Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Apr 2010 23:11 UTC, submitted by UglyKidBill
Legal Well, this is unexpected. The iPhone 4G saga just got a whole lot crazier - dare I say it, a whole lot more ridiculous. Have you ever reported anything like a phone or something similarly small stolen to the police? What was their reaction? Did you ever get the device back? Did they send an army of officers to get your device back? No? Odd. They raided Jason Chen's house, and took four computers and two servers. Update: And thus our true colours reveal. "The raid that San Mateo area cops conducted last week on the house of Gizmodo editor Jason Chen came at the behest of a special multi-agency task force that was commissioned to work with the computer industry to tackle high-tech crimes. And Apple Inc. sits on the task force's steering committee." Update II: According to TechCrunch, the investigation has been put on hold while the DA ponders Gizmodo's shield defence. Update III: Some legal insight from a constitutional law and first amendment expert and a law professor. The gist? The DA has said no one has been charged with anything here, making this just an investigation - however, this makes the search and seizing of material worse. "If the police are literally just gathering information, with no suspect targeted yet, then a subpoena against a journalist would have probably been smarter than a search warranted that resulted in the front door of Chen's home being bashed in."
Permalink for comment 421095
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Makes sense
by nt_jerkface on Tue 27th Apr 2010 20:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Makes sense"
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26


Last I read, Apple still had not fired or otherwise disciplined the employee who lost it.


So what is your point? Does this in any way negate the fact that this phone contained trade secrets? Was this a product purchased at an at&t store? No, it was a secret prototype that they were keeping from their competitors.

How Apple handles this internally is irrelevant. This was an internal prototype that Gizmodo purchased under dubious circumstances. If you're looking for a reason to hate Apple then look elsewhere and you can find plenty of reasons. In this case Gizmodo is the guilty party, they shouldn't have bought property that they knew belonged to Apple.

Apple had every right to contact the authorities. Gizmodo not only illegally purchased Apple property but also profited from it through increased ad revenue. They wanted a breaking story and were willing to step outside the law to get it. The shocking thing is how they made no attempt to cover their trail.

Hey guys look at this Apple prototype we purchased from some random guy for 5000 dollars! Neat-o! Here's my picture with it!!!

Oh but we shouldn't be arrested cuz they guy we bought it from says Apple doesn't care.

So freaking stupid, I just can't believe it.

Reply Parent Score: 2