http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/pd ... arch-apple

Well the police raided the home of Gizmodo editor.

Hardly a surprise. He put a posting on a public news source read by (at least) hundreds of thousands of people that he paid for stolen goods.

I've been reading some of the relevant 'freedom of the press' legislation and I think he (or his legal advisors) made a serious error. The relevant law protects a journalist from police interference under the circumstance that a source he used had committed a crime. They provide no protection at all when the journalist themselves commits a crime.

He was safe until he paid for the phone. Up to that point the only person who had committed a crime was the guy who picked the phone up in the bar. When Chen talked to him, Chen himself (and even the guy) were protected by the FotP legislation. What he should have done was told the bloke who to return the phone to - maybe Apple's iPhone R&D exec, who Chen would undoubtedly be aware of - and run a story that the bloke found the phone and returned it to Apple. He'd have his story, Apple would have their phone. Arguably the bloke would still be in trouble, but with Chen legally protected from being forced to reveal who he was, the chances of him ever being prosecuted were minimal.

The moment Chen handed over money for the phone he booted the FotP legislation into touch, committed one crime and became an accessory to another. It was a monumentally stupid thing to do. Everything he's done since has just made it worse. Publishing the letter Apple sent him asking for the phone back, revealing who the engineer was... All of that simply publicly emphasised his intention was not to 'repair' the crime or to ensure Apple got their property back but to maximise his won profit from the theft. He's an idiot and more than likely he's going to jail.

He asked an English Barrister about what his legal position (in California) was... His barrister said it was okay.

TOOL!

Chen has been a monumental moron. If he had returned the phone then he would not have got into any trouble. Though as you say he will probably end up in jail for handling stolen goods, theft, and what ever else they can find on him now.

He did return the phone though

He asked Apple to confirm it was theirs and then he would return it, and he did apparently

He had it for a week to dismantle before he told t'interwebs he had it.

Giving something back only after they ask for it isn't enough to keep you out of hot water under californian law. You're required by law to return something to it's owner at the first opportunity, or to hand it in to the police.

They wrote to them, asked to confirm it was theirs and what it was then they would return it

Surely identifying the rightful owner is something they have to do also......

They already knew that, they had seen the guy's facebook page on the phone. Aside from that the law is specific about what you do in the circumstances of finding something. If you can't identify the owner of the property, you hand it in to the police. You don't get creative, you don't phone the helpline for the phone manufacturer (seriously, if you found my car keys do you really think ringing Toyota would do any good?), you hand it in to the police. That's what the law says.

If Gizmodo try that defense in court, the fact they paid some guy five grand for it before bothering to ask Apple if it was a genuine prototype suggests they already knew very well what it was, the contact with Apple was arse-covering and I'd suspect any half competent lawyer to vapourise that defense in minutes. And the guy who found the phone took the money rather than just hand it to the police, so he's got no defense at all.

And even accepting all that, Gizmodo didn't just try to figure out who the phone was owned by and return it. They shipped it across the country, disassembled it, photographed it and put the photographs on their website, thus generating page hits and therefore ad revenue and therefore profit. Then they contacted Apple to ask if the phone was one of theirs. I don't think any sane person would consider that 'reasonable efforts'.

No. Look. Seriously. This kind of stuff is no kind of defense a first year law student couldn't dismantle in minutes. Their only chance is if the court rules that the warranted search of Chen's office was incorrect on the basis that he was in fact covered by the Freedom of the Press legislation. If that warrant is ruled valid, things will look very bleak for them indeed. They were stupid and greedy and they're about to get the legal failbat in the face.

I don't think they will come out of it too badly, Apple might have the press lusting after them after the 'incident' but after this and a fair bit of recent press (including the 2 finger salute to their micro-usb agreement) IMO the opinion on them is changing to a less positive opinion (and potentially anti competitive laws such as those MS and Google are getting from the EU who want more money).

Other things that strike me as EXTREMELY suspect about the whole story:
Apple didn't stop the articles being published or ask for them to be removed.
Apple didn't fire the employee (considering the Apple Gestapo are pretty damn strict, the guy lost a prototype having drinks FFS), yet an employee who showed Woz the iPad shortly before it was revealed to the public WAS fired.
Apple have pulled this kind of crap before with new ways to 'leak' stories to the press to get the hype up on their products.
Gizmodo are one of THE most iPhone loving news sites that there are, even the most pointless Apple article gets on their site and most Android/WM/other device ones don't

I smell something, it's either a red herring or something fishy in general......

Just read about the freedom of press stuff on Giz with relation to the warrant, IIRC under US law anything obtained with an illegal warrant can't be used and they can't use it again, so they are pretty boned if the ruling finds it illegal
http://gizmodo.com/5524843/police-seize ... -computers

Possibly because the cat's clearly well out of the bag at that point? Were it some shaky, blurry snaps taken on a mobile with some production line worker waving in the back ground, then they'd probably pull it and claim it as damaging their well polished announcement/simply being a fake.



And who knows what other circumstances may have been surrounding that dismissal? The Woz thing may have been the final chapter in a line of [LIFTED] ups by that employee - the impression I do have is that whilst Apple have no tolerance for this sort of thing, they may be willing to accommodate a [LIFTED] up if they think you're worth it. Like any company.



When was the last one? I can think of things like FCC filings, but they're an eventuality anyway. I can't comment about their iPhone/Android/WM bias, because frankly I don't care enough to be interested.
Point is, all of this is pure speculation, as usual. You can colour the story anyway you like - though sending the cops after the journo seems a little overboard if this is a piece of press spin.

Seriously?

Last one was the iPad, including the iPad store
http://gizmodo.com/5507166/browse-throu ... -ipad-apps
http://gizmodo.com/5503162/ipad-app-sto ... shots-leak


It's the fact that it's usually a lot more subtle, and a lot closer to release time than this story.

On Giz it's about 2 or 3 Apple stories per page, it's heavily oriented to their devices

Mind you, it's hard to lead with a story about a 'leaked' open source project, really, isn't it?
And Windows Mobile, whilst popular, has hardly set the world alight in the 'OMFG I want one' way that the iPhone has.

Considering the Android OS updates with Cupcake/Donut have been popular stories, same with the Google GPS

The new Kin was fairly popular, as are the WP7 stories atm.... sticking achievements on a WP7 game is a sure way to get the true die hard achievement whores getting one

Any journo will tell you big companies don't comment on rumours/speculation/hearsay. When there was enough evidence to essentially make the point moot, they asked for their property back. They've done nothing to inflame the situation at all. In fact they've pretty much stayed out of is as much as they could.


I haven't seen anything to suggest either guy has been fired beyond internet hearsay. It would seem a bit harsh to fire someone when it's yet to be proved he did anything wrong - the guy who sold the phone to Gizmodo claimed he 'found' it. Yeah, I'm sure lots of car stereos get 'found' every weekend. I wonder if it was in someone's jacket pocket when he 'found' it. Gizmodo say the guy lost it but then they would wouldn't they? All we know for sure is that he was frantically trying to get it back. How it actually came into the possession of the 'finder' we don't know. The fact he sold it to Gizmodo for a few grand suggests he was perectly aware of what it was. If we're being suspicious, let's start from the beginning.


There's a difference between leaking a story and faking a crime. One gets you publicity, the other gets you a spell in jail. Nobody and I mean nobody is that stupid. I'm sure you've heard of Occam's razor. That would suggest if the two explanations are things happened as described or a conspiracy engineered them to happen that way, you go with the former.


I think that may be the strong ganga you're apparently smoking.


Not just US law. However the latest statement I saw was that they don't consider the search to be illegal as things stood but they are obliged to check things out as the EFF have questioned the status of the search. I suspect we'll find out one way or the other within 24 hours. As I said, if it turns out the search was illegal the finder may well get away without being prosecuted since his identity will be incidentally protected. However Chen and Gizmodo have put enough evidence in the public domain to possibly allow for a prosecution of purchasing stolen goods to go ahead anyway. I suspect we won't find out that for a while longer.

I find your insistence that Apple are somehow the guilty party here despite all the actual evidence (and logic) utterly flabbergasting.

The Apple engineer had his phone nicked/misplaced it. The bloke who found it did none of the things most of us would do under the circumstances. Instead he made a somewhat eccentric attempt to return it by a route so circuitous most of us would never have thought of it and then approached Gizmodo with the offer to sell it. That's not at all suspicious is it?. Chen/Gizmodo bought it and, despite knowing exactly what it was (and if they were half way professional what dodgy legal ground they were on) kept it for a week, dismantled it and put it on their web site. When Apple asked for it back, they published that piece of private correspondence on their web site as vindication of their prior behaviour.

The bloke who found it is a thief and Gizmodo and Chen are a load of morons who if they're very lucky will stay out of jail. Anything else is just fantasy.

Whether Gizmodo are an Apple loving site or not, they've kissed any future relationship with Apple goodbye at this point. let's be honest, there's more chance of Steve Ballmer being announced as Steve Job's successor than there is Gizmodo getting anywhere near any Apple news again.