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

[Anuba]

You seem to be taking the word of the person who "found" the iPhone at face value.

That seems rather...stupid.

Right, everyone who doesn't automatically believe the worst about everyone is stupid and naive.

Never mind the fact that no thief would be foolish enough to sell stolen goods to a tech site that would obviously run a big story about it, thus the thief would put himself in a position where it would be dead easy to trace and nail him.

Never mind the fact that Powell (or his dad, who was interviewed about it) has said anything suggesting it was stolen rather than accidentally left behind. Since theft would've gotten Powell off the hook more easily than negligence on his part, he would've quickly pointed out that it was stolen had this been the case.

Never mind that the finder's call to Apple's support line has been confirmed by Apple, because as we know, all thieves try to contact the owner by placing a phone call that can be traced back to them.

 

[gwangung]

Right, everyone who doesn't automatically believe the worst about everyone is stupid and naive.

Never mind the fact that no thief would be foolish enough to sell stolen goods to a tech site that would obviously run a big story about it, thus the thief would put himself in a position where it would be dead easy to trace and nail him.

You don't cover the police beat, do you?

 

[MorphingDragon]

Wow, so daddy's a lawyer and that make you an expert in law? I suppose you are an internet tough guy too???

Hes gonna smash your face in!

 

[megadon]

Given that they got a warrant, given that Gizmodo was accused of being a part of the crime (which was NOT for publishing the pictures, by the way), what don't YOU get?

I think he's referring to the point that the "investigation on the computers" has been put on hold to see if it is even legal. The police have the computers, but they will not do any investigating until it is cleared up that they have the right to search the computers. Hopefully YOU get it.

 

[redkamel]

Honestly I've read this for a while and now I am getting mad, at all you fanboys. I love apple products I got my first macbook pro and other apple stuff. But at the same time I realize its a company who's main purpose is to make money. So unlike (some of) you idiots I don't feel the need to defend apple.

Pretty much what I get from most of you is he deserves to go to jail because he is an anti-apple douche bag who hurt them.

Well I got news for you apple is a huge ****ing company and they'll be fine, further they don't give a **** about you so why are you all up in arms.

This Jason Chen guy on the other hand is just one guy trying to be the first to bring some apple news. Also the phone was FOUND not STOLEN, maybe the guy that found it didn't do the best to return it. But he did try, he called apple, they blew him off. And all Jason Chen did was buy it off the guy and then RETURNED it when apple asked.

I am just getting tired of everyone getting on this guys back because you idiots feel like you owe apple something.

Its really quite PATHETIC it is just a ****ing company who doesn't give a **** about you.

I think you have real reading comprehension problems. Giz is one of the most pro-apple blogs out there. They are all about Apple. To the point where it can even make a fanboy sick.

The problem here is that they received stolen goods, and published all about it. Yet there are people who don't understand this, and think that Giz did the right thing, and keep coming on the forums essentially saying "stealing is ok" and misunderstandig laws and basic morals. Obviously some people (like myself) have a problem with that and keep replying. The issue here is about theft and CA law, not Apple. A 4G iphone makes it interesting, but people's feelings are running high because it involves Apple.

Very few of the "pro-Apple" posts involve people saying how Apple was wronged and got screwed. Many of the the anti-Apple posts involve people flying off the handle and ranting about police states, idiots, ***s, bribes etc.

 

[chomomo]

Enough theory already.....

Apple Lawyer

Gawker Lawyer

nuff said....

 

[gwangung]

I think he's referring to the point that the "investigation on the computers" has been put on hold to see if it is even legal. The police have the computers, but they will not do any investigating until it is cleared up that they have the right to search the computers. Hopefully YOU get it.

Kinda standard procedure, isn't it, to seize computers to prevent destruction of evidence?

 

[Anuba]

You don't cover the police beat, do you?

I most certainly don't. However, both my parents are cops (as was my grandfather and my great-grandfather), so I've heard a lot of stories including ones that make America's Dumbest Criminals look like Harvard graduates. Nothing the finder of the iPhone did, if Gizmodo's account is to be believed, is consistent with the behavior of someone who willfully committed any crimes, but rather a not-so-clever regular Joe who at some point in the process realized he may have struck gold and did his best (which wasn't much) to try to take advantage of the situation by improvising.

 

[farmboy]

actually, the "owner" of the phone is Apple Inc. Not Joe Blow from Facebook.

So he did contact the right people.

Um, right. So if your Ford is found, one should notify Ford Credit or Wells Fargo Bank instead of the guy whose name is on the registration slip in the glove box, because they are the owners. The standard is what would a reasonable person do, assuming that is adequate under the statutes. And one phone call to a tech support line, instead of a local Apple main number, isn't going to fly. Just sayin'.

 

[kdarling]

Never mind that the finder's call to Apple's support line has been confirmed by Apple, because as we know, all thieves try to contact the owner by placing a phone call that can be traced back to them.

Link? I don't recall Apple themselves confirming any support call.

I do recall someone claiming to work for Apple saying that he remembers a cubicle buddy getting such a call.

 

[LagunaSol]

I most certainly don't. However, both my parents are cops (as was my grandfather and my great-grandfather)

Pshaw. I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Nothing the finder of the iPhone did, if Gizmodo's account is to be believed, is consistent with the behavior of someone who willfully committed any crimes, but rather a not-so-clever regular Joe who at some point in the process realized he may have struck gold and did his best (which wasn't much) to try to take advantage of the situation by improvising.

"His best?" LOL! Hardly. Don't be so naive. He knew the name of the phone's owner, yet he made no reasonable attempt to contact him. As has been pointed out a bajillion times already, calling Apple's technical support line does not fulfill the "reasonable attempt" criteria. He didn't try to call the owner. He didn't try to send a message to the owner via Facebook. He didn't report the found phone to the bar owner. He didn't report the found phone to the police. He didn't try to deliver the phone to Apple HQ. He didn't put a "found phone" listing in the newspaper or on Craigslist.

Any half-wit with no intent of wrongdoing would have done one or several (or all) of those things.

The seller is certainly "not-so-clever," and may not be a hardened thug, but he certainly committed a crime, and he certainly committed the act willfully (even if he didn't fully understand the implications). He knew what he had, he made a half-hearted (and I'd argue, intentionally futile) attempt to fulfill his obligations as the finder simply to cover his butt, then he shopped the thing around to the highest bidder.

 

[Anuba]

Link? I don't recall Apple themselves confirming any support call.

I do recall someone claiming to work for Apple saying that he remembers a cubicle buddy getting such a call.

Yes, that's what I'm referring to. What else were you expecting? An official press release from Apple regarding a support call? If you're so suspicious that you consider even the account of the Apple tier 2 agent tentatively fictitious until Apple verifies it officially, I don't see why you even bother to follow a story that's entirely made up of first- and second hand accounts by the involved. For all we know this story might not exist at all, it's just a collective hallucination induced by something they put in our water.

 

[MorphingDragon]

For all we know this story might not exist at all, it's just a collective hallucination induced by something they put in our water.

Awesome!

 

[Anuba]

"His best?" LOL!

He did his best to take advantage of the situation he found himself in, not his best to return the phone. Man, you guys are so fixated on the issue of "reasonable attempt" it's hard to have a conversation about anything other than this legal detail.

As has been pointed out a bajillion times already, calling Apple's technical support line does not fulfill the "reasonable attempt" criteria.

No (again with the reasonable attempt!), but my point was that the phone call is rather inconsistent with the notion that he stole the phone (stole as in snatched from Gray's pocket, not stole as in found-but-didn't-try-hard-enough-to-return). Had he flat out stolen it, he either would've wanted to keep it or sell it, so why on earth would he call Apple in the middle of all that?

 

[ct2k7]

Yes, that's what I'm referring to. What else were you expecting? An official press release from Apple regarding a support call? If you're so suspicious that you consider even the account of the Apple tier 2 agent tentatively fictitious until Apple verifies it officially, I don't see why you even bother to follow a story that's entirely made up of first- and second hand accounts by the involved. For all we know this story might not exist at all, it's just a collective hallucination induced by something they put in our water.

Unfortunately, I don't actually believe this source, because no one would want to risk their job because of it. It really isn't difficult to identify who it would be who said that, from Apple's POV.

 

[nsayer]

Right, everyone who doesn't automatically believe the worst about everyone is stupid and naive.

Anyone who automatically believes everything someone accused of theft says is stupid and naive.

 

[nsayer]

He did his best to take advantage of the situation he found himself in, not his best to return the phone. Man, you guys are so fixated on the issue of "reasonable attempt" it's hard to have a conversation about anything other than this legal detail.

Wow. Way to miss the forest for the trees.

 

[farmboy]

I most certainly don't. However, both my parents are cops (as was my grandfather and my great-grandfather), so I've heard a lot of stories including ones that make America's Dumbest Criminals look like Harvard graduates. Nothing the finder of the iPhone did, if Gizmodo's account is to be believed, is consistent with the behavior of someone who willfully committed any crimes, but rather a not-so-clever regular Joe who at some point in the process realized he may have struck gold and did his best (which wasn't much) to try to take advantage of the situation by improvising.

You had me right up to the point where you said "Nothing the finder did..." Unless he can demonstrate a clinical mental defect, he will be held accountable for his actions. He kept something he knew was not his, even after he knew who the owner was (strike one), and then when he deduced/was told that the item was worth lots of money, instead of doing what normal people do and make a concerted effort to return the valuable item (strike two), he sold it. Steeerike three! There are plenty of dolts convicted of crimes. Stupid is not an excuse.

 

[Hal Itosis]

But it's already been established that the finder contacted Apple and they dismissed it. No harm in opening up something that, based on Apple's dismissal, could well be a worthless hoax.

The guy made an effort to get it back to Apple, they thought it was a joke. Tough **** for them. Not everyone has Steve Jobs' personal cell number on speed dial. If I were in that situation, I'd probably call their main 1-800 number too, because that's the only number I'd know of to call.

And I bet even if you could call up an executive officer at Apple, they'd probably think it was a joke too.

So.. finding an iPhone, trying to return it, then selling it after not finding the owner is wrong? Is buying a found iPhone wrong when the person selling it tried to find the real owner? This whole thing is complete crap and it needs to be dropped. The guy tried to contact Apple, they didn't believe him, so he sold it. Gizmodo did nothing but help Apple build hype for the new iPhone. Apple already won from this whole thing. Just drop it and be done with this stupidity.

You children are so gullible... and you're not even accurately repeating Gizmodo's 2nd-hand lies. Seriously, just read this:

Lost and Found:

Apple security's mighty walls fell on the midnight of Thursday, March 18. At that time, Powell was at Gourmet Haus Staudt, just 20 miles from the company's Infinite Loop headquarters, having his fun. Around him, other groups of people were sharing the jolly atmosphere, and plenty of the golden liquid.

The person who eventually ended up with the lost iPhone was sitting next to Powell. He was drinking with a friend too. He noticed Powell on the stool next to him but didn't think twice about him at the time. Not until Powell had already left the bar, and a random really drunk guy—who'd been sitting on the other side of Powell—returned from the bathroom to his own stool.

The Random Really Drunk Guy pointed at the iPhone sitting on the stool, the precious prototype left by the young Apple engineer.

"Hey man, is that your iPhone?" asked Random Really Drunk Guy.

"Hmmm, what?" replied the person who ended up with the iPhone. "No, no, it isn't mine."

"Ooooh, I guess it's your friend's then," referring to a friend who at the time was in the bathroom. "Here, take it," said the Random Really Drunk Guy, handing it to him. "You don't want to lose it." After that, the Random Really Drunk Guy also left the bar.

The person who ended up with the iPhone asked around, but nobody claimed it. He thought about that young guy sitting next to him, so he and his friend stayed there for some time, waiting. Powell never came back.

During that time, he played with it. It seemed like a normal iPhone. "I thought it was just an iPhone 3GS," he told me in a telephone interview. "It just looked like one. I tried the camera, but it crashed three times." The iPhone didn't seem to have any special features, just two bar codes stuck on its back: 8800601pex1 and N90_DVT_GE4X_0493. Next to the volume keys there was another sticker: iPhone SWE-L200221. Apart from that, just six pages of applications. One of them was Facebook. And there, on the Facebook screen, was the Apple engineer, Gray Powell.

Thinking about returning the phone the next day, he left.

^ Anyone who accepts that garbage as a full and honest accounting of what happened is a fool.

Let me ask you anti-Apple Einsteins some questions: you discover your cellphone is missing... so, how long before you call your own number to see who answers? How many times would you try calling that number to reach the person holding your lost phone? How many text messages would you send to that phone?

I'll bet anyone 50 cents that that Gray dude was desperately trying to contact his lost cellphone for hours on end. That's why this is about theft... that's why Gizmodo is so full of it their eyes are brown... and that's why people attacking Apple based on 2nd-hand lies are losers.

You are dumb and Steve is smart. Deal with it. (silently, if at all possible)

Next step: Apple buys Gawker and then shuts it down.

"Buys"? Try: sues.

 

[Anuba]

Anyone who automatically believes everything someone accused of theft says is stupid and naive.

Yes, but as far as the phone call is concerned, there are two sources – the finder's account is consistent with the account of the guy who claims he works as an Apple support guy.

Gizmodo may not be Bernstein and Woodward, but I'm fairly certain that the support guy's account didn't come from the finder of the phone doing a funny voice, nor from a voice inside Jason Chen's head.

You had me right up to the point where you said "Nothing the finder did..." Unless he can demonstrate a clinical mental defect, he will be held accountable for his actions.

If you've been following the thousands of posts on this handful of threads for the last 48 hours or so, you'll have noticed that there are plenty of computer literate people arounds these parts who are not well enough versed in law to understand why the guy committed a crime by not trying hard enough to return the phone. So why are you assuming that the guy who found the phone belongs to the half that has a good understanding of the legal implications? Your version of the finder apparently hangs up the phone after calling Apple's support line and says "I know that call doesn't constitute reasonable attempt, but I don't care." I assure you it's quite possible to be unable to spell "attempt" without being retarded. It's clear from the overall story that the guy isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, so I personally wouldn't expect him to be 110% acquainted with the definition of "reasonable attempt" either.

 

[Cartaphilus]

actually, the "owner" of the phone is Apple Inc. Not Joe Blow from Facebook.

So he did contact the right people.

The owner of the phone, in the common sense, was certainly Apple, Inc., but theft is a crime against possession, not merely ownership. Accordingly, returning the phone to the Apple-authorized possessor, the Apple engineer, is proper, just and reasonable. According to the account on the Gizmodo site, the phone appeared to the finder as belonging to the person whose Facebook page he found.

In any case, it is much more reasonable to return a found phone to the person who lost it and who can be more easily contacted than it is to attempt to return a phone being secretly tested to a Fortune 100 company, especially if you only have the phone number for customer care. While others may have a different view, I personally don't believe it is reasonable to expect a CSR to know what to say to someone who calls about a found iPhone.

I think this may be why there is a consensus of opinion that to fulfill his legal obligations the finder ought to have given the phone to the management of the bar, or, if he preferred, left his contact information with the bar. This, as we now know, would have been successful within 24 hours.

Incidentally, since there is a report that the finder called AppleCare, a statement from a CSR, and a report that a ticket number was issued....wouldn't Apple have the identity and contact information of the finder? If the finder tried to remain anonymous I think he hurt his case, but if he identified himself it might render moot a lot of the discussion about the shield law. Anybody read anything on this?

 

[gwangung]

Yes, but as far as the phone call is concerned, there are two sources – the finder's account is consistent with the account of the guy who claims he works as an Apple support guy.

Also consistent with a lot of other stories, which have more sinister motives for the finder. That's the point, you know...

 

[dejo]

actually, the "owner" of the phone is Apple Inc. Not Joe Blow from Facebook.

And how would the person who "found" this phone know this?

 

[farmboy]

...but my point was that the phone call is rather inconsistent with the notion that he stole the phone (stole as in snatched from Gray's pocket, not stole as in found-but-didn't-try-hard-enough-to-return).

I guess have your grampa or mom and dad explain that there is no difference between lifting out of his pocket and finding it and never returning it and then selling it for profit.
The phone call, if real, was well after the fact of possession and, in my opinion, deliberately ineffective CMA. Then this "innocent doofus" SOLD IT FOR 5K! This doesn't mean anything to you?

 

[pastparticiple]

My god are people still insisting he STOLE the phone?

Apparently picking up a penny from the sidewalk is theft according to those who are. And if they EVER so much as touch anything that doesn't belong to them I hope they immediately surrender themselves as criminals.