California authorities seize computers of Gizmodo editor - Page 7

I don't know how a night search is defined, but even if it's 10pm, the letter said he went home at 9:45pm and they continued searching for 30 minutes.

My appreciation for many of your sanity posts, perspective, and patience (and to a few others, as well).

On the Gizmodo topic, I've just been sitting back shaking my head for a few days, restrained by disappointment to comment at the abundance of adolescent hyperbole, flawed reasoning, rationalizations, projection, strawmen, false equivalences, etc. I'm mind-numbed by the mindless' identification with egregious behavior (legal outcome notwithstanding).

In any event, I'd be curious whether the sometimes unpleasant head of reality has begun to erode Mr. Chen's mask of bravado.

Exactly.

That goes into no one knowing what's really happened and that is what may be revealed soon enough.

I disagree, I don't think too many people would have sympathies with the engineer if he did get fired, and even if that were the case it doesn't justify anything on Gizmodos part. They could have called him and asked him if they should out him - I'll bet they didn't do that. And I bet if they had, he would have said "no thanks".



Yeah - I agree - thats why I facetiously said that in response to your post. To refresh your memory, you said "Also, none of this is as serious people make it out to be so I can't get upset about one company taking advantage of another company. How many people are still living in tents in Haiti? How many people died of malaria in yesterday?" Context, my friend...



You're putting words in my mouth - I don't recall saying any of that; "hypocrisy brought on by ignorance" - I have no idea what that has to do with my post either.

Personally, I'll occasionally read Gizmodo when I'm bored and it's a slow day on the good tech blog sites. It's pretty far down on my list (even after TUAW) for editorial content. They churn out a high volume of low quality material, but thats just my opinion. The entire way they played this iPhone prototype story was just sleazy from start to finish, and it sounds like they violated the law I the process. Time will tell how criminally and civilly responsible they are, and how deep their pockets are to afford a good defense. You can tilt the scales of justice a lot with a lot of cash; I'm looking forward to watching a good drama play out.

You still haven't mentioned any Apple lawsuits that are even remotely similar to this one. If you think of any, let us know. You mentioned it, so why should we do the googling. If it's so obvious, surely you can name a few.

Rob

Because it was all for show in the land of Hollywood and no substance.

I stand corrected.

That having been said, in court that is inadmissible as hearsay.

Mistrial and case dismissed.

What facts?

You have stated none. Only one person in this entire thread has stated a factual and reasonable interpretation of the law and that person was not you.

Until you can do such, you are just as credible as the owner of gawker.

Also, you responses, including this one, border on personal attack.

Let's keep this adult, or are you the age you accuse me of being?

Exactly, so barring hiding behind the defense they are "reporters" why out the phone and the engineer in the manner they did when the legal backlash could destroy them?

I leave you to think about that.

lol like the things Gizmodo published didn't incriminate the person who sold them the iPhone enough already.

I believe, at least according to California Penal Code Section 1533, that it is upon the "serving"/instigation of the search warrant that it is considered a day or night search. So if the police began any time before 10 pm (which I gather they did), it stands as a day search, regardless of final length of the search. At least according to my sources, for what it's worth.

or yourself, since you clearly know the ins and outs of the criminal legal system......

Another intelligent interpretation of the law. Why couldn't the other 129 posts have been this informed?

I mean that in all honesty. The rest of the romper room could learn a lot of they read things like this rather than speaking.

From the California Penal code:

"Upon a showing of good cause, the magistrate may, in his or her discretion, insert a direction in a search warrant that it may be served at any time of the day or night. In the absence of such a direction, the warrant shall be served only between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m."

He was physically served at 9:45pm

If there is actually record the phone was "purchased".

I will not make an opinion one way or another on that piece of vapor.

Meanwhile... Chen's neighbour to the right is drunk and pounding his wife in the face - while his neighbour to the left is cooking meth...

Chunk of Chinese plastic and electronics > human condition \

Apple is guilty in the Court of public opinion. It cannot ever be a victim. It's called Handicapping creative talent to level the playing field. The Corporate Media calls it as it should be: Apple's brilliance trumps common business practice and therefore must be slowed to allow fairness to alleviate tip scaling genius.

Gizmodo went to the Court of Public Opinion and its spin apparatus to take on Apple. They broke the law and bragged about it because it helped them make their case in a court of corporate spinmeisters. You flood the anti Apple blogs with hateful rhetoric and let it sap their Will to seek Justice for harms done.
Business and Politics dread straight arrows. Success stories are better expressed in past tense; it makes for a better template to free riding mediocrity.

Will this Case ever be judged on its own merits? If Apple has no business standing out of the crowd, it therefore has no merit; so how could it possibly be?

Let the wild rumpus begin!

if gizmodo wins this contretemps, i'm going to call dick nixon and tell him to appeal.

*points*
*laughs*

The statute says any time between 7am and 10 pm.

Use the Taser!!!1!1!1!1!! the Taser!!!!111!111!!111!!11!!!!!!

Yes, but, if that report is accurate, it won't be that report that is admitted as evidence.

I don't know if you're just here as a troll, or as a Gizmodo apologist, but you aren't really doing a good job as either.

I'm not quite sure, but you might just be guilty of some original thought there.

That said, do you have enough faith in our judiciary and the rule of law to hope and possibly even believe that this case may just be tried on its merits? We've gotta know that the outcome will be independent of our Internet passions here on AI, right?

C'mon.

Stop calling people names, and stick to the substance of his comments.

once again, Gizmodo said they paid for it.

I am just going by the story told by Gizmodo, since it's the only story right now.

Like if you tell a police you have cocaine, you will most definitely be searched. Why should anybody believe otherwise?

SOL, I hope they take it one step further and show us what he has on his hard drives. Maybe they will find something embarrassing for Gizmodo's editor. Freedom of speech, right?

An alternative would be that any company represented on the "steering committee" gets no protection from law enforcement. Would that look better or would that be absurd?

Which warrant are you looking at, the indication is that the search was approved. And night search is usually in addition to daylight searches.

I doubt Engadget gives a crap what Giz does. Half of Giz is leeched directly from Engadget anyway.

Well, speaking for myself, although I'm not fiercely hating on Gizmodo, I would like to see a message sent that this sort of behavior on their part crosses a line on the other side of which are serious negative consequences, and for entirely rational and self interested reasons.

Although they are not a competitor of Apple's, Gizmodo's report amounts to industrial espionage. It's not the same as rumor sites reporting speculation based on this or that, or even rumors from "inside sources", which always involve a certain amount of uncertainty as to their truth and or are based on relatively public information. Things like this can affect Apple's ability to compete effectively, on a level playing field.

And, since there aren't many companies in the tech sector today continually producing outstanding, groundbreaking products, I want them to be successful, very successful, so they can continue doing that. This one incident probably won't, in the long-run, have a significant impact on that, but a series of incidents like this could. If people think they can profit without consequences by "finding" Apple prototypes and selling them to the highest bidder, we're likely to see a lot more of this, which will be bad for Apple, and, ultimately, I think, bad for me.

So, I say, make an example of them. It's not like the world will be a lesser place without Gizmodo.

Problem reading? I quoted the post I was responding to.

Going to be difficult to convince a jury that you would pay $5000 for something you weren't sure was real.

On a more happier note: according to an Apple sales rep at the Fairview Toronto store they will start taking pre-orders for the iPad on May 10th.

What "substance"? Crack?

That would be AWESOME.

Note to Chen: Whenever you need the services of an attorney....you're already screwed!

TRUE and well stated. The quality of Giz is irrelevant here. If Appleinsider or TIME Magazine did the same thing to the prototype, they would be just as guilty.

Corporate espionage obviously has far more sinister intentions than Gizmodo did, but the fallout could be WORSE in the Giz case because now every iPhone counterfeiter and competitor KNOWS what Apple has in the pipeline.

Thanks for the heads up, Giz. Signed, Samsung, HTC, Ericsson, LG, BlackBerry, Nokia, Microsoft, etc.

I wonder... you think Woz will be the next to fall victim to the Apple Law... err I mean CA Law Enforcement Agencies?

Very adult.

Apparently it follows the same logic of people that saw us go through a major real estate crisis, and then began to bid for homes again before the market has completely dropped.

In other words, incapable of learning and repeating the same mistakes all over again.

To me it's pretty obvious that gizmodo expected this. They are going to portray themselves as victims of the apple machine and do a ton of giz vs apple articles. It's what I'd do if I were them. Engadget passed after talking to their lawyers. I'm sure gizmodo lawyered up immediately. There was no way apple was not going to file charges.

I wish I could take credit for it. I got the image from Tumbler.

http://topherchris.com/post/551530253