<story><title>Gizmodo and the Prototype iPhone</title><url>http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gizmodo_prototype_iphone</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Hagelin</author><text>According to Gizmodo the phone was lost March 18. On March 29 Gruber publishes a short comment that casually includes some of the specs (A4-family CPU, 960x640 display, front-facing camera). Kinda makes me wonder if there was an authorized leak of the hardware specs in order to steal some thunder from any upcoming stories.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/03/29/wsj&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/03/29/wsj&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>Gizmodo and the Prototype iPhone</title><url>http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/gizmodo_prototype_iphone</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>ZeroGravitas</author><text>I&apos;m a bit confused by this. Gizmodo&apos;s behaviour seems skanky, but only different by degree from Gruber, in this very post, confirming that the recent photos were of a late stage prototype, or in recent posts confirming tech specs.&lt;p&gt;People are throwing terms like &quot;industrial espionage&quot; around. Why is publishing such details of unreleased products from internal sources, as Gruber seems to take great delight in doing, not the same thing.&lt;p&gt;If one of his moles gets fed tagged information and the release gets traced back to him, resulting in a firing are we supposed to all gang up on Gruber too?</text></comment>