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

[Revelation78]

Wow, I really thought that, once the cease and desist letter was followed, that it would be the end. Shows how much I know. I still think it's the wrong move, to do something first-hand to Gizmodo, from a PR standpoint. It just will always look like David & Goliath, even if Apple shows to be legally correct.

Maybe, with all the media attention given to the loss of the phone, Apple felt that they had to do something more decisive, in order to show that they wouldn't fool around in circumstances such as these, and that they take matters like this extremely seriously.

Overall, it's no one's proudest moment.

So you didn't read any of the posts in this thread then?

IT ISN'T APPLE. Gray would have notified law enforcement immediately of the lost phone. Once Giz started posting left and right about the phone and how they got it, they opened the doors for Law Enforcement. The police just viewed the site, got their ducks in a row and secured a search warrant.

 

[Revelation78]

But they are ok with people breaking NDAs to leak rumors. ALL info that comes to this site before it has been released has violated some law somehow. It is a huge pile of steaming hypocrisy.

The only reason most people are upset is because their shrine Apple has been embarrassed. If it was Microsoft or any other competitor they would be laughing and pointing. It's very transparent.

Actually you're incorrect. Violating and NDA is not a violation of the law, it's a violation of a contract. You'll never due time for violating and NDA unless it deals with Trade Secrets. You can pay restitution and other penalties for violating and NDA.

There's a difference. And, BTW, most people didn't care too much until they bashed Gray in the manner that they did. At the point I no longer care for Giz. I hope they eventually come out with the heads attached, but I hope it teaches them a good lesson about Karma.

 

[Mlobo01]

Macrumors...

People visit the Macrumors site for questions regarding fixes and future expectations, some help others fix issues that can prevent you from going to the Genius bar, its not irony at all, I like a good juicy rumor but not at the cost of someone else's life, job or grief which is what Gizmodo possibly did, they crossed some type of threshold and yet they seemed bewildered of what is happening to them? karma perhaps? this could of cost that young person's job. I do not live for the rumors, like many I enjoy a good story but not at that high cost, after all I do have a conscious which allows me to sleep well at night.
there is more to this site than just rumors.

 

[lilo777]

So you didn't read any of the posts in this thread then?

IT ISN'T APPLE. Gray would have notified law enforcement immediately of the lost phone. Once Giz started posting left and right about the phone and how they got it, they opened the doors for Law Enforcement. The police just viewed the site, got their ducks in a row and secured a search warrant.

Yeah, that's how police always react to reports about lost phones. You are funny

 

[quackquack]

See I'm not arguing if he knew or not. I'm pointing out that the law doesn't care, the letter of the law anyways. If he didn't know, the DA will probably go easier on him vs if he outright knew it was stolen.

Again, if you go back and READ my post. Giz clearly states the timeframe the finder had the device and that he didn't turn it over to law enforcement. When the finder then sold it to Giz it became theft. Giz clearly states these as facts in how it came into possession of the device. According to the law they committed theft. It doesn't matter if the finder said "hey I stole it off of some guy in a bar." The moment money was exchanged for the device it became theft because it was never turned over to law enforcement.

Now Giz is trying to hide behind the fact that the finder called apple support so it can't constitute theft. Again, the finder never turned it over to police so he didn't satisfy his due diligence, thus theft occurred.

You're doing better about not getting angry, but you're still pretty patronizing Yes, I've been reading your posts.

Anyways... OK I see your point. But, your interpretation relies on the assumption again that Gizmodo knew at the time of purchase that it was a genuine device and not in fact a hoax. Gizmodo will argue they couldn't know this until after having access to the device. There's no question that the guy who found it in the bar stole it, Gizmodo at least has an argument to make (albeit a fairly weak one).

 

[pastparticiple]

So you didn't read any of the posts in this thread then?

IT ISN'T APPLE. Gray would have notified law enforcement immediately of the lost phone. Once Giz started posting left and right about the phone and how they got it, they opened the doors for Law Enforcement. The police just viewed the site, got their ducks in a row and secured a search warrant.

Nonsense. Apple most assuredly made a call to the DA. I truly doubt some cop was checking out the site and said "hey there is a crime in progress!!!"

As has been said they don't normally take such swift and aggressive action in the search of "stolen" property. Try reporting your car stolen and listen to the "not much we can do but keep an eye out" comments. This thing got the royal treatment because of Apple.

 

[quackquack]

IDK. So if I work for a company then I'm protected but if I work for myself, I'm not. Seems like something the lawmakers or courts need to clarify.

It has more to do with whether or not you are full-time journalist. You could be a self-employed journalist and be protected, if my interpretation is correct. You could not, however, work at GameStop and post on your blog during your free time and be protected.

 

[Revelation78]

Yeah, that's how police always react to reports about lost phones. You are funny

OK, read my post about Giz's articles. The main fact that this wasn't just a "phone." It was a prototype that is valued greater than just a sum of it's parts; greater than the retail or MSRP value. If you asked Apple what the value of a prototype device is, they will add in all of the R&D to the sum of millions of dollars for it's value.

Now do you see, it's not just a phone.

 

[RickSizz]

....such a waste of time

I'm having a hard time swallowing this whole thing...

Q. Did Gizmodo cross the line with "how" they obtained the device.
A. Yes.

Q. Did Gizmodo provide us with "tasty" bit of Apple news that was justified and enjoyable.
A. Of course they did, that is why we all read these sites..

Come june, this whole thing will not matter.. The phone will be released and everyone will know what it coming down the pipe.

The bottom line this is a complete waste of tax dollars going after this when Apple has yet to release any official document/answer (besides that "letter" from their legal department) to this issue on whether how or if even they plan on taking any legal actions.

-Final Note. A reporter can release the real identity of a CIA agent to the public media possibly putting their life and family in danger, where's the raids, wheres the hoopla for something like that.. This is a piece of hardware.. I agree, the device belongs to Apple and it could possibly damaged them directly or indirectly....Anyway, I am still going to buy the device, whether its the one we currently know of, or something different...

-Just my opinion, take care.

 

[ddrueckhammer]

It has more to do with whether or not you are full-time journalist. You could be a self-employed journalist and be protected, if my interpretation is correct. You could not, however, work at GameStop and post on your blog during your free time and be protected.

I think you are right but I still think they aren't protected under the shield law if they are themselves being investigated but that is still a pretty complicated matter if they are indeed part of the protected class.

 

[wovel]

Yeah, that's how police always react to reports about lost phones. You are funny

Police do not pursue lost phones that much you are correct.

If you went to the police and said "someone stole my phone, they posted about (even bragged about it ) on their blog, they took it apart even though they knew it was mine and they sent it back to me after I sent them a letter demanding it" -- they would pursue the criminal for you too.

I'm having a hard time swallowing this whole thing...

The bottom line this is a complete waste of tax dollars going after this when Apple has yet to release any official document/answer (besides that "letter" from their legal department) to this issue on whether how or if even they plan on taking any legal actions.

Corporations are not in the habit of publicly discussing ongoing legal issues. The tax dollars are there so that when a citizen files a complaint, the police can investigate...

-Final Note. A reporter can release the real identity of a CIA agent to the public media possibly putting their life and family in danger, where's the raids, wheres the hoopla for something like that.. This is a piece of hardware.. I agree, the device belongs to Apple and it could possibly damaged them directly or indirectly....Anyway, I am still going to buy the device, whether its the one we currently know of, or something different...

You lived in a bubble for five years if you think either the investigative effort or the media hoopla over this phone is even in the stratosphere of the Valerie Plame coverage. Judith Miller spent 85 days in jail for refusing to name her source. It is ludicrous to even mention it.

 

[Revelation78]

Nonsense. Apple most assuredly made a call to the DA. I truly doubt some cop was checking out the site and said "hey there is a crime in progress!!!"

As has been said they don't normally take such swift and aggressive action in the search of "stolen" property. Try reporting your car stolen and listen to the "not much we can do but keep an eye out" comments. This thing got the royal treatment because of Apple.

All the police had to to was turn on the news. It was on the freaking news that Giz acquired the prototype phone. Once Giz posted how they got it, there no longer is a need for Apple or Gray to get involved. Not to mention if Gray filed a police report for a missing phone and then Giz publicly stated it was Gray's phone, hmmmmm.... The police could have walked right in and made arrests based on he article posted on Gizmodo if they wanted.

They chose to build a case due to the value of a prototype iPhone; not to mention the possible Trade Secret violations that may have occurred.

 

[lilo777]

People visit the Macrumors site for questions regarding fixes and future expectations, some help others fix issues that can prevent you from going to the Genius bar, its not irony at all, I like a good juicy rumor but not at the cost of someone else's life, job or grief which is what Gizmodo possibly did, they crossed some type of threshold and yet they seemed bewildered of what is happening to them? karma perhaps? this could of cost that young person's job. I do not live for the rumors, like many I enjoy a good story but not at that high cost, after all I do have a conscious which allows me to sleep well at night.
there is more to this site than just rumors.

I think we might add hypocrisy to the list of Apple fan features. "good juicy rumor" is exactly what this Gizmodo story was. And no Gizmodo would not fre this guy but Apple might. Just read the story about another Apple engineer who was fired for showing iPad 10 minutes before official announcement to (of all people) Steve Wozniak. I guess stupid Steve really hates the smart one

 

[ma2ha3]

Peace sells, but War gets page views.

yeah lots of views, this might all end in prison for gizmodo, it is not worth it, the ugliest looking phone apple ever made. they should just return the phone when apple ask for it. all the round button at the side, i want to vomit when i see them.

 

[Cartaphilus]

I have a serious problem with the search and seizure. A professional blogger for a commercial blog (regardless of your opinion of the quality of their reporting) should be afforded the protection of the shield law. Great mischief would be possible if shield protections are only afforded to serious reporters. Who decides which reporters are serious? The White House does not consider Fox News a serious news organization. You can see how this can become a sticky wicket. So, regardless of whether a crime was or was not committed, the cops should not have busted down the reporter's door and seized his unpublished material. These strong arm tactics are problematic.

I'm for extending the shield protection to any idiot with a computer and an internet connection--maybe even to Fox News. But I draw the line at criminal behavior. Once someone receives stolen goods, steals a briefcase, or tortures someone to get a story, that person is going to be prosecuted for his criminal acts, and I don't care if he is Clark Kent or Osama bin Laden.

This isn't about a great metropolitan newspaper or a gutsy independent journalist breaking a story involving government corruption---this is, by all reports, a blogger on tech matters who through poor judgment and lack of discipline yielded to temptation and committed one crime and concealed another so it could tell Apple enthusiasts what the next gadget might look like. This is very nice, but while I think it is alright to permit the disclosure of state secrets and to waive the Espionage Act to achieve a more open and effective democratic society, there's a limit to the crimes and misdemeanors I think private citizens ought to have to suffer just so us geeks can get a sneak peek.

So to me, at least, it is a balancing test--how much public harm is sought to be excused for how much public benefit. Neil Sheehan passes muster with me; Jason Chen doesn't.

 

[Revelation78]

I think we might add hypocrisy to the list of Apple fan features. "good juicy rumor" is exactly what this Gizmodo story was. And no Gizmodo would not fre this guy but Apple might. Just read the story about another Apple engineer who was fired for showing iPad 10 minutes before official announcement to (of all people) Steve Wozniak. I guess stupid Steve really hates the smart one

The iPad incident, the guy was told NOT to show anyone prior to the launch. He even stated that in the video. If he was my employee, I would fire him too.

 

[merlintl]

Nobody has provided a rational argument for why the police or Apple look bad in this, because they don't.
Not to mention you forgot Gizmodo and the seller, the ones who actually look bad here.

Apple looks bad because they appear to be the storm troopers of recent. Whether it be heavy enforcement of app store rules and then to this. Even if they didn't have a hand in this, it looks bad on them.

As far as the police, give me a break. Even though legally they may be justified, seems a little funny that an iPhone proto can generate this much effort. There must be little or no crime in California.

Rational arguments have nothing to with this. In land of rational, none of us would own apple computers or buy the Apple reality distortion field.

Just for the record, I have a 3GS, 2 AEs, MBP, and Octo 2.26. I love my Apple stuff but I'm not a fanboy. I can see Apple going the way of MS in terms of public perception if they are not careful.

 

[lilo777]

The iPad incident, the guy was told NOT to show anyone prior to the launch. He even stated that in the video. If he was my employee, I would fire him too.

OK, and what was the point of firing this guy Was there any harm done to Apple? Obviously not. Apple lost a [supposedly] good engineer. For what? Clearly the goal was to make sure that every Apple employee be scared. What a lovely company.

 

[ImperialX]

It was obviously stolen in the first place, but they shouldn't have searched Jason's home.

 

[Full of Win]

Just because people are interested in news about current and upcoming Apple products does not mean they think theft is an ok way to get that information.

Where is the theft? Gizmondo was just getting page clicks from the stupidity of an Apple employee. This seizure is just Apple flexing its muscles. Apple has 40 billion in the bank and a market cap of a quarter of a trillion dollars; so you better believe they are calling the shots on this one. The local police will do what Apple tells them to, that is just how it works when your company has more money than most small countries do.

 

[Full of Win]

It was obviously stolen in the first place, but they shouldn't have searched Jason's home.

If it was stolen, where is the police report? Where was it reported as missing to the police?

 

[Cartaphilus]

Really? So If I find an iPhone tonight at a bar, bring it home with me with the intent of returning it to the original owner, wake up to find the phone bricked before I can get the person's info, call Apple to tell them I've found a lost phone and they blow me off, then sell it on eBay that I am guilty of theft? Oh wait, I am supposed to so a web search for "Bob Frapples" and then email every person with that name and ask them if they're missing a phone?

I would LOVE to stand trial on that one.

You wouldn't last five minutes of cross-examination, and then you'd be found guilty unanimously by a jury.

And where you went wrong? No, it wasn't giving Bob Frapples short shrift, it was when you left the bar without doing a single thing for the owner of the phone. Would it have killed you to leave your name and number with the bar's management? Just in case the owner figured out where he'd last remembered having the phone and called the bar? How about just saving yourself all that trouble of making resolutions and wearing your fingers to the bone on your keyboard going through all the Frapples in the world, and just turn the phone over to the management of the bar? How about dropping it off at the nearest police precinct?

You did none of those things. I guess you care more about making money by selling it on eBay than about making sure somebody got his phone back. I guess you're a thief.

But I think orange is a great color for you.

 

[Revelation78]

OK, and what was the point of firing this guy Was there any harm done to Apple? Obviously not. Apple lost a [supposedly] good engineer. For what? Clearly the goal was to make sure that every Apple employee be scared. What a lovely company.

I can agree with you there. The only reason I would fire the guy is violation of my trust. If I can't trust you to follow the rules with only 10 minutes to go, how can I trust you on the next secret project. Will you show it off ten days in advance next time?

 

[lilo777]

I can agree with you there. The only reason I would fire the guy is violation of my trust. If I can't trust you to follow the rules with only 10 minutes to go, how can I trust you on the next secret project. Will you show it off ten days in advance next time?

And yet, somehow Apple decided not to fire Steve Jobs for backdating his stock options.They are very selective about whose trust may or may not be violated

 

[ddrueckhammer]

I can agree with you there. The only reason I would fire the guy is violation of my trust. If I can't trust you to follow the rules with only 10 minutes to go, how can I trust you on the next secret project. Will you show it off ten days in advance next time?

The guy broke NDA. If it had just be Woz he had shown it to then he might have gotten away with it. Unfortunately for him, there was YouTube video of him showing the device to all sorts of people besides Woz.

Also, he didn't just break the rules 10 minutes early. It was a 3G model and he broke NDA over a month early.