Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Details of Lost Next-Generation iPhone Saga Revealed in Search Warrant Affidavit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Which is probably a good thing, just to make sure their bases are covered.
However, I don't see why they should be concerned about shield laws, since they indicate suspicion that Jason Chen himself is guilty of a felony and that the equipment he possesses might contain proof of those felonies. Not sure where source protection fits in here.
One line of reasoning is to protect Jason Chen's other sources. Not just the ones related to this case.
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/paul/gizmodo-warrant-searching-journalists-terabyte-age
I guess Journalists should not commit felonies then...
I don't see any way to both protect journalists and everything they have done, and hold them to the same legal standard as any other citizen.
Could the police potentially trump up felony to get access to journalist information? Sure, but that is what the judicial branch is there to decide upon.
Anyone who has their computer seized is likely to have all kinds of irrelevant and unrelated information on the computer to the warrant and crime in question. Again, no real way to prevent it from being an issue. The scope of what is admissible and usable is up to a Judge.
I am fine with the way the system handles it. Giving Journalists (especially extending it to anyone with a blog or who writes for a blog), unchecked protection from any kind of search warrant or criminal investigation is neither feasible nor viable. It also does nothing to protect the freedom of the press.
I would add I don't mind the scope of precedent set having anything not related to the specific warrant not be able to be used to investigate or support another crime. I have no problem with that.
However, just saying we need to blanket protect journalists or prevent law enforcement from doing their job properly because someone writes a blog is a no go in my book. Like I said, a judge rules on the admissibility of evidence all the time.
Apparently, a subpoena or very specific warrant limitations just limited to the crime in question. (if you read the rest of that article linked, it describes this).
it's not yet clear how the system handles it. We'll see if they decide to continue with the search. it's on pause right now.
edit:
And I hope you realize that you don't necessarily have to be guilty of a crime to get a search warrant issued. So, I guess Journalists just need to figure out how not to get accused of felonies.
arn
1) Where? I've seen nothing more than mere speculation "it looks sharper" Either way it was already rumored so nothing really harmful to Apple here.
2) Again, the code revealed it's existence. Seeing it on the phone is merely a formality. Once again, hardly any more harmful than finding it in the code.
4) They improve the battery on each release. Once again..no harm.
5) Again, we already had pretty good information based on the iPad. No harm.
6) Minor
7) A style, not a feature. Don't see how this harms Apple either except the knock-offs get a little head start. But anybody with the budget for an iPhone isn't in the market for a knock off.
There's a big difference between OS references found in OS 4 and posted on MacRumors...
vs.
it being confirmed on...
Good Morning America, The View, and The Today Show
arn
True, being announced on GMA just stirred up even more free advertising for Apple. If anything, this will just make the 4G launch more successful. I won't be convinced Apple has been harmed in any way until I see some reports showing a major slump in sales (more than last year) and major overstock they can't get rid of.
1) From Gizmodo's article "Improved display. It's unclear if it's the 960x640 display thrown around beforeit certainly looks like it, with the "Connect to iTunes" screen displaying much higher resolution than on a 3GS."
2) Some SDK stuff hardly "reveals the existence". It
can be there or not. At most it's a good guess, but now you are sure.
4) Yes, but how much? The 3GS was hardly a big improvement. If my memory is correct ifixit stated 5%.
5) Yes, we did. But we still weren't sure.
6) and 7) granted.
Imagine a guy (iPhone 3G owner) who wants a front-facing camera, multitasking and better battery life (he didn't buy the 3GS because it was released just an year after his own phone, but now with the upcoming iPhoneOS4 he wants to switch (multitasking). He can buy a 3GS now or wait for the 4G. To wait several months he needs some motivation - and this motivation is based on rumors - evidence for an FF camera in the SDK, maybe better battery life (not sure, considering the 3GS improvement). Now this guy is sure - better battery life (Gizmodo: "The battery is 5.25 WHr at 3.7V, compared to the 3GS battery, which is 4.51 WHr at 3.7V"), the much faster A4 and FF camera. Maybe his decision will be affected?
I can understand it. Money is a sick, sick incentive for all kinds of ills. However, how the entire gang (Warner, Hogan, Chen, Lam, Gawker) were all so stupid throughout this whole mess is tough to comprehend. Most of these guys are college educated, but edumacation is useless without common sense.
AHAHAHAHA! I love South Park references.
Matt and Trey need to do an iPhone/Gizcrapdo satire.
You actually believe that Apple needs awful publicity for its hottest upcoming product?
You actually think that Apple wants tens and tens of thousands of buyers to refrain from purchasing a 3GS and wait for the 4G that they know is coming for sure in a month?
Really? Seriously?
Yes, Powell made a dumb mistake, and no one would argue against an immediate dismissal from Jobs. Powell's mistake was due to carelessness, while Hogan/Warner/Chen/Giz were just sinister and douchey.
HAHA! Agreed. Who cares about the iPhone. Just give me more titillating details about this stolen prototype. No other tech story has entertained me this much in 2010.
Exactly. A long time ago, I dropped my wallet just outside my house. A passerby picked it up and immediately knocked on my front door to return it.
My wallet had several hundred bucks in it and a load of credit/debit cards. The stranger did not touch a single thing.
Finders not keepers for people with integrity.
Simply wrong. If it was an iPhone 3GS, that would be 'simply a mobile phone'. This was an unreleased device containing hardware, firmware, software, aesthetics, and form-factor that had not been presented to the public nor to Apple's competitors. By doing what Hogan and Gizmodo did, they cost Apple huge money in deferred sales and gave their competitors a clear road map of Apple's next couple of months along with a headstart on any countering strategies they might employ. That has the potential to be severely damaging.
You think Gizmodo would pay $7-$8k for 'simply a mobile phone'?
Trying to pretend the theft of this prototype is equivalent to the theft of something that's already circulating retail and in the hands of millions of people is ridiculous.
You missed the point. I'm well aware of the true cost of iPhone with an average unit price of around $629 IIRC from the CC, and that actual damages could be higher. I was responding to the poster who said damages for decreased sales due to people waiting 2 months wouldn't be too bad. I was showing what might be a best case, lowest damages, scenario. When the 3Gs came out, the 3G dropped $100. My guess is that the same thing will happen this time around, and that aapl will end up @$100 shy per phone which it could have sold.
I know this isn't exactly relevant to your point, but I'd like to use your (very nice!) list to point out to the "but now Apple's competitors will have three extra months to add these features to their OWN phones!" crowd that, except for 5 (which is a proprietary part) and 7 (which isn't exactly a "feature"), all of these features are widely available on other phones and have been for months or years. It's not like HTC saw the Gizmodo photos and said "Wow, a camera flash!! Why didn't we think of that??"
The only real impact this could possibly have on Apple's business is among the "should I wait to buy an iPhone or should I buy one now" demographic.
Apparently I must hang out w/ a more informed crowd than you. Or all your friends just woke up from comas.
Speaking of "waking up from comas", I said "people I run into weekly", not friends or people I "hang out with". More often than not, people I don't even know who ask about how I like it. I've even overheard college kids about to graduate talking about getting a 3Gs in immediate future. People on these boards really aren't in touch with how poorly informed the general populace is about present and upcoming technology.
That's far from a good measure. And it wouldn't convince you anyway since your primary purpose appears to be to try to convince others that aapl wasn't damaged, and that Gawker therefore shouldn't take it in the shorts.
Not so sure. Example - the front-facing camera, which is a feature on several smartphones out there, serves as a differentiating feature. Now that it won't be, the competition has the time to do something about losing the advantage - put 100MP camera and say it is better, prepare some nice software, etc. Look at all those following the iPhone - everyone tries to catch up with touch screens and nice software, but given that this is not enough they put an 8MP camera inside and compare it to the iPhone's 2MP. And people believe this kind of stuff.
This is all true. But the same level of urgency might actually be warranted if it were an iPhone 3G or 3Gs. As many celebs have discovered, there's a lot of info stored on even basic phones which is extremely private. Smartphones are the equivalent of computers and many have extremely important info stored. Anyone who argues that these are just cell phones really is missing the big picture.