or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple a director of task force that raided Gizmodo journalist's home
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple a director of task force that raided Gizmodo journalist's home

post #1 of 64
Thread Starter 
Apple is among a group of Silicon Valley firms that are listed as helping to steer the California police task force that raided the home of a Gizmodo journalist who published photos and information of Apple's fourth-generation iPhone prototype.

Others steering the Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team, or REACT, include both Google and Adobe, according to MarketWatch, which unearthed the data from California's High Technology Crime Advisory Committee's annual report filed for 2008.

The REACT task force dates back to 1999, according to the following year's annual report. It received $2.3 billion in funding last year, which it used to facilitate 102 "high-tech investigations" that resulted in 28 arrests and subsequently 12 convictions.

There's reportedly no "defined membership" of the committee overseeing REACT and its meetings are open to all company representatives. And while there is no record of Apple reps attending any recent meeting, the iPhone maker is listed amongst the companies who have open investigations to attend.

On Friday, the REACT task force executed a warrant to search the home and car of Gizmodo blogger Jason Chen, who had possession of the iPhone prototype before it was returned to Apple, and who was responsible for the gadget blogs breaking stories on the device.

Chen said he and his wife came back home from dinner around 9:45 p.m. when they noticed their garage door was half-open. When he tried to open the door, officers searched him and informed him that his property was under their control.

Chen's front door was reportedly broken open so the authorities could enter, and those on the scene informed him that he could be reimbursed for the damage. He was provided with a copy of the warrant, which stated that there was probable cause his computers were "used as the means of committing a felony."

Those beliefs stem from the fact that Gizmodo's parent company, Gawker Media, openly admitted that it paid $5,000 to obtain the iPhone prototype from a man who claimed he found it at a California bar after it was left their by an Apple baseband engineer who was field testing the device.

The employee frantically searched for the device, calling the bar multiple times to see if it had been returned, but the owner of the bar said no one ever contacted him to say they had found an iPhone. Gizmodo claimed that the person who found the phone attempted to call Apple and did not receive a response.



A full inventory of the material seized from Chen's home included a MacBook, MacBook Pro, 32GB iPad, 16GB iPhone, an AirPort Extreme, IBM ThinkPad, a Dell desktop, external hard drives, and American Express credit card bills. The items were removed from numerous rooms in his home.

Gawker has since argued that by executing the search warrant, the REACT task force was in violation of California's shield law, which was designed to protect journalists from being forced to turn over their sources.
post #2 of 64
What a silly article.

Are they accusing Apple of wrong-doing? If so, how about some evidence.

Or maybe they're suggesting that companies who are on the task force shouldn't get police protection. That would sure encourage companies to volunteer.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #3 of 64
With Apple and the rest of the Tech Industry along with the RIAA and MPAA I think we can all sleep well in the knowledge that the police are here to... To Protect (the corporate profits) & Serve (the CEO)!

I'd laugh if it wasn't so sickeningly sad.
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #4 of 64
Basically are you saying that Apple somehow controls the DA that signs the search warrant?
It's only a violation of the shield law if Jason Chen is not a suspect.
Unfortunately he could very well be a suspect in this case.
post #5 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

What a silly article.

Are they accusing Apple of wrong-doing? If so, how about some evidence.

Or maybe they're suggesting that companies who are on the task force shouldn't get police protection. That would sure encourage companies to volunteer.

Yeah, this has to be one of the most ridiculous articles I've ever seen on here.

In the first place, it's not even news because these facts were all known within five minutes of the cops bashing down Jason Chen's front door, and in the second place, it's completely immaterial to the whole controversy.

The implication is that Apple shouldn't be involved because they are on the board, but you only have to think of the reverse (that no crimes against members of the board should be investigated), to see how bloody stupid the whole idea is. Apple shouldn't ask for an investigation of a crime? Seriously?
post #6 of 64
this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways
post #7 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbrider View Post

this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways

Yeah. Someone stole your wallet. So what?! It already happened. The thief should not be investigated and arrested. And if you are the member of a law enforcement agency then you are "throwing a fit" and acting like a child. Let it go
post #8 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbrider View Post

this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways

They said they did not know it was stolen, that doesn't make it true.
Chances are they knew it was a stolen Apple prototype, and they paid 5 grand for it.
Unfortunately nobody has the right to buy/sell stolen property.
post #9 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbrider View Post

this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways

Hey dude, I just found your car, it was lying around on the side of the street so yeah I got in to find the owners name and waited to see if you'd come back for a bit but you didn't so I drove off with it. Hung onto it for a while, called your employer's reception (maybe) and then sold it to someone else.

Don't go throwing a fit now, I had all the rights to do what I wanted with it.

Get a grip on reality man
you only have freedom in choice when you know you have no choice
Reply
you only have freedom in choice when you know you have no choice
Reply
post #10 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbrider View Post

this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways

Says the grown up with the degree in law and yet who knows not how to capitalise.
post #11 of 64
getting bored of hearing about Gizmodo and how they should be able to facilitate stealing legally...
post #12 of 64
How is it a surprise or a scandal that the victim of a theft called the police to report the crime?
post #13 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by cy_starkman View Post

Hey dude, I just found your car, it was lying around on the side of the street so yeah I got in to find the owners name and waited to see if you'd come back for a bit but you didn't so I drove off with it. Hung onto it for a while, called your employer's reception (maybe) and then sold it to someone else.

Don't go throwing a fit now, I had all the rights to do what I wanted with it.

Get a grip on reality man

You forgot the part where, when you return it, he'll have to put the engine back together and remold the framing, since, of course, you took the entire car apart while you had it, too. Just to see if maybe his name was written in some obscure place like one of the axles or in the container for the windshield washer fluid.
post #14 of 64
Taking Apple out of the equation-has anyone thought about the cost of this task force and how well they are doing convicting people?

1) 2.3 billon in 2009 to fund Task Force, yielded-102 investigations, 28 arrests and 12 convictions.

2) That is 17.9 million per investigation, 82 million/arrest, and 192 million/conviction. This is how CA spends its money? You have got to be kidding me.

The percentages don't add up to have this task force operating at all, unless companies are funding the task force and are using them as they're personal police force. Which I suspect Apple, Google, and Adobe is. Pretty hard to get a search warrant on the public when you are a private company isn't it?

3) Percentages- 27% of the investigations led to an arrest and only 42% of the arrests led to a conviction. If that happened in a business it would be bankrupt in months.

After this stunt by Apple I will be thinking twice about ever purchasing another Apple product in my lifetime. This also goes for using Google and Adobe.
post #15 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbrider View Post

this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways

If Gizmodo had the rights to take the phone, then the police had the rights to take Gizmodo's computers. After all, Gizmodo left them lying around and they didn't build a moat around their house and stock it with alligators.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LighteningKid View Post

You forgot the part where, when you return it, he'll have to put the engine back together and remold the framing, since, of course, you took the entire car apart while you had it, too. Just to see if maybe his name was written in some obscure place like one of the axles or in the container for the windshield washer fluid.

You also forgot the part where the crook published your social security number and checking account number on the Internet before returning your wallet to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat2441 View Post

Taking Apple out of the equation-has anyone thought about the cost of this task force and how well they are doing convicting people?

1) 2.3 billon in 2009 to fund Task Force, yielded-102 investigations, 28 arrests and 12 convictions.

2) That is 17.9 million per investigation, 82 million/arrest, and 192 million/conviction. This is how CA spends its money? You have got to be kidding me.

Since Gizmodo made this one simple by publicly confessing, those numbers should improve. So you should be thanking Apple.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #16 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat2441 View Post

Taking Apple out of the equation-has anyone thought about the cost of this task force and how well they are doing convicting people?

1) 2.3 billon in 2009 to fund Task Force, yielded-102 investigations, 28 arrests and 12 convictions.

2) That is 17.9 million per investigation, 82 million/arrest, and 192 million/conviction. This is how CA spends its money? You have got to be kidding me.

Yeah I was thinking the same thing...good god man, 2.3 BILLION DOLLARS!!!! Let's cure cancer instead, my god what a waste of money.
post #17 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

With Apple and the rest of the Tech Industry along with the RIAA and MPAA I think we can all sleep well in the knowledge that the police are here to... To Protect (the corporate profits) & Serve (the CEO)!

I'd laugh if it wasn't so sickeningly sad.

Get a life. Your vulgar innuendo is what's sickeningly sad.
post #18 of 64
Okay, I know this is a fan forum but even so, the reactions are ridiculous. In the US, someone is innocent until proven guilty. This is even true when a person or the organisation the person works for virtually admits being guilty.

The facts.
  • The police raided the house of Jason Chen.
  • Chen was a journalist.
  • He worked out of his home.
  • Section 1524(g) of the CA penal code clearly states that a journalist cannot be subpoenaed for refusal to reveal a source.
  • Section 1070 of said code clearly states that a warrant cannot be issued for seizure of any objects described in section 1524(g)

The fact that Apple has a directorship guiding the same task force that raided Chen's house might be relevant if that taskforce is prepared to bend the law just a little bit to help Apple out. It helps having friends in the right places. However, the law is supposed to work equally for everyone, not just for big corporations. I wonder if the police would have been so willing to raid the home of someone who alledgedly "stole" a phone made by a competitor.
post #19 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat2441 View Post

Taking Apple out of the equation-has anyone thought about the cost of this task force and how well they are doing convicting people?

1) 2.3 billon in 2009 to fund Task Force, yielded-102 investigations, 28 arrests and 12 convictions.

2) That is 17.9 million per investigation, 82 million/arrest, and 192 million/conviction. This is how CA spends its money? You have got to be kidding me.

The percentages don't add up to have this task force operating at all, unless companies are funding the task force and are using them as they're personal police force. Which I suspect Apple, Google, and Adobe is. Pretty hard to get a search warrant on the public when you are a private company isn't it?

3) Percentages- 27% of the investigations led to an arrest and only 42% of the arrests led to a conviction. If that happened in a business it would be bankrupt in months.

After this stunt by Apple I will be thinking twice about ever purchasing another Apple product in my lifetime. This also goes for using Google and Adobe.

You are not taking Apple out of the equation, you are talking law out of the equation.
post #20 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singapura View Post

The fact that Apple has a directorship guiding the same task force that raided Chen's house might be relevant if that taskforce is prepared to bend the law just a little bit to help Apple out. It helps having friends in the right places. However, the law is supposed to work equally for everyone, not just for big corporations. I wonder if the police would have been so willing to raid the home of someone who alledgedly "stole" a phone made by a competitor.

Are you stupid?
You saying that Apple's controlling the DA who signed the warrant.
how stupid can you be?
post #21 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbrider View Post

this story is just stupid. the engineer should have be more careful with the phone. apple is just throwing a fit like they always do. the phone is out on the internet, apple should just move on and stop acting like a little kid. Gizmodo had all rights to do what he wanted to do with the phone. apple got it back anyways

Yea.... I just bought a stolen/lost prototype worth billions of future income from you.... but you got it back.... so stop "throwing a fit".

Just because Apple is a big company, then it's ok for people to adversely affect them?
Mac Fantatic & web designer: http://www.modernmagic.com
http://www.about.me/jeffmayland http://www.modellabs.comhttp://www.primocraft.com2.53/4GB Macbook Pro 15", Mac Mini HTPC, iphone4,iphone1
Reply
Mac Fantatic & web designer: http://www.modernmagic.com
http://www.about.me/jeffmayland http://www.modellabs.comhttp://www.primocraft.com2.53/4GB Macbook Pro 15", Mac Mini HTPC, iphone4,iphone1
Reply
post #22 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singapura View Post

Okay, I know this is a fan forum but even so, the reactions are ridiculous. In the US, someone is innocent until proven guilty. This is even true when a person or the organisation the person works for virtually admits being guilty.

The facts.
  • The police raided the house of Jason Chen.
  • Chen was a journalist.
  • He worked out of his home.
  • Section 1524(g) of the CA penal code clearly states that a journalist cannot be subpoenaed for refusal to reveal a source.
  • Section 1070 of said code clearly states that a warrant cannot be issued for seizure of any objects described in section 1524(g)

The fact that Apple has a directorship guiding the same task force that raided Chen's house might be relevant if that taskforce is prepared to bend the law just a little bit to help Apple out. It helps having friends in the right places. However, the law is supposed to work equally for everyone, not just for big corporations. I wonder if the police would have been so willing to raid the home of someone who alledgedly "stole" a phone made by a competitor.


The police raided the house of Jason Chen.

Yes they did.

Chen was a journalist.

For this sake of this post let's assume that a blogger is really a journalist

He worked out of his home.

This is what has been stated, so ok

Section 1524(g) of the CA penal code clearly states that a journalist cannot be subpoenaed for refusal to reveal a source.

He was not subpoenaed, he was served a search warrant and he is not protected by the
California Shield laws which do not apply when the Journalist is suspected of being involved in the crime himself. They are not necessarily searching only for the source they are checking to see if Chen was involved in a crime, for example purchasing stolen property with the knowledge of such.

[*]Section 1070 of said code clearly states that a warrant cannot be issued for seizure of any objects described in section 1524(g)

If section 1524 does not apply then neither does this

While I agree with the laws that protect Journalists from having to reveal their sources, I do not condone them breaking the law to get a story.
post #23 of 64
i just love how you people get so mad about the stupidest stuff. maybe this will teach apple not to let their employees take prototypes out in public. duh....
post #24 of 64
Apple cut off developer support for writing native programs with non-apple programming languages.

Ok.

Apple creates deals with publishers to increase the cost of buying e-books.

Ok.

Apple charges lots of additional money for every new software update for the iPod Touch.

Ok.

Apple locking in the batteries of its portable devices so that users don't have the ability to buy new batteries or replace the batteries if they die.

Ok.


There's the benefit of the doubt.


But now, being complicit in raiding the house of a JOURNALIST to get information?



I don't know how much longer this can go on.
Fragmentation is not just something we have to acknowledge and accept. Fragmentation is something that we deal with every day, and we must accept it as a fact of the iPhone platform experience.

Ste...
Reply
Fragmentation is not just something we have to acknowledge and accept. Fragmentation is something that we deal with every day, and we must accept it as a fact of the iPhone platform experience.

Ste...
Reply
post #25 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by cy_starkman View Post

Hey dude, I just found your car, it was lying around on the side of the street so yeah I got in to find the owners name and waited to see if you'd come back for a bit but you didn't so I drove off with it. Hung onto it for a while, called your employer's reception (maybe) and then sold it to someone else.
Get a grip on reality man

Oh, good....the car theft analogy again. OK so since you stole his car we will raid your house and confiscate your computer, camera, photo albums, mail, music, business cards, recipes, pron, and any other media we think "might" be remotely related to the theft. Because we can.

Whose reality is in danger now?
post #26 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by g3pro View Post

Apple cut off developer support for writing native programs with non-apple programming languages.

Ok.

Apple creates deals with publishers to increase the cost of buying e-books.

Ok.

Apple charges lots of additional money for every new software update for the iPod Touch.

Ok.

Apple locking in the batteries of its portable devices so that users don't have the ability to buy new batteries or replace the batteries if they die.

Ok.


There's the benefit of the doubt.


But now, being complicit in raiding the house of a JOURNALIST to get information?



I don't know how much longer this can go on.

Apple reserves the right to to run their business as they choose. They have a lot of shareholders who like their strategies, which obviously work and many people do indeed buy their products. None of the above statements about Apple are against any laws that I know of. I pesonally like their products and choose to pay extra for the quality and service I receive.

About raiding the Journalist house maybe it wasn,t right if in fact it was done for the wrong reasons (revealing sources) but if it is done to determine if Mr. Chen himself committed a crime then it is perfectly legal and should be IMHO. There seems to be plenty of already published evidence that GIZ or an employee(s) may have committed a crime.

You reserve the right not to buy Apple products.

What was suspected to have been done could and probably will have a significant negative impact to Apple and it's shareholders.
post #27 of 64
well this story put one opinion to bed that this was done for publicity stunt by Apple, I think not.

This comments from RKRick "What was suspected to have been done could and probably will have a significant negative impact to Apple and it's shareholders"

I very much doubt it will have any impact to Apple and its shareholders, unless the new specifications were sold to competing mobile company. The free PR and buzz generated by this story has got many people drooling for the new iPhone.
Maybe short term iPhone my drop, since people know the new phone is coming (doubt it), but long time, I can not see any negative impact.
post #28 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat2441 View Post

Taking Apple out of the equation-has anyone thought about the cost of this task force and how well they are doing convicting people?

1) 2.3 billon in 2009 to fund Task Force, yielded-102 investigations, 28 arrests and 12 convictions.

2) That is 17.9 million per investigation, 82 million/arrest, and 192 million/conviction. This is how CA spends its money? You have got to be kidding me.

The percentages don't add up to have this task force operating at all, unless companies are funding the task force and are using them as they're personal police force. Which I suspect Apple, Google, and Adobe is. Pretty hard to get a search warrant on the public when you are a private company isn't it?

3) Percentages- 27% of the investigations led to an arrest and only 42% of the arrests led to a conviction. If that happened in a business it would be bankrupt in months.

After this stunt by Apple I will be thinking twice about ever purchasing another Apple product in my lifetime. This also goes for using Google and Adobe.

Conjecture of course but what if... Supported by the major players of Silicon Valley, who lose that much due to piracy and theft of intellectual property each perhaps per year - so a drop in the bucket for each of the 25 to kick in to help fund the task force. Assuming that just one of those convictions resulted in staunching a bleeder of several millions of lost revenue per year - would it be worth it then? You aren't thinking corporate scale now are you. Of course not. Context is everything. So let's extend the logic a bit further in this conjecture. Operating costs are off-set by revenues. Stockholder are paid dividends based on profitability. The price of product is determined by profitability and what the market will bear. Losses have to be off-set by profits. Are you getting any of this? Piracy and theft result, directly or indirectly, in higher product prices.

SO I guess you are completely justified in being morally outraged by simple economics. Unfortunately anywhere you turn the same scenario plays out for ANY supplier of goods in the open market. You are trapped in the marketplace, with no where to go but dig a hole and pull it in behind you.
post #29 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by g3pro View Post

Apple cut off developer support for writing native programs with non-apple programming languages.

Ok.

Apple creates deals with publishers to increase the cost of buying e-books.

Ok.

Apple charges lots of additional money for every new software update for the iPod Touch.

Ok.

Apple locking in the batteries of its portable devices so that users don't have the ability to buy new batteries or replace the batteries if they die.

Ok.


There's the benefit of the doubt.


But now, being complicit in raiding the house of a JOURNALIST to get information?



I don't know how much longer this can go on.


You're a lists person - I can tell! Let me help you out a bit:

Apple requires use of native programming languages to ensure that applications developed can scale with the maturation of the platform code, not spin, crash and burn at every update.

Apple creates deals with publishers to get their content into the Apple marketplace to allow consumer-driven pricing once the publishers are committed to delivering into the marketplace

Ten dollars is a lot of money to charge of OS updates on an unsubsidized platform. Yep. But you have a choice of updating or not. That's just wrong.

There are only several reliable internet and local sources that will either supply batteries or replace them for you for a small cost in iPods, and iPhones.

How are they complicit in the house raid? Any proof at all would be nice. Oh wait - Apple pays property taxes in Cupertino, so they are complicit in major road repair efforts that kept a local journalist up late and thus failed to get an article in on time. They contribute directly into Open Source efforts and thus are complicit in Open Source being unable to establish a decent marketshare on the consumer desktop. As long as you are going for smoking guns let's get all the complicits out there. Unbelievable.
post #30 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

well this story put one opinion to bed that this was done for publicity stunt by Apple, I think not.

This comments from RKRick "What was suspected to have been done could and probably will have a significant negative impact to Apple and it's shareholders"

I very much doubt it will have any impact to Apple and its shareholders, unless the new specifications were sold to competing mobile company. The free PR and buzz generated by this story has got many people drooling for the new iPhone.
Maybe short term iPhone my drop, since people know the new phone is coming (doubt it), but long time, I can not see any negative impact.

No real way to quantify either way... remember, I said "could" and IMHO it will, but that is only my opinion...
post #31 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKRick View Post

No real way to quantify either way... remember, I said "could" and IMHO it will, but that is only my opinion...

I agree and I know it was your opinion, just giving another angle
post #32 of 64
The conversation between the task force head and Jason Chen probably went a little like this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Task Force Chief

Mr. Jobs draws a lot of water in this town. You don't draw jack, Chen. Now we got a nice, quiet little valley community here, and I aim to keep it nice and quiet. So let me make something plain. I don't like you sucking around, bothering our citizens, Chen. I don't like your jerk-off name. I don't like your jerk-off face. I don't like your jerk-off behavior, and I don't like you, jerk-off. Do I make myself clear?
post #33 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

Oh, good....the car theft analogy again. OK so since you stole his car we will raid your house and confiscate your computer, camera, photo albums, mail, music, business cards, recipes, pron, and any other media we think "might" be remotely related to the theft. Because we can.

Whose reality is in danger now?

Yours. Crime is crime is crime. What about that don't you get? If there is reasonable cause to suspect that evidence may be contained in one or more of those items, and the judge is convinced you have potentially committed a crime, and there is a strong enough case, a search and seizure warrant is granted.
post #34 of 64
Apple needs to chill the fuck out.

I would understand if the device was stolen as a result of someone breaking into their laboratories. If you take the device out into the real world for testing you have to abode by the rules of the real world (including protection laws for journalists). It's not some fantasy stormtrooper land where they can send out the Gestapo to do their bidding.

Gizmodo should not have dismantled the device though. And they shouldn't have gloated about it excessively.

But overall I'm glad the device was leaked proper. Now apple can't shortchange us on any features at the last minute (eg iPod touch circa 2009). In fact I would happily accept a four month delay if they need the extra time to make sure everything is working and polish things properly.
post #35 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singapura View Post

Okay, I know this is a fan forum but even so, the reactions are ridiculous. In the US, someone is innocent until proven guilty. This is even true when a person or the organisation the person works for virtually admits being guilty.

The facts.
  • The police raided the house of Jason Chen.
  • Chen was a journalist.
  • He worked out of his home.
  • Section 1524(g) of the CA penal code clearly states that a journalist cannot be subpoenaed for refusal to reveal a source.
  • Section 1070 of said code clearly states that a warrant cannot be issued for seizure of any objects described in section 1524(g)

The fact that Apple has a directorship guiding the same task force that raided Chen's house might be relevant if that taskforce is prepared to bend the law just a little bit to help Apple out. It helps having friends in the right places. However, the law is supposed to work equally for everyone, not just for big corporations. I wonder if the police would have been so willing to raid the home of someone who alledgedly "stole" a phone made by a competitor.

The courts have ruled:

A California appeals court has ruled that the state's shield law does not prevent reporters from being forced, under penalty of contempt, to testify about criminal activity, if they're believed to be involved in it. Gizmodo was explicit in their blog entries about their offer to pay the informant to receive the device and what they did once they had it. In fact the case that brought this determination was Rosato v. Superior Court which found that California's state shield law "wouldn't apply to subpoenas or searches for evidence of such criminal activity."

In fact, relating to the federal version of the law, no less that the U.S. Supreme Court has stated "It would be frivolous to assert--and no one does in these cases--that the First Amendment, in the interest of securing news or otherwise, confers a license on either the reporter or his news sources to violate valid criminal laws. Although stealing documents or private wiretapping could provide newsworthy information, neither reporter nor source is immune from conviction for such conduct, whatever the impact on the flow of news."

From the possession side of the law California has laws in place that state rather clearly that any person who finds lost property and knows who the owner is likely to be - but appropriates such property to their own use - is in fact guilty of theft. There are no exceptions for journalists. In addition, any person who knowingly receives property that has been obtained illegally can be imprisoned for up to one year. The California appeals court has ruled in such cases that possession of stolen property, accompanied by an unsatisfactory explanation of the possession or under suspicious circumstances, justifies inference that the property was received with knowledge it had been stolen.

These are the laws governing the action of the deputy DA running the investigation, where clearly, by Gizmodo's own blog entries, Gizmodo self-implicates as being in violation of those laws. Apple didn't have to do anything - Gizmodo did it to themselves.

Never attribute to malice what can be best explained by stupidity or ignorance.
post #36 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunks View Post

Apple needs to chill the fuck out.

I would understand if the device was stolen as a result of someone breaking into their laboratories. If you take the device out into the real world for testing you have to abode by the rules of the real world (including protection laws for journalists). It's not some fantasy stormtrooper land where they can send out the Gestapo to do their bidding.

Gizmodo should not have dismantled the device though. And they shouldn't have gloated about it excessively.

But overall I'm glad the device was leaked proper. Now apple can't shortchange us on any features at the last minute (eg iPod touch circa 2009). In fact I would happily accept a four month delay if they need the extra time to make sure everything is working and polish things properly.

The DA's office with the support of the REACT task force are pursuing a criminal investigation. Apple filed a theft report apparently once it became evident that the protptype could not initially be recovered. Everything else is pure and unsubstantiated conjecture unsupported by evidence at hand. Seriously, stop swallowing every conspiracy theory that pops up out of the febrile minds of bloggers trying to generate hits off the Gizmodo foolishness.
post #37 of 64
more publicity for APPLE?? YES
GIZMODO going to pay the price??? YES Even if it's only being cut out of the APPLE LOOP.
post #38 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by masternav View Post

Apple is very chill on this - they are doing nothing. The DA's office with the support of the REACT task force are pursuing a criminal investigation. There is no public record of Apple filing a theft report or complaint against Chen, Giz or Gawker Media. At all. Everything else is pure and unsubstantiated conjecture unsupported by evidence at hand. Seriously, stop swallowing every conspiracy theory that pops up out of the febrile minds of bloggers trying to generate hits off the Gizmodo foolishness.

I wonder how many times this needs to be said? People keep posting as if Apple were in charge of the police and can just send them forth to do their bidding. And then they start foaming at the mouth about "Gestapo" and "storm troopers" and "fascism." Really, it's just...... stupid.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #39 of 64
Also, where is AI getting its R.E.A.C.T funding figures?

I downloaded a PDF of the 2008 annual report of the California high tech crimes task force, the umbrella organization for R.E.A.C.T and a bunch of other state cyber-crime task forces. The relevant passage:


Quote:
REACT - HIGH TECHNOLOGY CRIMES

During fiscal year 2007-08, REACT received $ 1,947,661 in State funds for high
technology crimes. REACT provided a 25 percent match of $ 486,915. Total
grant award funds to further the investigations of high technology crimes was
$2,434,576.

During the grant period, REACT budgeted approximately 36 percent of its high
technology grant budget on personnel costs and 64 percent on operational costs.
Grant funds of $ 8,376 were spent on equipment.

And from what I've seen, even that 2.5 million in 2008 has been subsequently cut, owing to the state's ongoing budget crisis. 2.3 billion in funding is ludicrous, and is either a typo or confusing some other figure with the budget.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #40 of 64
all this for a phone.
I wonder if a taskforce would have done this for me if I lost my phone.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple a director of task force that raided Gizmodo journalist's home