Steve Jobs subpoenaed over stock option backdating

It's not easy being Steve Jobs. When you're not jet-setting around the world, introducing your disappointing EDGE-only iPhone to the European market, you're getting subpoenaed by US securities regulators over a lawsuit concerning stock option backdating. According to reports, El-Jobso has been called in for the US Securities and Exchange's case against former Apple general counsel Nancy Heinen over backdating option grants to Jobs and other executives. Apparently, Heinen is looking for 45 depositions for the case, though the SEC is hoping to limit that to 12 (per party). SEC lawyers are claiming that Heinen and former Apple Chief Financial Officer Fred Anderson (of Elevation Partners fame) backdated more than $20 million in stock options in 2001 for Jobsy, themselves, and other executives. Anderson -- who's already paid $3.5 million in fines -- claims he was given permission by Jobs himself to backdate the options. An internal Apple review claims it found two questionable stock options awarded to Jobs, but found no wrongdoing on his part. For Jobs' sake, let's hope he stays out of the slammer -- a pretty face like that won't last long on the inside.

[Thanks, Randall]

[Eric M @ Sep 20th 2007 10:42AM]

Obviously this is a lie. Bill Gates made him do it.

[Mark @ Sep 20th 2007 10:47AM]

Maybe if he gets jail time the battery time on the iphone will be increase. I can see it now "It's got 3 months of video and 2 months of talk." :)

[lordofthedirectrix @ Sep 20th 2007 10:49AM]

Doesn't video playing require more power than talking does?

[Paris @ Sep 20th 2007 11:48AM]

He probably means talking as in Video Calling.

Ohh wait. iPhone can't do that. It's not 3G.

[strider_mt2k @ Sep 20th 2007 10:48AM]

I'm sure justice will be swift and fair.

No, actually I'm not sure.

[hemmy @ Sep 20th 2007 10:48AM]

iCrook.




iKid, iKid :)

[Darayz @ Sep 20th 2007 11:11AM]

iHa iHa iHa

In all seriousness, I hope he doesn't go to jail. The last thing he needs is to get iRaped in the shower after dropping his iSoap with Feist's "1 2 3 4" song playing in the background.

[Kevin @ Sep 20th 2007 1:23PM]

Nice.

[Alien Grey @ Sep 20th 2007 10:49AM]

PCs are for Farthuffers and Macs get you laid!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v3KCAJwJK8

[Chippolus @ Sep 21st 2007 9:53AM]

Unfortunately, not with a partner.
...iporn and a spank, anyone?

[yacoub @ Sep 20th 2007 10:53AM]

Why has no one else picked up on this pricing inconsistency yet?

The iPhone includes a full-featured iPod touch for only $100 above and beyond everything else it offers.

Originally:
iPhone: $600 (8GB model)
iPod touch: $300 (8GB model).
Difference: $300.
iPhone value: $300.
iPod touch true value (which must be the remainder): $300.

Now with $200 price drop for iPhone:

iPhone: $400 (8GB model).
iPod touch: $300 (8GB model).
Difference: $100.
iPhone value: $300.
iPod touch true value (which must be the remainder): $100.

The iPhone also includes a number of features purposely stripped from the touch.

Bottom line: Ever since the iPhone dropped $200 in price, the Touch has been way over-priced (or under-featured).

[peshue @ Sep 20th 2007 11:01AM]

Isn't overpriced and under featured standard for ipods anyways?

[Chris @ Sep 20th 2007 11:51AM]

You're forgetting that Apple has a revenue sharing deal with ATT so that they are able to under price the iPhone but get back some money over the next two years from their cellular plan.

[Richard @ Sep 20th 2007 11:57AM]

You're not taking into account the iPhone subscription costs ($1400 over 24 months).

So the real costs of the iPhone (and value of the iPod touch) will depend on the price users is willing to for their mobile subscription.

[Richard @ Sep 20th 2007 11:58AM]

PS post above is reply to Yacoub

[Nate @ Sep 20th 2007 4:15PM]

but you also have to know that actually the price of the iPhone plan is cheap compared to other plans, because it gives you the minutes, txts and unlimited internet/data.

[Jamar @ Sep 20th 2007 11:03AM]

Heh- subpoena from the SEC over stock backdating but not a peep from them about the incident where people claimed to have lost untold amounts of money over a little post on this very blog.

[Tony @ Sep 20th 2007 11:27AM]

they only lost money if they sold the stock . if they waited two days it was back so no big deal.

[Rainier @ Sep 20th 2007 11:05AM]

Uh oh. I think inmates only have access to PCs.

[Don @ Sep 20th 2007 11:06AM]

I can't wait until the monopoly suits start flying at Apple... anyone who doesn't think Apple is setting up a monopoly is a Mac fanboy...

[Shaka @ Sep 20th 2007 11:09AM]

There is a difference between a monopoly and an UNFAIR monopoly. The laws allow for monopolies. The problems arise when monopolies abuse their powers and engage in anti competitive activities.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 20th 2007 12:12PM]

shaka, how is ms with ie+windows media an unfair monopoly and mac with safari+ itunes a FAIR monopoly?

Really, do tell, I'd love to hear the brilliant explanation.

[IndiaTech @ Sep 21st 2007 1:38PM]

IE and WMP are built into the Windows OS itself. They have a symbiotic relationship with the OS. You can't completely remove IE or WMP completely from Windows. Their code is part of Windows Code. The so called "N" versions of Windows just strip the frontends from IE and WMP while the major part of code still remains embedded.
As for Safari and iTunes. You can uninstall them by just drag + drop to thrash bin. Mac OS X doesn't crash or stop working if you "completely" remove these two.
In Windows, you can't just start using Firefox, Safari, VLC player and get rid of so called "built in" applications. While you can definately get rid of "factory loaded" and "suggested" apps on a Mac.
As for Apple forcing users to use ONLY iTunes, well it has more to do with DRM than monopoly. Every hardware company has a right to make devices that work with just supported applications, peripherals and OSs. For eg, you cant force Sony to make cams with SD slots, Can you?

[Macinjosh @ Sep 20th 2007 4:22PM]

@dj-kenpo...Because Safari isnt as integrated as IE is on a PC. If you'd ever used a Mac, you'd know that.

Also, iTunes & Quicktime use non-proprietary formats for its video, audio, etc. They dont develop any of those formats. Can you say that about Microsoft (WMA, WMV, you get it)?? And sure, iTunes store bought stuff has DRM, but thats not Apple's doing. Its clear hey dont like DRM either. Also, when you rip audio with WMP, its DEFAULT is set to a PROTECTED Windows Media file. I could go on & on.

Anyways, its not the same thing, dude.

[R. C. @ Sep 20th 2007 9:51PM]

AAC.

You were saying?

[Aleks @ Sep 22nd 2007 11:32AM]

RC: Hey Retard,

"AAC was developed with the cooperation and contributions of companies including Dolby, Fraunhofer IIS, AT&T, Sony and Nokia, and was officially declared an international standard by the Moving Pictures Experts Group in April 1997."

[Shaka @ Sep 20th 2007 11:07AM]

Let's hope he doesn't become the new iHo in the slammer. Scrawny nerds like him become currency in there.

[Xzavier @ Sep 20th 2007 11:09AM]

That’s a weird looking picture of Steve! It almost looks like somebody is holding up one of those paper face mask of Steve Jobs.

I wonder if that's guy gonna be the one to show up in court?

:D

[Darayz @ Sep 20th 2007 11:13AM]

Fake Steve Jobs is going to take the fall for the real Steve Jobs.

[Oracle @ Sep 20th 2007 11:12AM]

That's a pretty good inmate pic.

ikid 2

[resource @ Sep 20th 2007 11:15AM]

And this is on the heels of MS losing their EU case.

Apple and Mac fanboys want to fight, when both companies are crooked in their own ways.

[Typhoid Mary @ Sep 20th 2007 11:27AM]

iBubba!

[gunforhire @ Sep 20th 2007 11:40AM]

Steve Jobs might be wanting to make use of JailBreak himself before too long!

See what I did there iPhone fans?

[pangelav @ Sep 20th 2007 11:41AM]

Time to pay the Piper.

[Noxferatu @ Sep 20th 2007 11:51AM]

As funny as the thought of Steve Jobs going to jail is, he's not being charged with anything:

"...Chief Executive Steve Jobs was asked by U.S. securities regulators to give a deposition in a lawsuit against the company's former general counsel involving stock options backdating, Bloomberg reported, citing two people familiar with the matter."

No "iJail" or "iRape". Just an "iDeposition" against Nancy Heinen.

[Typhoid Mary @ Sep 20th 2007 12:19PM]

Even if Jobs went to jail there would be no iRape. Even if he was found guilty of murder he would be spending his time in a nice luxury "jail" with other iRich folk.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 20th 2007 12:13PM]

it's never enough is it. while some single mother in amaerica makes $5/hr at walmart, stevo is worried about gettign an extra couple million.

and no, I don't think he worked harder for it than she did. I think his employees work hard... but not him.

[Herbert Neal @ Sep 20th 2007 12:18PM]

To jail with him !
He can sneak in his iPhone up his butt.

[gogarty @ Sep 20th 2007 12:21PM]

Hey, that's a provocatively misleading headline. He's off the hook and only subpoenaed to testify against some other fall guys/girls.

[Shaka @ Sep 20th 2007 2:05PM]

So you mean no iHo

[TRLK @ Sep 20th 2007 2:15PM]

FFS... I won't be suprised if an iShrine dedicated to the Almighty Jobs will be next

[Blahbler @ Sep 20th 2007 2:23PM]

Look! Free Publicity! He's giving a depo guys, people do it more than once a day. It's not as much fun as sex, but if you're in the right business it's almost as profitable.

If Steve Jobs went to jail he would probably sell MORE iPods. It starts with a shuffle smuggled in here or there...then it's up to nano's and more sophisticated bribery...sooner or later Steve walks out with a limp, a pimp stick, and the guard blushes when Steve calls him sweetlips.

Sarcasm detector failing... IE + WMP = ONLY on windows with a bunch of punk IT cops making things like webpages only work on those devices. Safari + iTunes = works on Mac OS X and Windows... so what we really need is a UMPC that runs windows, iTunes, and is a phone! Because...all those legal monopolies are just doing great with those little anti-trust lawsuits.

Be nice Steve, otherwise Masturbation Partners will jack you when you ask for Palms former IP to run on the iPhone.

[Richard Courtman @ Sep 20th 2007 2:25PM]

Engadget always writes in biast against Apple in this topics case steve jobs. All the editors and writers of engadget all seem to have something agaisnt them. 'A dissapointing iphone' How is the iphone dissapointing apart from one little feature its missing, its amazing how cynical you guys are. I cant see how anyone deep down no matter how much they protest against can think the iphone is dissapointing.

[MP @ Sep 20th 2007 3:15PM]

Blargh - you people act as if they left 3G out of the iPhone just to piss you off. 3G would mean a bigger iphone and shorter battery life:

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3036&p=1

There are tradeoffs in technology you know.

[John M @ Sep 20th 2007 3:26PM]

Now thats some news!!! Finally Apple news worth reading about

[Nate @ Sep 20th 2007 4:21PM]

Your comments: Microsoft's problem is not the number of apps it runs, Apple and MS both are allowed to make as many apps as they can and load them onto their computers or OS's. The problem is when you make those apps the only way to operate certain functions on your computers. Apple is not an unfair monopoly because it doesn't do things like that.

[David @ Sep 20th 2007 10:12PM]

Richard Courtman @ Sep 20th 2007 2:25PM

Engadget always writes in biast[sic]against Apple

...



...

what?
Did you seriously just accuse engadget of being anti-Apple?

[Foris @ Sep 21st 2007 12:30AM]

This bitter, twisted piece of misinformation passes for... what exactly?

As others have pointed out, the Jobs subpoena is as a witness. To state the obvious, witnesses don't go to jail, defendants do.

So Engadget is now the Fox News of computing?

[gottino @ Sep 21st 2007 8:39AM]

I hope they'll not sack him before I get my chance to meet him as the CEO of Apple! Check out my quest to meet His Steveness for a business school project on http://iwanttoshadowstevejobs.com