or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Police investigating Gizmodo's iPhone prototype story
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Police investigating Gizmodo's iPhone prototype story

post #1 of 393
Thread Starter 
The computer crime task force of the Santa Clara County district attorney's office is investigating the Gizmodo purchase of an Apple prototype iPhone to determine if criminal charges will be filed.

A report by Greg Sandoval of CNET stated that police are investigating the circumstances of the event to determine if there is enough evidence to support criminal prosecution.

Gizmodo announced paying $5,000 for what it believed to be a prototype of Apple's forthcoming new iPhone model, after finding a seller who had claimed to possess the device after finding it in a bar.

CNET said it "has not been able to confirm whether the investigation is targeting Gizmodo.com, its source who reportedly found the iPhone in a bar, or both."

Gawker Media, Gizmodo's owner, has previously floated offers to pay sources for access to unreleased Apple products in order to publish the company's trade secrets on its Valleywag tech gossip site. After Apple objected to the offer, Gawker taunted the company by saying it would keep its leaks anonymous.

The report noted that California law states that anyone who finds lost property and knows who the likely owner is, but "appropriates such property to his own use" is guilty of theft. Taking property valued at more than $400 can result in more serious charges of grand theft.

Additionally, Californian law also states that any person who knowingly receives property that has been obtained illegally can be imprisoned for up to one year.

While First Amendment rights granting freedom of the press have supported Supreme Court rulings to allow members of the media to broadcast confidential information, the buying and selling stolen property are separate criminal law issues. California also has trade secret laws that would enable Apple to seek civil damages related to the incident.

In previous legal arguments, Apple argued that it suffers significant damages from leaks related to its unreleased products. "If these trade secrets are revealed, competitors can anticipate and counter Apple's business strategy, and Apple loses control over the timing and publicity for its product launches," the company wrote.
post #2 of 393
The problem is Gizmodo people are not journalists. They are part of a blog.

IMHO they are scum that don't deserve page hits.

Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad (2nd gen), 14G Ram, Two DVD-RW Drives, OS X 10.9
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.7
1TB Time Capsule

Reply

Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad (2nd gen), 14G Ram, Two DVD-RW Drives, OS X 10.9
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.7
1TB Time Capsule

Reply
post #3 of 393
This is a job for Dragnet's Joe Friday!...

Dum, Da, Dum, Dum.

Dum, Da, Dum, Dum, Daaaa.


Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #4 of 393
You get what you pay for, and they purchased a whole lotta hurt!.

DSL
post #5 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by satcomer View Post

The problem is Gizmodo people are not journalists. They are part of a blog.

IMHO they are scum that don't deserve page hits.

DITTO THAT. Gizmodo can suck it. I hope they get pinched hard. Lam should be fired. They're a bunch of arrogant imbeciles who pulled this stunt and then tried to make the devleoper who lost (or had stolen from him) that phone look like an idiot.

It will be a sweet moment when this comes full circle.
post #6 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by satcomer View Post

The problem is Gizmodo people are not journalists. They are part of a blog.

Fortunately, crime is crime, and whether a journalist or a blogger, after being investigated, if they broke the law, they will get their upcommence!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #7 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Fortunately, crime is crime, and whether a journalist or a blogger, after being investigated, if they broke the law, they will get their upcommence!

They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.



Hey - I got an idea - medical pot is legal in California - light up a joint in front of a policeman in New York City. Or a DEA office in Washington DC. Let me know how that works out for you, and don't forget to forward me the mug-shots.

post #8 of 393
Recent Gizmodo purchases:

post #9 of 393
Busted, disgusted, can not be trusted! Jizzmodo is going down!
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #10 of 393
It's not Californian law...it's California law.

And Upcommence is not a word. It's comeuppance.

And Gizmodo - willfully took part in a crime by accepting obviously stolen property.

-Blurp
post #11 of 393
Seems to me that Apple needs to be careful here. They might just end up creating an incentive to sell a future iDevice prototype to somebody who isn't based in the US and who won't be so cooperative as to give the device back.
post #12 of 393
I think there may also be a law against enticing criminal acts with a promise of payment. I do not know the specifics but I remember hearing something along this line at a point in time.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #13 of 393
I care a great deal. Apple success is part about keeping its secrets. Gizmodo crossed the line when they knew they had the real thing and posted a tear down. They should be sued for liable. I hope Apple puts them out of business. I will be very surprised if they get an invitation to the next media event.
post #14 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by blurpbleepbloop View Post

It's not Californian law...it's California law.

And Upcommence is not a word. It's comeuppance.

And Gizmodo - willfully took part in a crime by accepting obviously stolen property.

-Blurp

And Gizmodo isn't in California. Oh ... yeah ... you knew that right?
post #15 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Seems to me that Apple needs to be careful here. They might just end up creating an incentive to sell a future iDevice prototype to somebody who isn't based in the US and who won't be so cooperative as to give the device back.

Nonsense. They need to press hard on this case to discourage future illegal actions.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

They (perhaps) broke a California law. They're based in NYC. So what.

Did they take the phone to NYC? Taking stolen property across state lines. If so, the Feds could be involved soon.

I've stopped clicking on any link that would lead me to Gizmodo. Hope they suck it.

And altho Engadget may not be much better, at least they did make note of this statute early on. Nilay Patel, a blogger-lawyer, who writes on patent stuff for them, wrote that Engadget believed buying the phone could violate the law.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #17 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Recent Gizmodo purchases:


Fixed that for you.
post #18 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

And Gizmodo isn't in California. Oh ... yeah ... you knew that right?

Therefore, they may have been in receipt of stolen goods across state lines, which would make this a federal crime.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #19 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Did they take the phone to NYC? Taking stolen property across state lines. If so, the Feds could be involved soon.

Wrong. That only works if it's illegal in both states. It's not. Represent yourself in court, it'll be hilarious.
post #20 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.



Hey - I got an idea - medical pot is legal in California - light up a joint in front of a policeman in New York City. Or a DEA office in Washington DC. Let me know how that works out for you, and don't forget to forward me the mug-shots.


I'm pretty sure you'll find that the laws regarding theft aren't that different anywhere else, and the California law would apply anyway since that is where the phone was found/stolen.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #21 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Therefore, they may have been in receipt of stolen goods across state lines, which would make this a federal crime.

If it was illegal in both states.

Bzzt try again.
post #22 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I'm pretty sure you'll find that the laws regarding theft aren't that different anywhere else, and the California law would apply anyway since that is where the phone was found/stolen.

Find me one then. In NY - since that's the only other state that's relevant.

Oh right - I'm supposed to do your shit jobs.
post #23 of 393
I never read Gizmodo before until this. And I must say, this whole incident makes them look like an ass. Their stories read like articles out of a tabloid. If it's tabloidism they want, tabloidism they will be part of when Apple sues their sorry asses.
post #24 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Seems to me that Apple needs to be careful here. They might just end up creating an incentive to sell a future iDevice prototype to somebody who isn't based in the US and who won't be so cooperative as to give the device back.

Apple has nothing to do with this.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #25 of 393
Give 'em the chair!
post #26 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

Find me one then. In NY - since that's the only other state that's relevant.

Oh right - I'm supposed to do your shit jobs.

You're the one that's claiming that it wouldn't be a crime in New York.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #27 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

They (perhaps) broke a California law. Gawker (owners of Gizmodo) is based in NYC. So what.



Hey - I got an idea - medical pot is legal in California - light up a joint in front of a policeman in New York City. Or a DEA office in Washington DC. Let me know how that works out for you, and don't forget to forward me the mug-shots.


The act was committed in California by a someone who represented Gawker. Gawker already admitted that they bought it. Whether they are based in NYC or any other state does not matter.
post #28 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

You're the one that's claiming that it wouldn't be a crime in New York.

And you're claiming that CA law applies in NY

you're funny!
post #29 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Therefore, they may have been in receipt of stolen goods across state lines, which would make this a federal crime.

/They absolutely knew it. ?That's why they keep printing article after article rehashing the story with what is now becoming different information.

"Left on a bar stool" is the most recent description.

Think about that for just a moment. Picture that in your mind.

"Left it on a bar stool".

Who in fuckdom has ever left ANYTHING on a bar stool?

One would have to step off the stool, and then place the phone on the stool and then walk away from it. None of those behaviors are normal or intuitive in the least, even when drunk. Even if he were sitting on his phone (yeah, that's likely), it would have been dragged from the stool the moment he climbed off it.

That phone was stolen, and it was likely stolen by some member of the Gawker staff, and then three weeks were spent trying to develop a cover story that didn't stink as bad as their adolescent writing style.

Funny, Gizmodo isn't publishing any cocky tell-alls about this investigation, huh?
post #30 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

Apple has nothing to do with this.

That's an awfully confident statement. How do you know that Apple didn't file a complaint?

No way the police are just sitting around reading tech gossip sites looking for possible criminal violations. Somebody had to file a complaint.
post #31 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

The act was committed in California by a someone who represented Gawker. Gawker already admitted that they bought it willingly and knowingly. Whether they are based in NYC or any other state does not matter.

So go light a joint in front of a cop in NYC. I'm sure they'll honor the medical pot law from CA.

Oh right - it doesn't matter.
post #32 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

That's an awfully confident statement. How do you know that Apple didn't file a complaint?

No way the police are just sitting around reading tech gossip sites looking for possible criminal violations. Somebody had to file a complaint.

It's not just on tech gossip sites. You're right though, they could have filed a complaint, but at this point that is unsubstantiated speculation. I don't see the point of saying Apple has to be careful when this is a criminal investigation, not a civil one and there is no proof of their involvement at this time.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #33 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by blurpbleepbloop View Post

And Gizmodo - willfully took part in a crime by accepting obviously stolen property.

Stolen? So Apple filed a stolen property report? After all, something as valuable as an undisclosed iPhone prototype must be extremely valuable no? I'd imagine we are talking grand theft right?

Apple reported the theft as soon as they knew about it right?
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #34 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

This is a job for Dragnet's Joe Friday!...

Dum, Da, Dum, Dum.

Dum, Da, Dum, Dum, Daaaa.



Because California cops are great at their jobs.
post #35 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

That's an awfully confident statement. How do you know that Apple didn't file a complaint?

Unless I'm mistaken, most complains are of public record unless they involve underage individuals or involve a crime that warrants extraordinary privacy... Spousal abuse, rape and such.
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #36 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

So go light a joint in front of a cop in NYC. I'm sure they'll honor the medical pot law from CA.

Oh right - it doesn't matter.

California law applies to crimes committed in California obviously.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #37 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

California law applies to crimes committed in California obviously.

And Gawker / Gizmodo is based in NYC obviously.

I'm rollin' that medical marijuana for your NYC trip. Be sure to smile for the camera.
post #38 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

And altho Engadget may not be much better

Recall Engadget's activity 3 years ago:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9719952-1.html
post #39 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

Unless I'm mistaken, most complains are of public record unless they involve underage individuals or involve a crime that warrants extraordinary privacy... Spousal abuse, rape and such.

Perhaps Apple claimed they were raped. Makes sense.
post #40 of 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.No View Post

So go light a joint in front of a cop in NYC. I'm sure they'll honor the medical pot law from CA.

Oh right - it doesn't matter.

Oh I see you turn to humor now that you know how wrong your initial comment was. Based on your logic I can steal stuff from our neighbor state and never worry since I don't live in that state. I am sure you will make an excellent defense lawyer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Police investigating Gizmodo's iPhone prototype story