Gizmodo Iphone drama: Journalist's house raided

[John_Wayne777]

Then look at like CNN's IReporter. Are all of those contributions done by "journalists"? I would say no. But the work is being published by a News Source, so does this therefore constitute that their media equipment is thus protected under this law???

I think having democratic access to information is beneficial in our society, and that it is one of the primary reasons for the First Amendment. At the turn of the 20th century there were thousands of printed news papers, and it was this Amendment that was critical in many of the social changes that were taking place at the time.

In a lot of ways I feel like we're in the same boat now with blogs. The access to the technology is so easy, that we are going to have millions (rather then thousands) of journalistic sources, but eventually this will slow down when people start getting bought out by competitors, loose interest, or are shut down.

I find it interesting that news organizations which screech about the 1st amendment seem to think that if you aren't on their payroll that you aren't a journalist and thus aren't entitled to the protections they've carved out for themselves.

It's the same old story of class privilege. Guns are meant for cops and soldiers, not for the peasants! Publishing news and information is for the journalists, not for the peasants!

When the founders adopted the 1st amendment they weren't thinking about MSNBC or the New York Times, no matter how badly those narcissistic dumbasses wish to believe that it's so.

So if I lost my phone, or had it stolen for that matter, and someone returned it to me as requested, the state of California will gladly sign a warrant, break down a person's door and seize all of his electronic equipment that might have come near the phone for me, or is this type of service only reserved for companies like Apple?

It's not just a phone...it's a prototype of a new product with a bunch of (what Apple will argue is) proprietary stuff. Thus it's not just a lost phone...it's arguably industrial espionage, which is kind of a big deal.

The blog people screwed up. If they really did end up with the phone because somebody lost it at a bar, they should have figured out what they had pretty quick and made arrangements to send it back to Apple. They could have even negotiated an exclusive or something in the process. They tried to pull a fast one and apparently didn't realize that despite Apple's hippie-like image of peace and love, they are as ferocious as any corporation on earth and would come at them hard and heavy. The iPhone is Apple's crown jewel...and it's in a highly competitive sector. Screwing with it is just asking to get kicked in the nuts.

So if you lose your phone that is worth 400 bucks, it's highly unlikely that the Ca. authorities will pull out the SWAT team. If you're a major multi-billion dollar corporation and you can convince the authorities that you may have lost proprietary information worth millions/billions due to theft and espionage, ya. You might get the SWAT team to go get your property back.

It should also be noted that "raids" do not necessarily mean that the SWAT team kicked the door down and pointed M4's at everybody. You can be "raided" by a bunch of guys in suits who search through things in an orderly manner and just take what they need and leave.

[boltcatch]

The felony is receiving stolen property - the iPhone.

I read in another article that California law requires lost property to be returned to the owner if the owner is identifiable. That means if you find a wallet with money and ID, it is a crime not to return it to its owner.

In this case, whoever "found" the phone knew it was an Apple prototype thus the property of Apple. The Gizmodo guy knew this and bought it anyway.

And even if it was simply "lost", I'm willing to bet the Apple Engineer will claim he was pick-pocketed to cover his ass.

Now, if the Gizmodo guy received information about the phone, or specification documents, or something like that then the law referenced in the story might apply. But not for actual "stolen" property.

One might guess that it is property of Apple, but just that - guess. Was the device marked "property of Apple"? Apple can after all give one of those to whoever they damn well please.

A phone. One. ****ing. Phone. This is a pretty questionable basis to seize many thousands of dollars of equipment that are directly related to the guy's livelihood, and which contain VAST amounts of data that law enforcement has no warrant for. It's pretty obvious that this is a sort of personal service reserved for Steve Jobs and not for regular schmucks like us.

There is a reason why there are court-ordered standards for seizing certain types of data that entail copying the hard drives, not seizing the original equipment, and then having third-party investigators search for, and then only turn over to the investigators, the evidence sought in the warrant. There are also reasons for the laws in CA regarding prohibitions on raiding people and seizing journalism related materials except in certain circumstances... that tends to put a damper on their work, and is far too easily abused. I have no qualms about the law taking evidence from journalists or whoever else, but we seem to have forgotten that warrants are not for seizing whatever the hell comes to mind, they are for seizing specific evidence of suspected wrongdoing.

Simply asking him some questions could have gotten the job done, particularly considering that this department would tell me to go pound sand if I came to them and told them I believed some guy had my I-phone.

I expect this all to get tossed, and the entire affair to be a rather large embarrassment for all involved.

[-gary]

It's not just a phone...it's a prototype of a new product with a bunch of (what Apple will argue is) proprietary stuff. Thus it's not just a lost phone...it's arguably industrial espionage, which is kind of a big deal.

The blog people screwed up. If they really did end up with the phone because somebody lost it at a bar, they should have figured out what they had pretty quick and made arrangements to send it back to Apple. They could have even negotiated an exclusive or something in the process. They tried to pull a fast one and apparently didn't realize that despite Apple's hippie-like image of peace and love, they are as ferocious as any corporation on earth and would come at them hard and heavy. The iPhone is Apple's crown jewel...and it's in a highly competitive sector. Screwing with it is just asking to get kicked in the nuts.

If only it were that simple. They original finder tried to return it but Apple didn't seem to care. When Gizmodo purchased it, they weren't even sure that it was a real Apple product or some sort of knock-off. After dissecting and posting it, which they are going to do since they are near the National Enquirer of the blog world, Apple asked for it back. They returned it as asked. Then the raid happened. Posting the pics and specs is akin to the spy shots and specs posted of every test mule that leaves Ford and GM every day. They let it out into the wild, it was caught and released as requested.

[jaydoc1]

One might guess that it is property of Apple, but just that - guess. Was the device marked "property of Apple"? Apple can after all give one of those to whoever they damn well please.

Not really. Gizmodo is a very tech-savvy blog whose sole purpose is the unearthing and reporting of future-tech stuff. They knew exactly what they had and paid $5000 for it.

Also, if Apple was in the habit of handing out their R&D phones then you might be able to say that. If you know anything about Apple, however, then you know that the boilerplate non-disclosure documents that Apple's employees have to sign threaten them with everything but "penalty of death" (which a Chinese employee actually did suffer after some info was leaked on his watch...he took his own life, he wasn't killed) if they are to leak information on Apple's products in the works. Yes Apple could give anything away they want. They just don't.

A phone. One. ****ing. Phone. This is a pretty questionable basis to seize many thousands of dollars of equipment that are directly related to the guy's livelihood, and which contain VAST amounts of data that law enforcement has no warrant for. It's pretty obvious that this is a sort of personal service reserved for Steve Jobs and not for regular schmucks like us.

No. There is the very real issue of industrial espionage here. It's not just a phone. Once they start selling it, then it is. For now they are in a heated battle with Google/Motorola/HTC for your smartphone dollars. There is a lot of scratch involved here.

I expect this all to get tossed, and the entire affair to be a rather large embarrassment for all involved.

Not likely.

Apple is going to make an example of this guy/company. Watch.

[Irish]

How do you know they were being "Johnny SWAT"?

You're right, poor choice of words. I'd really rather call them a whole slew of adjectives but I'll refrain.

[NCPatrolAR]

There is a reason why there are court-ordered standards for seizing certain types of data that entail copying the hard drives, not seizing the original equipment, and then having third-party investigators search for, and then only turn over to the investigators, the evidence sought in the warrant.

So how do you copy the hard drives without seizing them?

[Irish]

destruction of evidence?

Crap, no one was home and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

[NCPatrolAR]

Your right, poor choice of words. I'd really rather call them a whole slew of adjectives but I'll refrain.

Way to be a mature adult.

[Irish]

Nevermind.

[Tom Swift]

Apple is being pretty snob like about this I might just by a Blackberry for my next phone.