With all this new drama floating around about the infamous lost iPhone prototype, the main thought I keep coming back around to is: “Why would Brian Lam be so short-sighted in his thinking?”

Okay, sure. Getting a scoop like this was bound to be a major page-click enhancer—for about two weeks. But then what? Gizmodo and Apple go back to business as usual, and there aren’t any consequences?

Forget the legal issues, which are very real. Forget the ethical issues, which have been debated to death by now. I’m talking about the very practical consequence of any news web site blatantly screwing Apple in this way.

Apple holds major press events at least four times a year. We have the early January/February event, which used to be Macworld but now looks to be an Apple independent event. (This year was the iPad announcement.) We have an iPhone OS announcement, usually around April. We have WWDC in June. And we have the iPod upgrades and other music-related announcements in September. Every one of those events is a major day for the Apple fan community. Gizmodo traditionally covers those events with live updates from the event itself, and many, many Apple fans have used Gizmodo as their site of choice for these live updates, as they have been known to provide reliable coverage with few technical issues.

I have to figure that those four days every year see at least ten to twenty times more traffic to the Gizmodo site than any other day of the year. People don’t madly hit the “refresh” button on their browsers as they stay glued to Gizmodo during Steve Ballmer keynotes at CES, or during Palm or Google press events. So you have to figure that those days are major sources of income for Gizmodo.

Now think about this fact: Every one of those events is “invite-only.” Apple reserves the right to invite or not invite whomever it likes to every one of those events. Did Lam bother to think about the fact that his site was probably never going to get an invite to any of those events from Apple ever again?

Apple tolerates rumor sites to a point, because that’s all part of the media firestorm that Apple needs to promote its products. But that tolerance stops the second you take away Apple’s most precious weapon in the media battle: its control over the story.

In other words, Apple uses you. You don’t get to use Apple. It’s their story, and you just get to go along for the ride for whatever profit you can manage.

So if I’m running Gizmodo, and I get an opportunity to “purchase” a prototype that I’m fairly certain is real, I would figure that there’s a lot more to gain, in the long run, by contacting Apple about it and helping them get their phone back from the creep who was peddling it. Apple’s not going to pat you on the back for being a hero, and you won’t get the big scoop you wanted. But you never know what little favors might come your way in the future from Cupertino. Certainly not early access to new products. But maybe an exclusive interview or two with high-ranking execs. Something that might make you a little more respectable to a wider audience.

If nothing else, you’ll be sure to get a good seat at the next “Special Event.” As opposed to spending that morning furiously hitting “refresh” while glued to Engadget or Macworld.