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

[RT2020]

I don't care about the Apple side of things, but this ugly, slimy bastard revealed the poor engineer's name... so I'm glad he has this to deal with now.

 

[mccldwll]

If they did that then the police department is opening itself up to law suites. The source aka who sold the phone has some legal protection in the fact the Gizmo does not have to give up who the source is.

Which TV show did you see that on? We're talking about stolen property.

 

[anthonyjr]

Something tells me Apple reported lost property most likely a day or two after the phone was lost, in hopes that the phone would be brought to the police station.

From what I remembered reading, all of Gizmodo's news came after a few days with the device in their possession. By that time, the police were definitely notified of the missing phone.

The police are probably looking into the terms under stolen property themselves, without Apple. Gizmodo did more wrong for themselves by showing off the phone online for a few days before it finally handed it over.

Sadly, the state / police usually pick up on law breakers. I really doubt Apple is pushing this. It's the same if you get into a car accident: The state / police bring the person to court first.

 

[dejo]

On the assumption they are missing something and that's why they ordered the search...

Apple ordered the search? Yeah, right...

 

[bobob]

You have that right. I think it is just a matter of time EFF and a few other digital rights groups start to jump on this. If their reasoning that is that if they are just "web only" and not print they cannot claim journalist privilege, this can turn into a landmark case.

Can you imagine the NY Times buying a stolen iPhone and taking apart and publishing photos?

 

[jaykk]

After the fact? Apple have their phone. What more do they want? ...

But its upto the law enforcement to decide that. Apple just reported it as missing, and they got it back. But Law enforcement is there for a reason, to enforce laws.

 

[Nebrie]

After the fact? Apple have their phone. What more do they want? ...

Run into Best Buy RIGHT NOW and run out with a laptop. Offer to give them back the laptop in exchange for dropping charges. Are you really that stupid?

 

[twilson]

Gizmodo reports that police officers entered the home of its editor Jason Chen last Friday night, seizing four computers, two servers, and other items as authorized by a search warrant related to the site's purchase of a next-generation iPhone lost by an Apple employee in a Redwood City, California bar.

A total of 24 items related to the investigation were seized by officers, who broke down the door to Chen's unoccupied residence to execute the search warrant. Chen, who returned home from a dinner out to find the police in his home, notes that he discussed with the officers claims made by Gaby Darbyshire, Chief Operating Officer of Gizmodo's parent company Gawker Media that such a search warrant should be considered illegal under journalist protection statutes. Officers proceeded, however, with their search and seizure.Gawker has filed its objection with the police department and requested an immediate return of the seized items.

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

I like (hate) how Gizmodo is trying to hide behind Section 1070.

Looks a bit like Section 1070 has a lot more to do with a warrant not being able to be used to seize articles that would reveal the identity of an anonymous source, which has absolutely no bearing on this case as the whole internet already knows the identity of your source.

This is instead, about determining the events pertaining to the alleged commission of a felony, which I'm sure the press are not exempt from in any way shape or form.

 

[sswanky]

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.

Sorry, but the police would have done nothing w/o a complaint from Apple.

 

[mingoglia]

Do you really think the police would react this much or even get involved at all if one of us lost a phone that was then sold for $5,000 then returned to us? They might do something, but they wouldn't be raiding houses taking away computers and hard drives. It would be a very low priority case.

x2.
And x2 on the **** you Apple post as well. Apple had discretion on how to handle this and they chose to set an example. Bullying the small guy like this is pretty ****less and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

[thatrandomguy]

I don't think this in any way harmed America.

Not the US, but it certainly hurt Apple's hype and you can bet your butt all the knock off artists are already copying the design. Hell, other phone manufacturers have probably taken a thing or two away.

I don't think it hurt Apple much either . Like honestly, who did it hurt? HTC already had most of these features. People who "wait to buy a new iphone" will still buy a new iphone.

You're going to have a hell of a time trying to sell the old stock now, plus the lack of hype when the device is announced, plus the time for competitors to copy you.

And stop feeling sorry for that Engineer. He messed up. Big time. Rule #1: Don't drink and use a top secret prototype iPhone.

Knowing someone made a major mistake that was entirely their fault and having sympathy for the bad circumstances that arose as a result are two entirely different things.

 

[Mjmar]

Firing the employee would essentially admit to people that it wasn't just a prototype in an odd case but the upcoming iPhone. Also, Gizmodo made his name public- now there's some public sympathy for the guy.

And you expect Apple to test the phone in a faraday cage? You have to test a device like a cell phone outside of your own building eventually...

Makes sense, but with Apple's strict policies I'd expect that certain places, such as a bar would be off limits when in possession of a prototype.

 

[Erwin-Br]

Haha, typical USA cops: Busting down the door only to get a few computers. I bet they really got a kick out of it. Couldn't they just try again the next morning? The guy already had plenty of time to try to hide the "evidence" anyway.

Here they only break down the door if someone's in danger on the other side.

 

[kingofwale]

this is BS.

How often do police break down doors seizing computers due to one item that isn't even stolen

Apple is having way too much control

 

[macquariumguy]

After the fact? Apple have their phone. What more do they want? ...

It doesn't matter what Apple wants, this is a criminal case. The DA might ask Apple to cooperate in the prosecution, and the DA could decide not to prosecute if Apple didn't cooperate, but it's the DAs call, not Apple.

Now after the criminal case is done, that's when Apple can and sue Giz out existence.

 

[*LTD*]

x2.
And x2 on the **** you Apple post as well. Apple had discretion on how to handle this and they chose to set an example. Bullying the small guy like this is pretty ****less and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Once again, the "small guy" seems to have broken the law. But since Apple is a large corporation with a lot of money they shouldn't pursue them.

 

[ct2k7]

Apparently under the same rock as you, running around with your "Trade Secrets" in plain view is gross negligence.

I've been over this with a Calif. lawyer, just for fun. He said that components would be covered by trade secrecy.

 

[brammp]

Chen was in possession of stolen property, the police raided his house.

You have no evidence the Apple had sway in the matter, it could merely be the media attention.

Uh, no. Incorrect. He turned the "stolen" property over to Apple long before the police raided his home.

 

[willie0683]

Finally

Finally the media is getting what it deserves. Journalists pry and probe into so many lives and companies under the freedom of information act. Ruining lives, family, and companies. I hope everyone involved in this theft and hiding behind the name of journalism get prison time. Maybe that will teach them to quit trying to create news and just report it.

 

[thatrandomguy]

Makes sense, but with Apple's strict policies I'd expect that certain places, such as a bar would be off limits when in possession of a prototype.

First time such a high profile product has leaked with such certainty before at Apple. I'm sure that it is now, but the rules were probably "don't lose it".

Now I expect they'll tighten up on that.

 

[GeekLawyer]

Good riddance to bad "journalism." Shut all the hacks down.

 

[Reve101]

Chen was in possession of stolen property, the police raided his house.

You have no evidence the Apple had sway in the matter, it could merely be the media attention.

was it stolen? I wasn't aware that it was proven. If it's not proven do you think it's right to break the law to prove that somebody else has broken the law? Nobody knows if Apple is behind this; but if this illegal then I seriously hope Apple protests to the way the case is being handled. The dude who left the phone in the bar got sloppy; and knowing the owner of the phone Gizmodo should have returned the phone to its rightful owner; but using an invalid warrant to take someone's property is just messed up

 

[BlizzardBomb]

Good. They milked the coverage so much that what could've been an interesting find just ended up annoying.

 

[penfool]

I think this clears everything up!

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/2/12/3/s1524

1524(g)No warrant shall issue for any item or items described in Section 1070 of the Evidence Code.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=evid&group=01001-02000&file=1070
1070. (a) A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected
with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical
publication, or by a press association or wire service, or any person
who has been so connected or employed, cannot be adjudged in
contempt by a judicial, legislative, administrative body, or any
other body having the power to issue subpoenas, for refusing to
disclose, in any proceeding as defined in Section 901, the source of
any information procured while so connected or employed for
publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication,
or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or
prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for
communication to the public.
(b) Nor can a radio or television news reporter or other person
connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any
person who has been so connected or employed, be so adjudged in
contempt for refusing to disclose the source of any information
procured while so connected or employed for news or news commentary
purposes on radio or television, or for refusing to disclose any
unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving
or processing of information for communication to the public.
(c) As used in this section, "unpublished information" includes
information not disseminated to the public by the person from whom
disclosure is sought, whether or not related information has been
disseminated and includes, but is not limited to, all notes,
outtakes, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort not
itself disseminated to the public through a medium of communication,
whether or not published information based upon or related to such
material has been disseminated.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Sorry, but the police would have done nothing w/o a complaint from Apple.

BS. They had evidence of a crime. Gizmodo published all the details all over the limit. Apple don't have to complain about a thing. It would be remiss of the police NOT to investigate.