Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Police raid Gizmodo editor's home
Tech Fortune at CNN.com ^ | April 26, 2010 5:37 PM | Philip Elmer-DeWitt

Posted on 04/26/2010 4:17:17 PM PDT by Smogger

Cops break open front door and seize computers in investigation of lost iPhone prototype.

It looks like the police are taking this pretty seriously.

Armed with a search warrant, members of California's Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team broke into a private home Friday night and seized computers and other electronic equipment, according to a report posted Monday on Gizmodo.

The home belonged to Jason Chen, the Gizmodo editor who published photographs and videos of a top secret prototype iPhone left at a bar by a young Apple engineer. Gizmodo has admitted paying $5,000 for the device, which it turned over on request to Apple (AAPL), but only after cracking it open and publishing details about its parts and specifications.

It's not clear at this time whether Apple or the local district attorney initiated the investigation. Apple has not replied to a request for clarification.

The search warrant, signed by a San Mateo County Superior Court judge, said the equipment seized may have been used to commit a felony.

"My wife and I drove to dinner and got back at about 9:45," begins Chen's description of the event. "When I got home I noticed that the garage door was half open, and when I tried to open it, officers came out and said they had a warrant to search my house and any vehicles on the property 'in my control.' Then they made me place my hands behind my head and searched me to make sure I had no weapons or sharp objects on me."

Photocopies of the warrant and a list of the equipment seized (including one box of business cards for "suspect chen") are available here. Chen's full statement below the fold.

(Excerpt) Read more at tech.fortune.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: apple; gizmodo; iphone
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221 next last
To: Smogger

(s)

Sir you are violating the Obamanomics wealth creation law of 2010 through your malicious refusal to upgrade your phone to a new model. (produced by a campaign donor)

(/s)


41 posted on 04/26/2010 4:53:39 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

I would hope so. I had a PDF copy of the book or something on my PC a while back.


42 posted on 04/26/2010 4:54:17 PM PDT by GeronL (http://libertyfic.proboards.com << Get your science fiction and fiction test marketed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
Seems to me that if the guy tried to give it back and Apple wouldn’t take it, the phone was abandoned property. Where’s the theft?

Exactly. And the irony is that reason the guy couldn't give it back is that, due to Apple's penchant for secrecy, their support people didn't know enough to accept it back. They thought it was some kind of joke. LOL!

43 posted on 04/26/2010 4:54:30 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

All true . . . except in this case, there’s no innocent buyer.


44 posted on 04/26/2010 4:54:58 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
California's laws would not seem to trump federal copyright and patent law.

This guy is lucky so far in that Apple has only crushed him ~ next, they scrape him off the plate into the garbage pail.

45 posted on 04/26/2010 4:55:36 PM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: aruanan

“Exactly who stole anything here?

Whoever took it from where the Apple guy laid it and then sold it to Gizmodo for $5K. “

Hmmmn - what about ‘finders keepers’? After all, Apple didn’t claim it when it was offered.

And, whatever happened to mens rea? Or did that also disappear into the collectivist, police state mentalist that Ca. has so well demonstrated in this case?


46 posted on 04/26/2010 4:57:02 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principles,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Joe Miner
No mention of them shooting his dog, must be a cat person.

Given the shooting ability of the average cop, a magazine was emptied at the dog but there were no hits.

47 posted on 04/26/2010 4:58:47 PM PDT by Stentor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

This is “the new design” and any copyrights are going to run for 125 years!


48 posted on 04/26/2010 4:59:33 PM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

The Apple people are full of themselves and full of crap. A few weeks ago I went to one of their ‘Genius Bar’ locations to pick up a computer my son had left to be repaired. It just so happened that on this day they were launching a new product. To create some sort of false excitement, they had a velvet rope set up outside the store, like one you would see at an exclusive night club, with a security guard manning it who was not letting anyone enter the store. This was in the middle of a Saturday afternoon. Finally I said this is nuts I’m going in and walked right past the guard. Inside their were about 10 blue-shirted Apple employees for every customer and there were only about 5 customers inside. I asked one of the Blue Boys to tell me what the hell was going on, but he just walked away like he was very busy! What a nut house! Finally, I was able to get the laptop and leave, but only after several other hip Blue people tried to sell me some more of their crap! These people think they are gods gift to technology and that they are doing you a big favor by letting you buy their overpriced products!


49 posted on 04/26/2010 5:00:10 PM PDT by Batman11 (Sarah Palin: "Illegal immigrants are called illegal for a reason!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru
"Mens rea?" You mean, I know this is a unreleased prototype, so I will pay 5 large for it, take it apart, and post everything on the internet? That mens rea?
50 posted on 04/26/2010 5:00:42 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

ah they they have documented three attempts to return the phone AND

apple’s own letter does not accuse anyone of anything illegal.


51 posted on 04/26/2010 5:07:09 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Batman11

Yup.


52 posted on 04/26/2010 5:08:01 PM PDT by GeronL (http://libertyfic.proboards.com << Get your science fiction and fiction test marketed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Possession of someone else’s property without a good explanation of why you got it is pretty much evidence of participation in a theft to one degree or the other.

The device was left in some bar for crying out loud, and to quote “SeaHawkFan, :”The guy tried to give it back and Apple wouldn’t take it, the phone was abandoned property. Where’s the theft?”

You will notice Apple wasn't going after the device ~ they had that ~ they went after his pictures of the design.

Apple refused to take it back, when the original finder contacted them. That makes it abandoned property.

The kid who busted into Sarah Palin’s emails probably thought what he did was legal ~ he's going to jail for a long time:

You are kidding right?
For the Sarah Palin email case to be the same as this one, the original finder of the iPhone, would have had to break into Apple's headquarters and stolen the device. That far from the case. The device was left at a bar.
The analogy here would be if Sarah Palin printed off her email, then left the printed email at a bar, and some kid found the email and read it. No one would be charging the kid of that is what had happened.

53 posted on 04/26/2010 5:08:11 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

There is no “I attempted to return it therefore it is now mine” exception carved into our common law, nor is there a “I have no admission from the owner that a crime has been committed, therefore I cannot be investigated by the State” affirmative defense.


54 posted on 04/26/2010 5:11:14 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe
No, the analogy would be some engineer leaves the blueprints for a nuclear trigger on a barstool, the guy that finds them calls a 1-800 number and speaks to someone who doesn't know what he's talking about, and puts them up for sale to the highest bidder, who then posts the blueprints on the internet.

Then, someone on FR appears to claim "no harm, no foul."

55 posted on 04/26/2010 5:15:22 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
The end of this story is that someone who had physical possession contacted Apple about returning it.

Whatever Apple's representatives said over the phone, the cold, hard fact is NO BILL OF SALE WAS EXECUTED so the fellow who possessed it didn't own it! Because he didn't own it his legal options were fairly limited.

56 posted on 04/26/2010 5:20:24 PM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Smogger; GladesGuru
The article clearly states it was left at a bar.

And something accidentally left behind does not automatically become free for the taking. If you maintain it does, then someone could be said to be without recourse if he forget which part of the parking lot he left his car in and it got "found" by someone who decided to keep it before he realized it wasn't where he thought it was.
57 posted on 04/26/2010 5:20:25 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe
Joe, it's the same. When you have a piece of property that you know is not yours, and you have no bill of sale, and you contact the owner your only course of action is to GET A BILL OF SALE or other recognized document wherein they formally reject their claim to the property.

You have no other choices.

There's no "I made a phone call and they said it's OK" exception.

58 posted on 04/26/2010 5:23:37 PM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

california law requires an attempt to return it.

that part was done.

THEN the owner has three years to claim it.

that part was done.

the item was returned.

What is the crime? refusal to return? the item was not stolen because there was a verifiable attempt to return and immediate return upon demand.


59 posted on 04/26/2010 5:23:42 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You may be right, but it was not the FBI who raided this house. It was California State LEOs.


60 posted on 04/26/2010 5:24:13 PM PDT by LibertyRocks (http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com ~ Anti-Obama Gear: http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson