Police Seize Gizmodo Editor's Computers and Other Property Related to Lost Next-Generation iPhone

[Cartaphilus]

If the lawyer is correct and the search warrant is invalid won't any evidence found at his home will be inadmissible in court?

The author of that letter claims to be the "legal representative" of his company which he also serves as Chief Operating Officer. An officer of a corporation is, legally, authorized to speak for and represent the company, so it's hard to know if he is claiming to be the company's lawyer. Unless he is a graduate of the esteemed California Close-Cover-Before-Striking School of Law, it is difficult to believe he passed the California bar exam.

In any case, he is citing a provision of the California Penal Code that exempts journalists from being compelled under threat of being held in contempt of court to reveal their sources. That is not the same as protecting a person suspected of receiving stolen goods from the execution of a search warrant signed by a judge seeking physical evidence of a crime.

A press pass is not a license to steal, nor is any reporter excused from the commission of a crime in the name of journalism.

 

[Digital Dude]

Some people never learn...

I've been buying Apple products since the very beginning. One thing I've learned along the way... Screw with Steve, and he will screw you back like' no other!

 

[drummingcraig]

Saying, " Is this yours? Is this yours?" or " Do you know whose this is?" and calling Apple's tech support who would not know what to do in that situation is not enough to make selling the prototype legal. Before the iPhone got bricked, the seller had the guys facebook info. He could have contacted him through facebook on his own computer or left a message using his own account while the phone wasn't bricked to say I found your iPhone. There was a whole lot more this person could have done, but didn't. He made a lame ass attempt to return it.

WTF was he supposed to then????

The only thing I would've done differently was to leave MY phone number with the bar staff in case the owner came after it. Otherwise, if I found what I thought at the time was a regular iPhone, I would certainly take it with ME (as I trust myself to do the right thing better then someone else).

I'm also not gonna drop everything I'm doing and ruin my evening out by playing Sherlock Holmes. I'd wait till the next day (which is what they did).

If I woke up, found the phone to be bricked, then discovered it was some sort of...I dunno...prototype or knockoff....Im not sure at that point. But I'd say that contacting Apple in any regard is what I'd do (tech support or otherwise). If they blew me off...again, I dunno.

I just think there's a whole lot of ASSuming going on around here, and the little guy should get the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

[JediZenMaster]

it isn't up to me, it's called the constitution. journalists are allowed to report on things. and police aren't allowed to seize their belongings because of it. the end. nothing will come of this other than an apology from the police department to the editor. theres no middle ground here jackass, seriously please commit suicide asap, your social contributions to this world will benefit exactly none of us.

You must work for google But then again i wouldn't curse them like that

 

[quagmire]

it isn't up to me, it's called the constitution. journalists are allowed to report on things. and police aren't allowed to seize their belongings because of it. the end. nothing will come of this other than an apology from the police department to the editor. theres no middle ground here jackass, seriously please commit suicide asap, your social contributions to this world will benefit exactly none of us.

The 1st amendment does not protect journalists from buying stolen property. It may protect them from the warrant, but not buying stolen property. Or we would be having CNN break into Apple's campus to steal the next big product prototype and then scream, " 1st amendment".

 

[chrispholt]

Apparently it was Gray who insisted on it

"Wagstaff had wasn't familiar with all of the details of the case, but believes it was instigated not by Apple computer but by Gray Powell, the Apple employee who reportedly misplaced the prototype phone"
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/26/police-serve-warrant-sieze-gizmodo-editors-pcs-iphone-leak/

Still a raid over a stolen/lost phone?

 

[quinntaylor]

You and everyone else are acting like Gizmodo definitely knew that the phone was stolen at the time of payment, and not lost. How can you possibly state this as fact? After more information has come to light, it certainly looks like the individual who found the phone didn't follow due diligence in tracking down the owner. But at the time of payment, how could Gizmodo know this, and why should they be responsible to make sure? That's not how our legal system works.

If you buy a used car, do you get charged with a felony if the seller stole the car? Only if you knew it was stolen to begin with. And while Gizmodo may have had a suspicion, it will be nearly impossible to prove that they knew it was stolen at the time of purchase.

Hmmmm, let's modify that scenario a bit to match the story at hand. Rather than just any car, assume the seller presents you what is purported to be a top-secret 2012 model or concept car created by a major manufacturer, which he "found" somewhere. (Recall that the iPhone "finder" took off the case and could tell it wasn't a 3G iPhone, and that was the whole reasons Gizmodo was interested.) Now assume that once you have your hands on the car, you disassemble it and post photos as part of a huge scoop. Then, when the company finds out and demands it back, you claim: "Sorry, we didn't know it was stolen. We didn't even know it was yours until we took it apart and found your company's name stamped on virtually every piece. We're happy to have you take it off our hands — it's been burning a hole in our pockets."

To my mind, that's a slightly different scenario, and one in which it's a heck of a lot more likely to get charged with a felony.

Final mental exercise: if someone offered to sell you a phone they found, would you buy it, no questions asked? Would you assume that the seller would take the fall, or consider that perhaps a law-abiding citizen might turn a lost item over to the police (as the very least, if not the owner, especially when they can be identified), and that by purchasing it, you could be breaking the law yourself? The evidence of wrongdoing is pretty incriminating if you ask me.

 

[aluren]

At the time of payment Gizmodo knew that they were purchasing trade secrets worth billions of dollars with the intent to exploit those trade secrets for financial gain by posting them to the world on their website. I'm not so sure that, in the end, it will matter at all if it was technically 'stolen' or not.

That's what I'm thinking as well. It's more about giz exposing Apple trade secrets than how they got the phone, regardless if it's lost, stolen, or bought at $5k.

 

[kiljoy616]

Yeah, he or she could argue that. He or she would lose. But he or she could argue that. There's no rule against specifying an entire residence.

More apple employee trying to pass law.

A search warrant has to be specific, if not, then its a police state.
But if something is left in plain site then they can grab it for evidence.

Police are prone to breaking the law all the time. Da, what new.

But this is not the Police, its a Special Task Force found not in California but only in a very small area of california so bending the law is probably something they do all the time, if in court they show that there was no probable cause to the warrant that ok, that will months if not year and by that time small or even mid company will have been crushed by legal debt.

This Task Force is for the benefits of the companies in that area and only there. But I would say Apple has a lot of pull.

 

[Davidkoh]

Yep, and to make extra sure, let's take some pictures of the phone and publish them .

Well, I am no lawyer, but if you buy something that you are not sure is a real apple prototype, is it really illegal to take pictures and publish them while finding out if it's real, and then if it was real you give it back to Apple?

 

[LagunaSol]

I don't drink. I'm too young. My Uncle doesn't either. my parents have NEVER gotten drunk when ever I'm around them at least. They have never been charged with drunk driving, or any other Felony.

OK, cool. Then just leave the keys in the car. That should be enough justification for me to steal it.

Thanks!

 

[smiddlehurst]

Fear is what apple and jobs want to show everyone else.

Oh for the love of Jeff.... this is a POLICE investigation, nothing to do with Apple beyond reporting the initial loss of the device. Why is that so hard for some people to grasp?

If Apple wanted to go for fear they'd have equipped their army of lawyers with CIVIL suits and aimed them at Gawker claiming damages...

 

[Cartaphilus]

I could laugh. Before this story was posted, Gizmodo were the bad guys. Now (mostly) everyone feels sorry for them.

I don't know what to think! We'll know when Apple releases iPhone 4.

If you're taking a poll, I don't feel sorry for them.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

eeeff this

The "I'm a journalist so I'm special" routine makes me laugh. Yeah, you write about things that happen. Hey, guess what genius, that might give you the impression you can do whatever you want, and you might even try, but that doesn't stop anyone from putting a bullet through your head in Fallujah, and it ain't gonna stop the 5-0 from investigating a massive theft and disclosure of trade secrets regarding about the most high-profile new device in the world. If Apple caved under the PR pressure to appear softer and cuddlier, I'd be disappointed, because ANYONE who has ever put millions and years of hard work into a project, and then had it stolen and outed in front of your competition before you can bring it to market knows that it is on par with the kidnapping of one of your children, especially those without actual children. This IS their creation, being used against them. ...by some attention whore kid that needs a shower, and to learn to close his mouth when on-camera. I'm no fanboy, but hang im.

 

[cmaier]

Still a raid over a stolen/lost phone?

It wasn't a "raid." It is called "executing a search warrant."

 

[saxamoophone]

And any judge with an ounce of common sense would say you're wrong.

The finder didn't follow any standard protocol (see "common sense") nor, unfortunately, the law in his "attempts" at returning the phone to its rightful owner. He knew the owner's name - yet made no attempt to contact the owner directly. He didn't report it to the bar owner. He didn't report it to the police. He called Apple Customer Service confused and then shopped it around.

Honest effort? Give me a break.

Well legally the owner was Apple, and he did contact them. The engineer was not the owner. And yes, He used some bad judgement. Exchanging money was a HUGE nono.

I'm curious how much of a case there is. Any legal experts want to chime in?

 

[Dr Kevorkian94]

That is all fine and dandy, except Gizmodo posted video and picture and detail about a trade secret. Would you be upset if you designed a new product (with competition following your every move) and someone sold it and posted pictures/videos online for all your competition to see? I would think yes.

i can see that i would take legal action too but if the seller told them that o i think this is a new iphone. and he sells it to them they have no way of knowing if its a real apple proto-type(and if it wasn't nobody would care at all) or not. like i said they should investigate the legality of the finding o f the iphone, because if the finding is truly legal then gismoto is allowed to say whatever they want. because TECHNICALLY under the law then apple either didn't know it was missing and the time was up to reclaim it, or they new and took no action. also the act that protects freedom of the press.

 

[iPunk]

Hahahahahha that's what happens when you publicly tear down an unrealeased product from a major cooperation. Morons...

 

[katiepea]

Good. Chen and Gizmodo are getting what they deserve. Every Apple follower knows that Apple values its secrecy. In fact that secrecy is worth millions in free press and buzz leading up to a launch. And until those new devices go on sale, they are the property of Apple. When Chen and Gizmodo acquired the device, they knew they were breaking the law. They could have done the right thing and just returned the device, and they would have been respected by Apple.

But their desire for a "scoop" is going to cost them dearly as it should.

The worst part is that this wasn't just some new device, it was also the personal information of Gray Powell. They caused him untold anguish by not simply doing the right thing. If you are going to feel sorry, feel sorry for the real victims here, Apple and Gray Powell.

Karma is a bitch Jason.

sorry but i have to disagree here, i'm all for freedom of speech and journalism as our entire country was founded on the constitution. if you like closed news and journalism you may want to check china out. i hear they love stuff like that. but as long as i'm living in the united states, i am going to support our legal system and freedoms. both of which were made a mockery by this entire ordeal. the police neither had a right to seize a journalists property or preform a night search, yet they did both, everything they took is now non-admissable in court because the police violated their own warrant. the most that will result from this is an apology letter to the editor.

 

[AgentElliot007]

Difference is this involves trade secrets which can have a much much larger impact and Gizmodo earned money from the process.

It is still under investigation if they are found to have do nothing wrong then it will end here however the police had enough evidence to believe that a crime was committed and are acting on it, i.e. doing the job they are supposed to do.

Why did it take two pages before someone made a rational, logical, at least marginally informed post? Sad. It's a bit nuts to me that people are discussing this as if it was just any lost phone. I give props to Apple for standing up for themselves on the matter. While it may seem to be the case at times, the Internet is not the wild west...

 

[quagmire]

WTF was he supposed to then????

The only thing I would've done differently was to leave MY phone number with the bar staff in case the owner came after it. Otherwise, if I found what I thought at the time was a regular iPhone, I would certainly take it with ME (as I trust myself to do the right thing better then someone else).

I'm also not gonna drop everything I'm doing and ruin my evening out by playing Sherlock Holmes. I'd wait till the next day (which is what they did).

If I woke up, found the phone to be bricked, then discovered it was some sort of...I dunno...prototype or knockoff....Im not sure at that point. But I'd say that contacting Apple in any regard is what I'd do (tech support or otherwise). If they blew me off...again, I dunno.

I just think there's a whole lot of ASSuming going on around here, and the little guy should get the benefit of the doubt for now.

A) Leave number or device to bar staff just in case owner called to retrieve it

B) As I just mentioned. He had the guys info already. Contact him on facebook. Is that so hard for you to do?

C) Take it to the police station.

D) Walked over to Apple's Campus and say I found this and it looks to be a prototype of yours.

E) Hell, email Steve Jobs with photo's of the device. I am sure he or one of his clones would have responded pretty quickly.

 

[mavis]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3GS (JB3.1, unlocked): Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7D11 Safari/531.21.10)

Buyer of stolen property has home raided by police. Sounds reasonable to me.

Exactly. In other news, THIS. IS. AWESOME. I hope they throw the book at Gizmodo.

 

[puffnstuff]

That's not apples fault. 27 Years old is an age where most people act like ADULTS. Not Druken Frat boys. Apple did what any other employer would have done. Trusted someone to be mature about his job. Now People on this board defend gray like he is the victim but he is not. He was immature because most people who work for apple act like adults. I give blame where Blame is done.

If i F*CK up at my job then guess what? It's not my employers fault its MINE. The same thing with gray. But yet the Apple haters and irrational ass hats can't seem to get that

Where is the proof that he was drunk?????? Do you have evidence showing how many drinks he had if any at all??? Did he take a breathalyzer???

PEOPLE STOP ACCUSING THE MAN

 

[Cloudmover]

I don't know what to make of this case, but this I believe: the original person who "found" the phone had no serious desire to return it to its rightful owners. As has been written a thousand times, if he did, then he would have brought it back to the bar, or at least left his info there. Period.

If he wanted to get cute, he could have emailed Jobs. Dear Steve, I have your lost prototype, serial #blahblahblah. Think he would have gotten an answer?

If the guy was savvy enough to pull it apart and figure out what it was, then he also had enough brains to figure out a way to return it.

Stolen.

EXACTLY.

For some reason, everyone is referencing "the original person who "found" the phone's" tale of events as cannon when it seems clear, to me at least, that he is the most untrustworthy actor in this whole story.

Does anyone have a clue who he is? Does he have a record? Has he been at the scene of multiple "lost" tech items?

Maybe it's old fashioned, but, if I find a wallet, Phone, etc. I put it in an envelope, address it to the owner and drop it in the mailbox. That's how I was brought up.

Gizmodo should have headed over to Cupertino and handed the phone to Steve himself. That's how ADULTS play the game. Who knows? if Gizmodo did that, they might have found themselves on the same preferential pre-release goodie list as Walt Mossberg and David Pogue.

Now, I think Apple has them on the other list.

I hope Gizmodo and the receiver of the $5000.00 have a few months of serious discomfort and legal bills because of this. Maybe a hefty fine as well.

 

[aristokrat]

This is not so much about what was published, but more about the device itself. Freedom of the press does not mean that they are immune to all conviction; they can't just break into Apple HQ late at night to take pictures of all upcoming products and then hide behind the journalism shield. The press is bound by the same laws as everyone else, including trafficking in illegal goods. They committed a crime when they paid for the device.