I'm glad they finally IDed the guy who stole and sold the prototype to Gizmodo... and somehow now that it's been revealed he's gone to others to try to sell the device it seems somehow worse. Hopefully they will throw the book at him and make an example of ANYONE who does this sort of thing to ANY company.
I wonder who will be the first to post that this is still some sort of Apple-backed publicity stunt?
Prosecutors defend Gizmodo search; ID seller
Summary
San Mateo County prosecutors are defending the search of a Gizmodo.com editor's home and seizure of his computers that were part of a criminal investigation into an iPhone prototype lost by an Apple employee.
Topics
San Mateo County prosecutors are defending the search of a Gizmodo.com editor's home and seizure of his computers that were part of a criminal investigation into an iPhone prototype lost by an Apple employee.
Stephen Wagstaffe, chief deputy district attorney, told CNET on Tuesday evening that prosecutors had considered whether reporter shield laws applied to the search and seizure aimed at the gadget blog--and decided to proceed after carefully reviewing the rules.
"My prosecutor who is handling it considered this issue right off the bat when it was being brought into him and had some good reasons why he and the judge felt the warrant was properly issued," Wagstaffe said.
Gizmodo's parent company, Gawker Media, has said that the search warrant is "invalid," citing a California law curbing newsroom searches. So has the Electronic Frontier Foundation. On the other hand, if Gizmodo employees are targets of the criminal investigation themselves, it's likely that the law's protections do not apply.
Wagstaffe confirmed that law enforcement has identified the person who allegedly found the iPhone in a bar and then began shopping it around to news organizations, including Gizmodo, Wired.com, and Engadget. Gizmodo has acknowledge buying it for $5,000 and then returning it to Apple.
For more on this story, read Prosecutors defend Gizmodo search in iPhone probe on CNET News.
Just In
on a stool in plain sight.
It's not like someone illegally got a hold of some confidential MS business plans inand posted them on the web on Halloween, or something.
It's not like someone illegally got a hold of some confidential MS business plans inand posted them on the web on Halloween, or something.
Are you still riding that tired old donkey? APPLE did not leave it on a barstool, a drunk engineer who works for Apple did...
Semantics perhaps but that aside, it's not the point that Grey Powell left it on a barstool, the point is the dude who picked it up made a feeble effort to return the phone - if indeed he actually made that effort... that part is all heresay... IF he had made a sincere and reasonable effort to return the device he would have either left it with the bartender or the manager at the bar OR turned it into the police. He did neither but instead made - IMHO based on the articles I've read - a half-assed attempt to locate the owner and then lit out of that bar thinking he had a free iPhone... when he figured out what he actually had, he went shopping for bidders. So yes he did in fact steal the device. And yes I'd say the same thing no matter what device made by whatever company running whatever OS...
Semantics perhaps but that aside, it's not the point that Grey Powell left it on a barstool, the point is the dude who picked it up made a feeble effort to return the phone - if indeed he actually made that effort... that part is all heresay... IF he had made a sincere and reasonable effort to return the device he would have either left it with the bartender or the manager at the bar OR turned it into the police. He did neither but instead made - IMHO based on the articles I've read - a half-assed attempt to locate the owner and then lit out of that bar thinking he had a free iPhone... when he figured out what he actually had, he went shopping for bidders. So yes he did in fact steal the device. And yes I'd say the same thing no matter what device made by whatever company running whatever OS...
"I wonder who will be the first to post that this is still some sort of
Apple-backed publicity stunt?"
Most of the usual suspects here of course.
"Gizmodo's parent company, Gawker Media, has said that the search
warrant is "invalid," citing a California law curbing newsroom searches."
Well to quote Mandy Rice-Davies "Well, he would, wouldn't he?"
Apple-backed publicity stunt?"
Most of the usual suspects here of course.
"Gizmodo's parent company, Gawker Media, has said that the search
warrant is "invalid," citing a California law curbing newsroom searches."
Well to quote Mandy Rice-Davies "Well, he would, wouldn't he?"
Posted by: athynz Posted on: 04/28/10:
"I wonder who will be the first to post that this is still some sort of Apple-backed publicity stunt?"
~~~~~~~~~~
There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.
~ Brendan Behan, Irish author & dramatist (1923 - 1964)
"I wonder who will be the first to post that this is still some sort of Apple-backed publicity stunt?"
~~~~~~~~~~
There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.
~ Brendan Behan, Irish author & dramatist (1923 - 1964)
I meant who will post one and be serious about it... there are still some idiots who think that Apple is doing this for hype and publicity... and I have to admit at first it could have been but now? And after having involved the police? Not likely.
I think it's more likely Apple was pissed someone got there new OS before they could have magical enveiling .
could there be a chance someone from Apple made a call to the DA? Apple corporate offices are in Ca. Do you think they might have some money to throw around at politicians?
If you dropped a phone in a bar and someone picked it up, do you think the DA would be breaking down doors to recover it.
could there be a chance someone from Apple made a call to the DA? Apple corporate offices are in Ca. Do you think they might have some money to throw around at politicians?
If you dropped a phone in a bar and someone picked it up, do you think the DA would be breaking down doors to recover it.
wasn't going to move heaven and earth to find the ones who are responsible for this and do their best to make sure they are punished - look at the lawsuits Apple has filed. I'm just saying that this no sort of publicity stunt by Apple as some idiots out there are saying.
It's all pretty simple. Apple made the call, we know that. Of
course they did. They had a resource, the REACT, so they
used it. They're making a statement as big, or bigger than Gizmodo's
which is "don't fu?k with us!" (remember, Gawker Media had an "Apple
Scavenger Hunt" offering to pay various amounts for secret Apple
info). They're reaping what they've sown. As for the DA, I'm sure they
didn't need too much encouragement to go after the guys who clearly
committed a California crime and then put the proof on their website.
Finally, while the DA wouldn't likely breaking down doors in regards to
a phone you lost, I'm willing to bet that they'd do the same thing
in the same situation for Palm, Google or any other company who
asked (and you know they would despite what Andy Rubin jokes
about).
course they did. They had a resource, the REACT, so they
used it. They're making a statement as big, or bigger than Gizmodo's
which is "don't fu?k with us!" (remember, Gawker Media had an "Apple
Scavenger Hunt" offering to pay various amounts for secret Apple
info). They're reaping what they've sown. As for the DA, I'm sure they
didn't need too much encouragement to go after the guys who clearly
committed a California crime and then put the proof on their website.
Finally, while the DA wouldn't likely breaking down doors in regards to
a phone you lost, I'm willing to bet that they'd do the same thing
in the same situation for Palm, Google or any other company who
asked (and you know they would despite what Andy Rubin jokes
about).
It's all just cover for not jumping on it when they
had the chance. In order to make Apple look like they
are hard core about protecting something that was a
basic non-working prototype in the first place. You'd
think if they were really worried about it in the
beginning, they'd been looking for it and let people
know it was missing then. Especially after the
guy called them, to no avail!!!
So what does he think? ....well I guess they don't
really want it returned, so I'll sell it!
Apple for their part are now like cops on a crime
scene w/ a throw away gun in a set up to nab the guy
they framed!!!
That's like a cop sitting under a bridge, down a hill,
next to the lower speed change sign to write speeding
tickets! .....or worse no visible car in Helicopter
Speed Trap on the same downhill stretch where everyone
is going over the speed limit and can't see the sign
under the bridge. It's simple eeeny meeeny miney mo law
enforcement to slow traffic down!
When and if they discovered their super duper secret
nex-gen iPhone non-functioning prototype was gone,
then their first step would be to get it in the news.
After making calls to the bar, where no contact was
ever made by Apple until after the fact! Why didn't
they broadcast it in the news with an offer of a
reward for it's return? Instead they took no positive
steps to claim it as their's until Gizmodo called them
to offer it's return. I'm saying Apple was calling
"Fire or Thief" after the fact to take advantage of
the publicity in a set up or dumb move by an employee
leaving a top secret device in a bar? WTF???? lol...
their indifference demonstrated this as a bogus
publicity plan in the first place!
Again w/ Gizmodo, NOTHING! ..no announcements, no
reward and that even after Gizmodo had contacted them
specifically again to return it, just like the guy
that'd found it had. So they Gizmodo simply returns
this junk phone (that didn't even have a camera) and
the next thing you know his home gets invaded with an
improper issued search & seizure for an object that
wasn't even on the premises!
If Gizmodo doesn't sue the county over this, I'd be
surprised and you know.... who'd be packing attorney's
into the court house with them! ... Electronic
Frontier Foundation and they don't get into this stuff
to lose a case either!!!
btw... just knowing this is going to be fun to watch.
Especially after Apple is forced to reveal all their
security steps of that engineer getting off the
premises with their super secret device into public!
I call foul as in fowl stinky Apple's Evil Lies will
then be revealed!!!
had the chance. In order to make Apple look like they
are hard core about protecting something that was a
basic non-working prototype in the first place. You'd
think if they were really worried about it in the
beginning, they'd been looking for it and let people
know it was missing then. Especially after the
guy called them, to no avail!!!
So what does he think? ....well I guess they don't
really want it returned, so I'll sell it!
Apple for their part are now like cops on a crime
scene w/ a throw away gun in a set up to nab the guy
they framed!!!
That's like a cop sitting under a bridge, down a hill,
next to the lower speed change sign to write speeding
tickets! .....or worse no visible car in Helicopter
Speed Trap on the same downhill stretch where everyone
is going over the speed limit and can't see the sign
under the bridge. It's simple eeeny meeeny miney mo law
enforcement to slow traffic down!
When and if they discovered their super duper secret
nex-gen iPhone non-functioning prototype was gone,
then their first step would be to get it in the news.
After making calls to the bar, where no contact was
ever made by Apple until after the fact! Why didn't
they broadcast it in the news with an offer of a
reward for it's return? Instead they took no positive
steps to claim it as their's until Gizmodo called them
to offer it's return. I'm saying Apple was calling
"Fire or Thief" after the fact to take advantage of
the publicity in a set up or dumb move by an employee
leaving a top secret device in a bar? WTF???? lol...
their indifference demonstrated this as a bogus
publicity plan in the first place!
Again w/ Gizmodo, NOTHING! ..no announcements, no
reward and that even after Gizmodo had contacted them
specifically again to return it, just like the guy
that'd found it had. So they Gizmodo simply returns
this junk phone (that didn't even have a camera) and
the next thing you know his home gets invaded with an
improper issued search & seizure for an object that
wasn't even on the premises!
If Gizmodo doesn't sue the county over this, I'd be
surprised and you know.... who'd be packing attorney's
into the court house with them! ... Electronic
Frontier Foundation and they don't get into this stuff
to lose a case either!!!
btw... just knowing this is going to be fun to watch.
Especially after Apple is forced to reveal all their
security steps of that engineer getting off the
premises with their super secret device into public!
I call foul as in fowl stinky Apple's Evil Lies will
then be revealed!!!
@i2fun
Wow - you have a lot of hatred and little knowledge of the facts.
Apple DID go to this iPhone "finder's" (i.e. thief) house where they were turned away. The finder did admit that he wishes he did more to return the phone.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-finder/
BG
Wow - you have a lot of hatred and little knowledge of the facts.
Apple DID go to this iPhone "finder's" (i.e. thief) house where they were turned away. The finder did admit that he wishes he did more to return the phone.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-finder/
BG
Look at this article:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20003597-37.html
Under a California law dating back to 1872, any person who finds lost property and knows who the owner is likely to be--but "appropriates such property to his own use"--is guilty of theft. There are no exceptions for journalists. In addition, a second state law says any person who knowingly receives property that has been obtained illegally can be imprisoned for up to one year.
...
The man, who reportedly approached Wired editors about buying the prototype iPhone at the same time he contacted Engadget and Gizmodo, told Wired in an interview that people who claimed to be representing Apple arrived at the home of the man who found the phone and asked to search the premises.
...
The man Wired interviewed claimed that the man who found the phone attempted to return it to Apple and also find the owner, but those efforts failed. "The idea wasn't to find out who was going to pay the most, it was, 'Who's going to confirm this?'" the source said.
It must be noted that before selling it to Gizmodo, someone who claimed to have the phone contacted multiple media outlets, including Wired and Engadget. Editors at both news organizations confirmed that they were contacted not about verifying whether the phone was legitimate but about their interest in buying the device.
***************
This sounds more and more like he tried to make it look like he made a reasonable effort to return the device to cover his azz, and when that "failed" he decided to sell it to the highest bidder.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20003597-37.html
Under a California law dating back to 1872, any person who finds lost property and knows who the owner is likely to be--but "appropriates such property to his own use"--is guilty of theft. There are no exceptions for journalists. In addition, a second state law says any person who knowingly receives property that has been obtained illegally can be imprisoned for up to one year.
...
The man, who reportedly approached Wired editors about buying the prototype iPhone at the same time he contacted Engadget and Gizmodo, told Wired in an interview that people who claimed to be representing Apple arrived at the home of the man who found the phone and asked to search the premises.
...
The man Wired interviewed claimed that the man who found the phone attempted to return it to Apple and also find the owner, but those efforts failed. "The idea wasn't to find out who was going to pay the most, it was, 'Who's going to confirm this?'" the source said.
It must be noted that before selling it to Gizmodo, someone who claimed to have the phone contacted multiple media outlets, including Wired and Engadget. Editors at both news organizations confirmed that they were contacted not about verifying whether the phone was legitimate but about their interest in buying the device.
***************
This sounds more and more like he tried to make it look like he made a reasonable effort to return the device to cover his azz, and when that "failed" he decided to sell it to the highest bidder.
"Did he steal it? I heard that Apple left it in the bar"
You are now bringing "hearsay" into this as an argument?
You were in the bar when it happened John? We only have
Gizmodo's side of the story to confirm it - how do you
KNOW it wasn't pick-pocketed from his jacket? How can
you be so sure?
If he was serious about returning it, handing a product
over to the barman would have been the obvious way to
go. Either way selling an unreleased product to the highest
bidder pretty much says all you need to know about how
hard he tried to return it.
For all their smarmy reportage on the thing Gizmodo
deserve all the nukage coming down upon them.
You are now bringing "hearsay" into this as an argument?
You were in the bar when it happened John? We only have
Gizmodo's side of the story to confirm it - how do you
KNOW it wasn't pick-pocketed from his jacket? How can
you be so sure?
If he was serious about returning it, handing a product
over to the barman would have been the obvious way to
go. Either way selling an unreleased product to the highest
bidder pretty much says all you need to know about how
hard he tried to return it.
For all their smarmy reportage on the thing Gizmodo
deserve all the nukage coming down upon them.
One step closer to finding out the real story. Hopefully Gizmodo gets b-slapped by this. And if they do, I can see Jason Chen looking for a new job.
Exactly how many violent criminals will this keep off the streets?
No need to waste any taxpayer dollars on this crap, even if the phone hadnt already been found and returned.
Let's see some one report who exactly brought this to the prosecutors and who exactly in the prosecutors office decided this would be a good use of tax payers money.
Does this decision maker know theyre going to release violent criminals from prison due to budget shortfalls? And they still think this is a good idea?
No need to waste any taxpayer dollars on this crap, even if the phone hadnt already been found and returned.
Let's see some one report who exactly brought this to the prosecutors and who exactly in the prosecutors office decided this would be a good use of tax payers money.
Does this decision maker know theyre going to release violent criminals from prison due to budget shortfalls? And they still think this is a good idea?
would be taken in or kept in had this never happened?
Very likely it would be the same amount either way.
Very likely it would be the same amount either way.
if that had been any private citizen the Prosecutor would have told the person to go pound sand.... since it's Apple, of course the prosecutors are willing to spend dozens of hours researching the issues so that they can make a case.... not fair, not right, completely immoral.
Why are they being so stupid? You lose the phone in a bar because of a drunk employee. Now you declare it was stolen so you can use OUR taxpayers money to punish someone for your company's mistake. You should have fired whoever left it there. Don't waste our taxpayers money Apple !!
it was indeed stolen. Semantics about the drunk Apple engineer aside - and yes something should be done about him internally perhaps termination of his employment - there is still the fact that the dude who took the device from the bar (IMHO hoping to score a free iPhone or iPod) made a half-assed attempt (maybe) to return the phone and when he found out what he had he then went shopping for the highest bid. So right there we have theft and selling stolen goods... both crimes that are punishable. Then Chen, having heard the back story bought the device knowing it was a possible Apple iPhone prototype and definitely knowing it was stolen property, so right there is yet another crime.
Not to mention then disassembling the device and posting pics of it online prior to contacting Apple - if you recall the request from Apple to return the device did not happen until after the initial post by Gizmodo. So then we have what possibly could be industrial espionage - I may not be a California taxpayer but if it happened in my nack of the woods I'd still be saying the same thing - but then again I don't see the prosecution of a crime to be a waste of taxpayer's money.
Not to mention then disassembling the device and posting pics of it online prior to contacting Apple - if you recall the request from Apple to return the device did not happen until after the initial post by Gizmodo. So then we have what possibly could be industrial espionage - I may not be a California taxpayer but if it happened in my nack of the woods I'd still be saying the same thing - but then again I don't see the prosecution of a crime to be a waste of taxpayer's money.
For it to have been stolen there would have to have been a police report made.
No victim, no crime.
No victim, no crime.
Grey Powell, the engineer who left the iPhone prototype at the bar - he was a bit intoxicated... HE didn't get the iPhone prototype back and he might wind up losing his job over it. As it is he might not be trusted with critical items with his job over a momentary lapse of judgment and someone who was less than honest.
So yes, there IS a victim and there IS a crime.
So yes, there IS a victim and there IS a crime.
The prosecutors are politicians? They are leeching onto any possible visibility for re-election. That's the motive for wasting the public tax payer's funds. To get re-elected and bask into the limelight...
Again,simply follow the money, and every motive will simply reveal itself.
Funny this article didn't mention at all that officials involved in this have contradicted, 1) the US Constitution, 2) the Federal law, and also 3) their own California Constitution... Nice going.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.
~ Brendan Behan, Irish author & dramatist (1923 - 1964)
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
~ Mark Twain
Again,simply follow the money, and every motive will simply reveal itself.
Funny this article didn't mention at all that officials involved in this have contradicted, 1) the US Constitution, 2) the Federal law, and also 3) their own California Constitution... Nice going.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.
~ Brendan Behan, Irish author & dramatist (1923 - 1964)
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
~ Mark Twain
give specifics on which parts of 1, 2, and 3 that the officials have violated.
Both state and federal statutes against newsroom searchs specifically enacted to preclude the interference or intimidation of the freedom of the press by police authorities. Chen is a journalist as defined by the California court of appeals in April 2009 and as such is shielded from search and seizuer of job related materials.
And how would those fit in with the fact that Chen knowing bought stolen property?
The apply guy was a dufus for dropping something so huge. He should be fired.
The guy who found the phone is a thief. I lost a book at my college, and someone found it and sold it. That was theft, and the school expelled him. He was supposed to turn it in. Same rules apply here.
The guy who bought the phone is guilty of receiving stolen property and thought he'd be shielded. He should not be. I am sick of media breaking the laws to break a story. Throw his butt in jail and fine him. That'll pour water on anyone else who tries something like that.
The guy who found the phone is a thief. I lost a book at my college, and someone found it and sold it. That was theft, and the school expelled him. He was supposed to turn it in. Same rules apply here.
The guy who bought the phone is guilty of receiving stolen property and thought he'd be shielded. He should not be. I am sick of media breaking the laws to break a story. Throw his butt in jail and fine him. That'll pour water on anyone else who tries something like that.
...The guy who bought the phone is guilty of receiving stolen property and thought he'd be shielded. He should not be. I am sick of media breaking the laws to break a story. Throw his butt in jail and fine him. That'll pour water on anyone else who tries something like that...
Whether or not any law was broken by Gizmodo, the search warrant should not have been issued. Read the pertinent section of Cal law to see why. It is linked in the article.
As to arbitrarily throwing journalists in jail, is that a slippery slope that you really want to go down? Do you want to rewrite the federal and Californis law to suit your sense of right and wrong? What hubris!
The police investigation was halted after counsel for Gawker Media, parent company of Gizmodo, wrote to the head detective to remind him that Chen, as a journalist, is protected under both federal and California law - and specifically cited the California statute that applies here.
Whether or not any law was broken by Gizmodo, the search warrant should not have been issued. Read the pertinent section of Cal law to see why. It is linked in the article.
As to arbitrarily throwing journalists in jail, is that a slippery slope that you really want to go down? Do you want to rewrite the federal and Californis law to suit your sense of right and wrong? What hubris!
The police investigation was halted after counsel for Gawker Media, parent company of Gizmodo, wrote to the head detective to remind him that Chen, as a journalist, is protected under both federal and California law - and specifically cited the California statute that applies here.
Sounds to me like somebody (i.e Apple) made a large
donation to the local DA / Police to 'encourage' them to
look into this matter. I.e. Harass Chen. Even if no
charges are filed, Chen has already had his life
seriously disrupted and significantly cramped his ability
to make a living. Isn't having money nice?
But, I'm not paranoid or anything ...
donation to the local DA / Police to 'encourage' them to
look into this matter. I.e. Harass Chen. Even if no
charges are filed, Chen has already had his life
seriously disrupted and significantly cramped his ability
to make a living. Isn't having money nice?
But, I'm not paranoid or anything ...
Somehow I doubt that the cops would send in the troops to get back any of my lost or stolen cellphones ...
An Apple engineer conveniently "leaving" a prototype phone sitting on top of a bar stool is as suspect as it is possible to be!
NO company allows a prototype outside its doors, especially not a company that practices the corporate secrecy and security of Apple, unless they have a motive for doing so.
This whole thing was staged to obtain free PR (Public Relations) and sympathy. The poor guy who "found" the prototype conveniently sitting in plain sight on top of a bar stool was set up. He and Gizmodo are the fall guys.
For those who want to find the poor bar slob guilty of stealing, please know that it also is a crime to create a crime or set one up to take place, such as enticing someone to steal. Check your laws on leaving your keys in your car--running or not.
NO company allows a prototype outside its doors, especially not a company that practices the corporate secrecy and security of Apple, unless they have a motive for doing so.
This whole thing was staged to obtain free PR (Public Relations) and sympathy. The poor guy who "found" the prototype conveniently sitting in plain sight on top of a bar stool was set up. He and Gizmodo are the fall guys.
For those who want to find the poor bar slob guilty of stealing, please know that it also is a crime to create a crime or set one up to take place, such as enticing someone to steal. Check your laws on leaving your keys in your car--running or not.
i thought there were law's about being it's time the employe that lost the phone took a lie decator test or or was questioned under oath !!! roy lippin spin doctor!!!!201-224-3794 - real truth should rule or prosecutor is being used as apple or jobs toy !
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
Facebook Activity
