I don’t see how Gizmodo can plausibly argue that they didn’t know, all along, that this unit belonged to Apple. Are they counting on Apple forgiving and forgetting once the unit has been returned?

— John Gruber http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/20/arthur

The story I read indicates that the guy that found it attempted the required “good faith effort” to return the phone. IF that’s the case, then when Apple failed to respond to his attempt at return, the phone became abandoned and legal title MAY have passed to the finder; abandoned != stolen, putting Giz in the clear.

Of course, IANAL, but that’s what I would argue if I were in their shoes.

UPDATE: now that we know that 1) the finder didn’t come close to a good faith effort and 2) California’s statues require the finder to turn the phone in to the police, it’s clear that neither the finder nor Gizmodo are in the clear here. Also, IMO Giz has managed to make themselves out as pretty sleazy IMO.