Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Authorities Withdraw Search Warrant in Gizmodo iPhone 4 Case

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,775
39,722



160628-chen_iphone.jpg


The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) reports that the San Mateo County District Attorney's office has been granted a withdrawal of its controversial search warrant used to seize items from the home of Gizmodo editor Jason Chen in the wake of the site's purchase of and publication of details on an iPhone 4 prototype lost in a bar earlier this year.
As EFF repeatedly noted at the time, the warrant-backed search of Chen's home was illegal as it violated California Penal Code section 1524(g)'s prohibition against the issuance of warrants for "unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public."
Click to expand...
As a result of the withdrawal, all information and equipment must be returned to Chen. This does not, however, mean that the potential case has been dismissed. In addition to evidence gathered through other means, the District Attorney's office could skirt around the questionably-issued search warrant and request a subpoena for access to the same items, but it is unclear whether it intends to do so.

Apple CEO Steve Jobs noted early last month that he had received advice from acquaintances urging him to "let it slide", but that his belief in the values of Apple compelled him to pursue the issue and report the iPhone's disappearance and subsequent resurfacing to the authorities.

Article Link: Authorities Withdraw Search Warrant in Gizmodo iPhone 4 Case
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/16/authorities-withdraw-search-warrant-in-gizmodo-iphone-4-case/
That ****er is guilty, hang him from the highest tree!!! I got the rope right here!!! :mad::mad::mad:
 
Jason Chen actually tried to call Jobs to return the phone, but couldn't make a call because he was holding it wrong! :D
 
Jobs gets a new liver and new lease on life and he wants to persue Chen!?!?!? Let it slide man, you've got worse issue to fix...like this iPhone 4 thingy. LOL!
 
Just so we clarify things here, the first amendment was not meant to be an excuse for committing crimes. (I wonder if we can now guess that the iPhone was not "found" but was stolen? There is at least room for questioning the original story given how much of the original story was ... shall we say... wrong?)
 
Wolfie Scooter said:
Jason Chen actually tried to call Jobs to return the phone, but couldn't make a call because he was holding it wrong! :D
Click to expand...

Be careful - a number of mindless fan-droids will attack you for "misquoting" Jobs.

The correct statement according to the fan-droids would be "..., but couldn't make a call because he was holding it in that way".

I hope that Gizmodo's lawyers are preparing the wrongful action suits as we speak. I wonder if Apple will be named in the suits. It will get more interesting.
 
allpar said:
Just so we clarify things here, the first amendment was not meant to be an excuse for committing crimes. (I wonder if we can now guess that the iPhone was not "found" but was stolen? There is at least room for questioning the original story given how much of the original story was ... shall we say... wrong?)
Click to expand...

Right he stole the iphone because SJ says so. :rolleyes:
 
While I think an investigation needs to be done, running roughshod with a bad search warrant is not the way to do it. That's the kind of BS pulled by the US government with the USA PATRIOT Act.
They need to be aboveboard with the handling of this case. Don't do a Dubya and run roughshod over the constitution.
 
This seems like an absurd result. While evidence of crimes may be gathered in many ways, searching is clearly a key source.

Should we all not put up blogs and claim to be journalists? Post a sign on our front doors proclaiming, "This is a journalist's residence and not subject to search"?
 
wreckshop said:
Right he stole the iphone because SJ says so. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Gizmodo said it themselves of how they came into possession of the prototype. Engineer lost it in a bar( just to point it out again, this doesn't have any legal bearing on the case. The engineer could have been wasted at the time, but it still doesn't matter). A person found it and gave it to a person that thought it was his. This person took the device home and discovered what looked like an iPhone prototype. He makes a lame attempt to return the prototype( by calling customer service who have no means at all to do anything about it) and then goes shopping around to sell the prototype to the media. Engadget refuses and gizmodo bites and pays $5000. Lost property became stolen property at that instance. Seller did not make a reasonable attempt to return the phone and gizmodo bought it. The first amendment and shield laws do not protect journalists from committing a crime.
 
iphone 4 has been selling like crazy (3 million handsets) despite the antenna issue.

why still go after the guy?

any other company would just let it go
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back