EFF Believes Search and Seizure of Gizmodo Editor's Computers Was Illegal

[MacRumors]

LaptopMag spoke with the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick who believes that the search and seizure of Jason Chen's computer equipment violated both state and federal laws.

"There are both federal and state laws here in California that protect reporters and journalists from search and seizure for their news gathering activities. The federal law is the Privacy Protection Act and the state law is a provision of the penal code and evidence code. It appears that both of those laws may be being violated by this search and seizure."

While some have suggested that this may not apply if they were investigating Gizmodo for criminal activity, the EFF says it doesn't matter and the shield laws apply anyway.

But even if they are saying it was unlawful, the statute appears to say it doesn’t matter. The crime that you’re investigating cannot be receipt of that information or materials.”

Based on a report by TechCrunch, it appears the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office is acknowledging that the shield protection laws may still be valid. The investigation has reported to have come to a pause as they reevaluate whether or not those shield laws do apply in this situation.

Article Link: EFF Believes Search and Seizure of Gizmodo Editor's Computers Was Illegal

 

[AbSoluTc]

Neat. So I can knowingly acquire stolen property (pay for it), tear it apart, photograph it and not worry about going to jail as long as I am a journalist?

SWEET!

 

[movieator]

Everytime I log on here, I keep getting deja vu.

 

[chembox]

This is starting to get ugly...

Neat. So I can knowingly acquire stolen property (pay for it), tear it apart, photograph it and not worry about going to jail as long as I am a journalist?

SWEET!

Why would they punish the end user and not the middle man? I've seen tons of iPhones on Craigslists that were probably stolen, but they still sell them to others.

Get a good lawyer. Not that big of a deal.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone 4G

 

[arn]

Neat. So I can knowingly acquire stolen property (pay for it), tear it apart, photograph it and not worry about going to jail as long as I am a journalist?

SWEET!

sigh... I know there's a race to try to post to be funny/cute/whatever... but if you took a second to read:

No, this simply says they can't use a warrant to get the information (they have to subpoena you). You could presumably still go to jail.

arn

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Neat. So I can knowingly acquire stolen property (pay for it), tear it apart, photograph it and not worry about going to jail as long as I am a journalist?

SWEET!

Exactly. It's really sad (in a sad way, not sarcastic) when a great organization like EFF contends that what Gizmodo did was "journalism." EFF is no better than Gizmodo here... they obviously want in on this for page clicks and PR.

 

[chrisb143]

Gizmodo Iphone

So that is why we have cloud computing.

Or are the Police going to seize a cloud.
\\

 

[AbSoluTc]

sigh... I know there's a race to try to post to be funny/cute/whatever... but if you took a second to read:

No, this simply says they can't use a warrant to get the information (they have to subpoena you). You could presumably still go to jail.

arn

I wasn't trying to be first or funny. Thanks for thinking I was though.

Second, from what I am reading - journalist have a "shield" protecting them from search and seizure. Going to jail comment was incorrect wording. Perhaps this would be better - if I am a journalist, I have more "protection" from doing "wrong" yet I can still be punished. Just takes longer.

That work for you?

 

[twoodcc]

i hope they give him his stuff back, unless he was really breaking the law

 

[Art Mark]

Exactly -

The key is this is a criminal investigation. Journalists are not protected in any way from a criminal investigation. But let the courts hear one and all. In the end we will know. Apple didn't sue, they did the right thing and turned over their info to the police and the DA will decide if their was criminal activity.

Neat. So I can knowingly acquire stolen property (pay for it), tear it apart, photograph it and not worry about going to jail as long as I am a journalist?

SWEET!

 

[pirateyarrr]

Bottom line is, illegal search and seizure is still illegal. What Gizmodo did may have been illegal as well, but that's no excuse for the government to start violating search and seizure laws. If you're on the side of the government in this one, you better take a long hard look at what you want your government to be in the future.

 

[Horus]

Neat. So I can knowingly acquire stolen property (pay for it), tear it apart, photograph it and not worry about going to jail as long as I am a blogger?

SWEET!

Fix'd

Remember kids, today we have learnt that Blogger == Journalist.

 

[Legolover64]

I'm sorry, but this man was breaking the law. He deserves to be brought to court, and fined for damages. Gizmodo and Gawker are shady, terrible excuses for "journalism" and this does them right.

Keep in mind, these are the same people banned from CES for using TV-B-Gones. They're little kids with no respect for trade secrets or corporations. I find their actions despicable, and according to California law, illegal.

 

[AbSoluTc]

Bottom line is, illegal search and seizure is still illegal. What Gizmodo did may have been illegal as well, but that's no excuse for the government to start violating search and seizure laws. If you're on the side of the government in this one, you better take a long hard look at what you want your government to be in the future.

You are about oh - 9 years late on that one. Lol.

 

[spacehog371]

You heard it here first... if you are a journalist and want a prerelease Apple product, just have a friend mug an Apple employee. As long as he gets away, it's protected by the shield law.

What a joke.

 

[Daiden]

Exactly. It's really sad (in a sad way, not sarcastic) when a great organization like EFF contends that what Gizmodo did was "journalism." EFF is no better than Gizmodo here... they obviously want in on this for page clicks and PR.

They are an organization which defends individual civil rights. They will of course claim anything and everything to be "unlawful", even if it's really not. I'm not saying that they're wrong in this case, but just remember who's making this claim.

 

[john3478]

I wasn't trying to be first or funny. Thanks for thinking I was though.

Second, from what I am reading - journalist have a "shield" protecting them from search and seizure. Going to jail comment was incorrect wording. Perhaps this would be better - if I am a journalist, I have more "protection" from doing "wrong" yet I can still be punished. Just takes longer.

That work for you?

Is it mean that anyone just having a blog website will be able to use "journalist shield law" and they can just go steal and buy any stolen property? That's will be a huge hole in the law.

 

[theheadguy]

sigh... I know there's a race to try to post to be funny/cute/whatever... but if you took a second to read:

No, this simply says they can't use a warrant to get the information (they have to subpoena you). You could presumably still go to jail.

arn

Unfortunately, your expectations were too high (i.e. people were actually going to read before they posted inane comments).

 

[wovel]

LaptopMag spoke with the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick who believes that the search and seizure of Jason Chen's computer equipment violated both state and federal laws.While some have suggested that this may not apply if they were investigating Gizmodo for criminal activity, the EFF says it doesn't matter and the shield laws apply anyway.
Based on a report by TechCrunch, it appears the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office is acknowledging that the shield protection laws may still be valid. The investigation has reported to have come to a pause as they reevaluate whether or not those shield laws do apply in this situation.

Article Link: EFF Believes Search and Seizure of Gizmodo Editor's Computers Was Illegal

This would be one of the most absurdly dangerous precedent ever set. According to this, I can pay people to steal anything I need as long as I blog about it.

 

[AbSoluTc]

Fix'd

Remember kids, today we have learnt that Blogger == Journalist.

Thank you. You're right. He's not even a journalist. He's a lonely blogger. Lol.

They should make his information public- address and all that. They should also make Gawkers info public. Anyone want to post the UNEDITED copies of the publicly available papers?

 

[troop231]

1000 posts in 3.. 2.. 1..

 

[manhattanboy]

this whole episode is absolute B.S.

 

[rgarjr]

Woah, this is definitely getting interesting..

 

[pirateyarrr]

You are about oh - 9 years late on that one. Lol.

That's why it's so scary that people here are actually in favor of the government doing illegal search and seizures, presumably because an Apple product was involved.

Have we fallen so far in 9 years of this crap that people today actually think it's a good idea to allow the government to search and seize anything they want without following the law?

Don't cry to me when they break down your door. Oh, you don't do anything illegal? You think that matters?

 

[ateslik]

Everytime I log on here, I keep getting deja vu.