Apple paid a hefty settlement and dropped charges to keep Chen and Gawker from suing the shit out of them for aiding and abetting a massive abuse of police powers.
The settlement gag order keeps them from publishing the details, but I'm sure some details will leak in time.
Apple paid a hefty settlement and dropped charges to keep Chen and Gawker from suing the shit out of them for aiding and abetting a massive abuse of police powers.
The settlement gag order keeps them from publishing the details, but I'm sure some details will leak in time.
What are you talking about? Apple was never sued, nor were they fined. Unless you have a link...
I can't believe the hate for Gizmod. I'll bet that all of you hater still looked at all the pictures when they leaked, right? Don't hate gizmos for giving the people what they want. If we all thought it was so wrong then nobody should have even looked at the pics.
Oh and by the way if anybody finds an iPhone4 anywhere, it belongs to me. I claim it and you must return it to me or else face up to $1000 fine and a year in jail.
I can't believe the hate for Gizmod. I'll bet that all of you hater still looked at all the pictures when they leaked, right? Don't hate gizmos for giving the people what they want. If we all thought it was so wrong then nobody should have even looked at the pics.
The pictures were posted before anybody knew of their origin - in fact many people thought they were fake.
Quote:
Oh and by the way if anybody finds an iPhone4 anywhere, it belongs to me. I claim it and you must return it to me or else face up to $1000 fine and a year in jail.
Sorry, you cannot fine anybody unless you are the police.
Come on. You don't know very much about the legal system do you? First, if you buy some expensive jewelry from the back of a pick up truck, a prosecutor is not going to have any trouble convicting you of knowingly purchasing stolen property. Second, do you honestly think Gizmodo is going to pay five thousand dollars for a knock off from China?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALUOp
A car has a title document, which can prove its ownership when shown. How could you prove Gizmodo knew it's really Apple's property? It could be some knock-offs from China. They returned the phone after Apple released a formal written letter that claimed the ownership of the phone. So, the chance of getting a conviction in court is very slim. That's why they're not going forward with the charge.
And lets you say whatever the crap you want, apparently.
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
Suggest you read more and type less. State screwed up big time on this one and want to bury it fast. So does Apple for their part on how the warrant was obtained.
So as to retort your uninformed, unread and ignorant post...
My guess it that Gizmodo will think twice from this point forward before pulling a stunt like that. Gawker is just sighing in relief knowing they dodged a bullet. They'll be forever stamped as the example of what will happen to others if they do something similar.
Keep banning them from any Apple press event.
My guess is they won't. Who wouldn't want to sell / show off pictures of an iphone prototype?
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
None of that was done by Apple - it was done by a task force (that works with the DA I should add) responding to a criminal complaint by Apple over a valuable prototype device. Just because the warrant was ruled invalid doesn’t mean anything of what you said true.
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
Suggest you read more and type less. State screwed up big time on this one and want to bury it fast. So does Apple for their part on how the warrant was obtained.
So as to retort your uninformed, unread and ignorant post...
Yep
Yep
Yep
ditto
You are apparently one of those that is apparently uniformed. Warrants are issued and later ruled invalid - one of many technicalities criminals use for getting off scott free when a crime was committed but evidence was collected without proper due process, etc. which leads to fruit of the poison tree etc.
I would love to see any link to this so called settlement that Apple paid to Gizmodo.
The only thing this did is further insure that Gizmodo (aka Gawker) will continue to use their slimly and sometimes illegal methods to write about stuff they want to know without regard to the protection of others rights to IP and privacy.
The only funny part is that you are apparently incapable of understanding that an article is more than the headline. Both statements are completely true. The DA did decide not to bring charges against Gizmodo while the prosecutors did decide to file some charges (just not against Gizmodo).
Is that distinction really too complicated for you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot
The only thing this did is further insure that Gizmodo (aka Gawker) will continue to use their slimly and sometimes illegal methods to write about stuff they want to know without regard to the protection of others rights to IP and privacy.
Maybe, maybe not. Apple still has the option for a civil complaint. They could put Gizmodo out of business by burying them with legal expenses if nothing else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mode
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
Oh, really? Where is your evidence that the warrant was obtained illegally and was declared invalid?
Oh, wait. You're repeating Gizmodo's erroneous claim that anything that occurs in a newsroom is exempt from search and seizure. That is, of course, nonsense. If it were true, Jimmy Hoffa would be sitting in NBC's production studios right now, rather than under the end zone of a football stadium.
Who reads their regurgitated garbage. Gawker has like ten blogs, but crossposts so much, that it's like 1.5 blogs worth of content. Gizmodo is the worst. Tech 'news' for ten year olds, written by ten year olds.
Who reads their regurgitated garbage. Gawker has like ten blogs, but crossposts so much, that it's like 1.5 blogs worth of content. Gizmodo is the worst. Tech 'news' for ten year olds, written by ten year olds.
I can't believe they're still around.
Lifehacker is actually a pretty good and the only gawker site that I visit.
Comments
The settlement gag order keeps them from publishing the details, but I'm sure some details will leak in time.
Apple paid a hefty settlement and dropped charges to keep Chen and Gawker from suing the shit out of them for aiding and abetting a massive abuse of police powers.
The settlement gag order keeps them from publishing the details, but I'm sure some details will leak in time.
What are you talking about? Apple was never sued, nor were they fined. Unless you have a link...
Oh and by the way if anybody finds an iPhone4 anywhere, it belongs to me. I claim it and you must return it to me or else face up to $1000 fine and a year in jail.
I can't believe the hate for Gizmod. I'll bet that all of you hater still looked at all the pictures when they leaked, right? Don't hate gizmos for giving the people what they want. If we all thought it was so wrong then nobody should have even looked at the pics.
The pictures were posted before anybody knew of their origin - in fact many people thought they were fake.
Oh and by the way if anybody finds an iPhone4 anywhere, it belongs to me. I claim it and you must return it to me or else face up to $1000 fine and a year in jail.
Sorry, you cannot fine anybody unless you are the police.
Apple paid a hefty settlement
Nope.
dropped charges
Nope.
suing
Nope.
aiding and abetting a massive abuse of police powers.
Nope.
The settlement gag order keeps them from publishing the details
And lets you say whatever the crap you want, apparently.
A car has a title document, which can prove its ownership when shown. How could you prove Gizmodo knew it's really Apple's property? It could be some knock-offs from China. They returned the phone after Apple released a formal written letter that claimed the ownership of the phone. So, the chance of getting a conviction in court is very slim. That's why they're not going forward with the charge.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
And lets you say whatever the crap you want, apparently.
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
Suggest you read more and type less. State screwed up big time on this one and want to bury it fast. So does Apple for their part on how the warrant was obtained.
So as to retort your uninformed, unread and ignorant post...
Yep
Yep
Yep
ditto
Some of us both wanted and predicted this outcome. And took a lot of grief from these forums for that.
My guess it that Gizmodo will think twice from this point forward before pulling a stunt like that. Gawker is just sighing in relief knowing they dodged a bullet. They'll be forever stamped as the example of what will happen to others if they do something similar.
Keep banning them from any Apple press event.
My guess is they won't. Who wouldn't want to sell / show off pictures of an iphone prototype?
Best day ever when that thing leaked.
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
None of that was done by Apple - it was done by a task force (that works with the DA I should add) responding to a criminal complaint by Apple over a valuable prototype device. Just because the warrant was ruled invalid doesn’t mean anything of what you said true.
ETA: According to the React Website:
All Agents of the React Task Force are either California Peace Officers and/or U.S. Federal Agents
lock up your women and liquor, here comes gizmodo chen.
Not to mention your pets and farm animals and....
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
Suggest you read more and type less. State screwed up big time on this one and want to bury it fast. So does Apple for their part on how the warrant was obtained.
So as to retort your uninformed, unread and ignorant post...
Yep
Yep
Yep
ditto
You are apparently one of those that is apparently uniformed. Warrants are issued and later ruled invalid - one of many technicalities criminals use for getting off scott free when a crime was committed but evidence was collected without proper due process, etc. which leads to fruit of the poison tree etc.
I would love to see any link to this so called settlement that Apple paid to Gizmodo.
The only thing this did is further insure that Gizmodo (aka Gawker) will continue to use their slimly and sometimes illegal methods to write about stuff they want to know without regard to the protection of others rights to IP and privacy.
DED's headline:
"DA decides not to bring charges against Gizmodo in iPhone 4 case'
CNET news headline:
"Prosecutors file charges in prototype iPhone case"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20...e-iphone-case/
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
As always, DED's spin is the most ridiculous thing about his 'news' article.
DED's headline:
"DA decides not to bring charges against Gizmodo in iPhone 4 case'
CNET news headline:
"Prosecutors file charges in prototype iPhone case"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20...e-iphone-case/
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum. Both headlines are true. Oh, I get it. It's all about hating on DED so substance really doesn't matter.
Either they they knew or didn't know.
Or they were unsure. Or they were 70% sure. Or an infinite number of other possibilities.
As always, DED's spin is the most ridiculous thing about his 'news' article.
DED's headline:
"DA decides not to bring charges against Gizmodo in iPhone 4 case'
CNET news headline:
"Prosecutors file charges in prototype iPhone case"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20...e-iphone-case/
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
The only funny part is that you are apparently incapable of understanding that an article is more than the headline. Both statements are completely true. The DA did decide not to bring charges against Gizmodo while the prosecutors did decide to file some charges (just not against Gizmodo).
Is that distinction really too complicated for you?
The only thing this did is further insure that Gizmodo (aka Gawker) will continue to use their slimly and sometimes illegal methods to write about stuff they want to know without regard to the protection of others rights to IP and privacy.
Maybe, maybe not. Apple still has the option for a civil complaint. They could put Gizmodo out of business by burying them with legal expenses if nothing else.
Because sending a swat team to assault and invade a private residence and steal their valuables under an illegally obtained warrant, (that has been ruled INVALID), by a judge who is not impartial - is the norm when someone loses a cell phone.
Oh, really? Where is your evidence that the warrant was obtained illegally and was declared invalid?
Oh, wait. You're repeating Gizmodo's erroneous claim that anything that occurs in a newsroom is exempt from search and seizure. That is, of course, nonsense. If it were true, Jimmy Hoffa would be sitting in NBC's production studios right now, rather than under the end zone of a football stadium.
... and in the end... millions and millions sold... hope they got their 5000 bucks worth out of it!
And gizmodo got millions and millions of hits and probably retained many new readers, was it worth $5000, hell the f yeah.
I can't believe they're still around.
Who reads their regurgitated garbage. Gawker has like ten blogs, but crossposts so much, that it's like 1.5 blogs worth of content. Gizmodo is the worst. Tech 'news' for ten year olds, written by ten year olds.
I can't believe they're still around.
Lifehacker is actually a pretty good and the only gawker site that I visit.