on the internet in a video about it.

And the fact that the kid seems to be a prolific liar (and a bad one) doesn't exactly help me sympathise with him.

Sure, ok, he somehow "got in possession" of stolen property. He decided to brag about it in an internet video (which he later denies).

Why does he continue to lie again, and again, and again?

First it's - oh, the phone is a fake. Dude, the frigging IMEI number is right there.

Second, I didn't share the video. Sure, that's why it reads like every other internet review - gee, you filmed this with the express purpose of showing nobody?

Thirdly, my parents work for HTC - don't you think HTC would be able to find out in about 5 seconds if your parents worked for them?

Also - we don't even know the consequences.

As it stands, he's probably going to just get hauled in for having stolen property, told to give it back, and then given a stern talking to by a judge.

Unless of course he's stupid enough to try lying to the judge as well.

Then he'll quickly see that in the real world, your actions do have consequences.

I have an 8 year-old boy. I taught him thus: "If you didn't earn it, it's not yours, so don't touch it."

Regardless of how unwise or immature his actions were, the company should not have treated him the way they did.

I completely agree with the sentiments expressed in your response. Just because we live in a society where massive technology corporations need to maintain a positive image and keep release cycles under wraps does not mean this kid should be treated like a criminal. I would rather smartphones not even exist if this is the way we are going to treat people. #buildingARocketAndLeaving

How did they publicly insult him?

RTFA! :)

I think that question stands in the wake of reading the article. People seem to arguing that the language used constitutes a threat; I don't see that in the slightest. It isn't overtly friendly, but it isn't menacing.

Well when the people who are about to seek legal action against tweet in public "It's going to be bad week for you :-(" because they're going to make it one, then yeah it kinda sounds like a threat.

I did read the article and I don't see one insult.

"It's gonna be a bad week for you my friend."

If someone told me that, I'd feel absolutely terrible inside. And that is the definition of an insult.

Since they said that on twitter, that fits the "publicly" label don't you think?

>If someone told me that, I'd feel absolutely terrible inside. And that is the definition of an insult.

So if someone calls you and tells you a loved one has died, they just insulted you? Man, I better never let anyone know anything that will make them feel bad. That would be insulting. /s

Is saying "You're going to be sued by our horde of lawyers" an insult, or a factual statement?

> And that is the definition of an insult.

No it's not. The person who leaked the info should feel some responsibility for his actions. I don't think HTC exec's actions were not to scale in opinion. But this is no way an insult.

You appear to have a different definition of definition than I do.

Well, my reaction at that point would be...

Gee, I have stolen property - either pinched by me, or pinched by somebody and given to me.

I can either say, whoops, I'll give it back.

Or I can try lying to them in a completely stupid way, to try and worm my way out of this, so I still get to keep the phone.

I would call that a "threat" rather than an "insult".

FYI, I think a threat is worse than an insult in most cases.

That sucks, your wife missed out on what could have been a great experience because of your hang up in 1997.

Sure, hold a company to a high moral standard, but I'd expect the same from you, the ability to forgive.

If you get a queasy feeling after you eat something at a local eatery, and you go throw it up at the earliest opportunity, I don't think anyone would fault you for not wanting to go there anymore.

Oh, she's very very happy with the car. She told me that after we sell this one in 4 years, she wants to get an X5.

This could definitely be a planned move on the part of HTC. I hadn't even heard of the phone until now. Mission accomplished HTC marketing.

And they even had the marketing prowess to use a kid so annoying, inept and clumsy that I couldn't be bothered actually watching the video long enough to learn any real info.

Mission accomplished indeed!

It looks just like a normal touchscreen phone. This level of 'secret' seems hardly worth making threats to kids on twitter over. Not if you have ambitions to appear more grown-up than kids on twitter, anyway.

This is the best which could happen to HTC, cheap PR around a phone nobody would have noticed. HTC lost significant market share compared to other Android handset makers Samsung, LG and Sony recent years.

Lots of kids appear to be losing their parents money.

Giving your kids access to tech under NDA is like giving your kids access to guys. You are not going to have a good time.

You can debate the degree to which this kind of secrecy is warranted, but at the end of the day, when you sign an NDA it is legally binding, and you can't simply blame violating that legal contract with a "Kids will be kids"

The phone looks awesome, I really enjoy their design style.

Access to guys?

I'm not sure that's what you meant, if it is then can you expand?

I'm fairly certain they meant "access to guns".

Guns as opposed to guys?

Well guns kill, NDAs do not.

Publicity stunt?

If so, it definitely back fired. And, no, not all publicity is good publicity in my opinion.

I guess this is the last early release this kid gets.

Will they unhappy with @evleaks?