California authorities seize computers of Gizmodo editor

1111214161727

Comments

  • Reply 261 of 530
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Harleigh Quinn View Post


    I stand corrected.



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



    Mistrial and case dismissed.



    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.
  • Reply 262 of 530
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Berp View Post


    Apple is guilty in the Court of public opinion ... 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?



    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?
  • Reply 263 of 530
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    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.



    C'mon.



    Stop calling people names, and stick to the substance of his comments.
  • Reply 264 of 530
    ihxoihxo Posts: 567member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Harleigh Quinn View Post


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



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



    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?
  • Reply 265 of 530
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post






    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?
  • Reply 266 of 530
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    Holy Conflict of Interest Batman



    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1795









    This is NOT good people. It looks very bad.



    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?
  • Reply 267 of 530
    rbonnerrbonner Posts: 635member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ALUOp View Post


    Maybe they are giving Jason a break.

    The evidence they took may be deemed useless (and the charge dismissed) because it was taken improperly.

    It's very obvious that they did a night search, which the warrant clearly disapproved.

    How could they make such a mistake?



    Which warrant are you looking at, the indication is that the search was approved. And night search is usually in addition to daylight searches.
  • Reply 268 of 530
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by min_t View Post


    This just in. Across the street from Gizmodo, Engadget staff are seen opening bottles of champagne and lining up chairs in front of their windows. Is this a coincidence?



    I doubt Engadget gives a crap what Giz does. Half of Giz is leeched directly from Engadget anyway.
  • Reply 269 of 530
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jonnyboy View Post


    i'm having trouble understanding all this animosity towards gizmodo



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Me, too. If the issue is with potentially doing something illegal then these same people should also hate Apple and boycott their products. Apple has actually lost court case while this Gizmodo case is still mostly speculation.



    Personally, I enjoyed seeing the G4 iPhone, don't think it will hurt the stock or company, and outside of that I'm indifferent, though am interested to see what will happen. No Schadenfreude here, but I do like conflict. Conflict is drama is entertainment.



    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.
  • Reply 270 of 530
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple 1984 View Post


    Why? Because someone may have broken the law and stole an Apple prototype and then sold it to 2-bit trash?



    Problem reading? I quoted the post I was responding to.
  • Reply 271 of 530
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    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.
  • Reply 272 of 530
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    C'mon.



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



    What "substance"? Crack?
  • Reply 273 of 530
    echosonicechosonic Posts: 462member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    I bet they disassemble the computers before they give them back







    That would be AWESOME.
  • Reply 274 of 530
    Note to Chen: Whenever you need the services of an attorney....you're already screwed!

  • Reply 275 of 530
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 276 of 530
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member






    I wonder... you think Woz will be the next to fall victim to the Apple Law... err I mean CA Law Enforcement Agencies?
  • Reply 277 of 530
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by applebook View Post


    What "substance"? Crack?



    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.
  • Reply 278 of 530
    veblenveblen Posts: 201member
    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.
  • Reply 279 of 530
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by applebook View Post


    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?



    I wish I could take credit for it. I got the image from Tumbler.
  • Reply 280 of 530
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by applebook View Post


    What "substance"? Crack?



    Grow up.
Sign In or Register to comment.