Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well i think this situation is a little OTT however I do reckon, assuming the story is as is, that the police should have notified Mr Chen prior to raiding his house for information on the stolen property.

Apple has their dummy back and i highly doubt they want to punish a journalist for publishing details of its prized device.

I do think the way the story was published and written was, as said previously unethical as the naming of the associate Apple employee and also the entire story of how the phone was purchased as stolen property, they are banking this for everything its got but Jason Chen was likely just doing his job.

If it were me i'd have handed it back to Apple right away, not because i'm a buzzkill, but a lot of the hype to an apple device launch is now deteriorated, this story has certainly spoiled it for me and some others.
 
What i think will be amusing is the field day all the lawyers involved will have. Not ot mention the money they will make off this

There is the journalism shield which is wide open to interputation here. And apple already lost one of those ( apple vs does on the firewire thing) when they got subpoenas for 3 web sites issued by the court and the appeals court squashed the subpoenas and issued a protective order protecting the sites.

And i know tons will say it is different, but it really isn't. Since the main reason behind the subpoenas was
"that the publishers had involved themselves in the unlawful misappropriation of a trade secret"

And since no charges have been filed against the person who found the phone in the bar in the first place,, i think the cops put the cart and the horse in the wrong order.

but only the courts can decide this mess. how ever it is amusing as to the who is guilty of what and when.

one thing for sure is , all the parties involved are guilty of tons of stupidity.
 
You do realize that you could get in serious trouble for falsely accusing a judge of taking money, right?

Can judge get into serious trouble by falsely accusing someone of crime or indeed for allowing illegal raid of private property and seizure of equipment?

Also, where exactly did I accuse him of that?

I am simply questioning certain possibilities which are likely to happen in capitalist money driven world :)
 
Just curious...did you think that would lead to a job someday?

Come on people, Occam's Razor

What do you think is more likely? That this random person on the internet with some of the worst logical reasoning I have ever seen actually has a masters in neo-imperialism, OR that he is just making stuff up to save face?

Do a google search on "masters in neo imperialism" how many university results do you get? The dude doesn't have a masters in neo imperialism any more that I have a masters in Neo-Theoligical Bacon Cooking
 
Well i think this situation is a little OTT however I do reckon, assuming the story is as is, that the police should have notified Mr Chen prior to raiding his house for information on the stolen property.

Apple has their dummy back and i highly doubt they want to punish a journalist for publishing details of its prized device.

I do think the way the story was published and written was, as said previously unethical as the naming of the associate Apple employee and also the entire story of how the phone was purchased as stolen property, they are banking this for everything its got but Jason Chen was likely just doing his job.

If it were me i'd have handed it back to Apple right away, not because i'm a buzzkill, but a lot of the hype to an apple device launch is now deteriorated, this story has certainly spoiled it for me and some others.

And given Jason and Giz the chance to destroy evidence? The law does not say they have to notify you prior to arriving at the location of the said search warrant. If police had to notify you ahead of time, there would never be any evidence to collect in any criminal case.
 
Can judge get into serious trouble by falsely accusing someone of crime or indeed for allowing illegal raid of private property and seizure of equipment?

1) the judge hasn't accused anyone of anything
2) there was no raid. No illicit goods were taken. No one was arrested.
3) the search warrant was legal. A journalist can't hire a hitman to kill someone, then right a story about it, then complain when the police carry off the computer he used to hire the guy on craigslist.

Also, where exactly did I accuse him of that?

Here: (this is after you edited it)
Perhaps even corrupted frekn judge!?!?!

And here:
To balance the things out, I say Judge's house need to be raided too since there is equally good chance that he took some money for his action as for Giz committing the "crime" :)

You originally had a more direct accusation that you attempted to edit, but you can see I quoted it in response to you 2 pages back.
 
The only reason the search has been called into question, is because there exist certain protections for "journalists." It is being examined in further detail whether or not Chen falls under this protection, as he had committed a crime by buying the stolen phone.

What here is illegal, immoral, or wrong from law enforcement perspective?

That is not "only" reason - it is THE ONLY reason!

Wrong, illegal, immoral thing is act of raid BEFORE examination of legal facts and figures... If there was nothing wrong, illegal and immoral investigation wouldn't be paused!
 
That is not "only" reason - it is THE ONLY reason!

Wrong, illegal, immoral thing is act of raid BEFORE examination of legal facts and figures... If there was nothing wrong, illegal and immoral investigation wouldn't be paused!

Well good news for you, then. It just got unpaused.
 
You've never heard of slander? And this would be slander per se, meaning the judge wouldn't even have to prove damages.

For someone who purports to be someone with some legal knowledge, you must have missed the day in tort law class where they explained the difference between slander and libel.
 
That is not "only" reason - it is THE ONLY reason!

Wrong, illegal, immoral thing is act of raid BEFORE examination of legal facts and figures... If there was nothing wrong, illegal and immoral investigation wouldn't be paused!

And you are wrong again! MANY times a good defence attorney will argue the validity of findings in a case, the investigation if it relies on those findings halts until they can verify there are no loop holes the defence can get the evidence dismissed.
 
For someone who purports to be someone with some legal knowledge, you must have missed the day in tort law class where they explained the difference between slander and libel.

And you missed the part about "slander per se," I suppose? Further, courts are mixed as to whether commentary in "internet communities" is slander or libel. (Though email and blogs are pretty universally considered "published").
 
Apple is a company that is run by Nazis, tyrants, and czars. This is evident in the way the lock down their products, fire their employees, so on.

Just be glad our country is not ran by guys like these.
 
And you missed the part about "slander per se," I suppose? Further, courts are mixed as to whether commentary in "internet communities" is slander or libel. (Though email and blogs are pretty universally considered "published").

The per se part was clear, but considering I'm fairly confident that you READ the posters comments, and didn't HEAR them, it's pretty clear that this would be a case of libel per se, not slander per se. I haven't seen a single case where a message board/internet community comments have been considered slander instead of libel. I have, on the other hand, seen dozens of cases that consider it libel. I'd love to read a few decisions that show otherwise though.
 
[...]Apple has their dummy back and i highly doubt they want to punish a journalist for publishing details of its prized device.

[...]a lot of the hype to an apple device launch is now deteriorated[...]

This is exactly why Steve wants Jason dead.







(I'm joking, Steve, don't send the Silicon Valley Gestapo after me, ok ?)
 
Gizmodo is a piss poor attempt at actual journalism anyway. I know that doesn't make a difference to the case but it boggles the mind as to why people are sticking up for these up their own ass, holier than thou idiots.

Piss poor? Really dude? They got a hold of an iPhone prototype and put it on display for everyone to see, that's hardly piss poor journalism.

Nobody is to blame but the jerk-off who left the phone on the bar stool in the first place. Apple has the phone back in their possession, their still going to sell a crap load of phones (maybe even more), we got a sneak peak, everyone wins (except maybe for drunk moron, he'll always be known as the guy who lost the next iPhone).

Apple: Grow a pair, call off the dogs and move on. You f***ed up, now deal with it!
 
Piss poor? Really dude? They got a hold of an iPhone prototype and put it on display for everyone to see, that's hardly piss poor journalism.

Nobody is to blame but the jerk-off who left the phone on the bar stool in the first place. Apple has the phone back in their possession, their still going to sell a crap load of phones (maybe even more), we got a sneak peak, everyone wins (except maybe for drunk moron, he'll always be known as the guy who lost the next iPhone).

Apple: Grow a pair, call off the dogs and move on. You f***ed up, now deal with it!

The "dog" in this case is the DA, who is bound to prosecute as a crime has been committed. You can't call them off.
 
Piss poor? Really dude? They got a hold of an iPhone prototype and put it on display for everyone to see, that's hardly piss poor journalism.

Nobody is to blame but the jerk-off who left the phone on the bar stool in the first place. Apple has the phone back in their possession, their still going to sell a crap load of phones (maybe even more), we got a sneak peak, everyone wins (except maybe for drunk moron, he'll always be known as the guy who lost the next iPhone).

Apple: Grow a pair, call off the dogs and move on. You f***ed up, now deal with it!

Hiliarious to read, but completely false. A crime is a crime, small, big, medium etc etc... You break the law and pay for it, most of the time :p
 
Piss poor? Really dude? They got a hold of an iPhone prototype and put it on display for everyone to see, that's hardly piss poor journalism.

Nobody is to blame but the jerk-off who left the phone on the bar stool in the first place. Apple has the phone back in their possession, their still going to sell a crap load of phones (maybe even more), we got a sneak peak, everyone wins (except maybe for drunk moron, he'll always be known as the guy who lost the next iPhone).

Apple: Grow a pair, call off the dogs and move on. You f***ed up, now deal with it!

Refreshing post finally! :)

Exactly... And I would go step further and add that I hope this raid on journalist's home bounces right back and straight into their draconian corporate face!

:)
 
The per se part was clear, but considering I'm fairly confident that you READ the posters comments, and didn't HEAR them, it's pretty clear that this would be a case of libel per se, not slander per se. I haven't seen a single case where a message board/internet community comments have been considered slander instead of libel. I have, on the other hand, seen dozens of cases that consider it libel. I'd love to read a few decisions that show otherwise though.

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_roo...les/5176-Bulletin-Boards-Slander-Or-Libel.htm

In California, of course, it's libel. Depends on jurisdiction.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.