I love Apple, the company makes great stuff and I wish them well. I get tired of the secrecy and mystery. It wears thin three phones in. Not to mention the iPad. I don't see how most people, especially gadget lovers, can be upset about seeing what is arguably the ultimate gadget early. You should be happy.
People around here award themselves points if they care more about Apple than they do about themselves.
They forget that they are consumers, and identify directly with the corporate interests rather than the interests of consumers.
I'm of the opinion that Gawker Media committed a criminal act with the purchase and sharing of the prototype iPhone. I've read up on some of the laws that apply to the situation and my armchair analysis is this:
1) Although the prototype iPhone was supposedly found in a bar, the person that found it did NOT make reasonable attempts to return the iPhone to its proper owner. The moment that person removed the iPhone from the bar, he/she became guilty of theft. It was not his/hers to take and it CERTAINLY was not his/hers to sell. This is the person that I have the most desire to see prosecuted for criminal activity. Having him/her spend a bit of time in jail would send a nice message to all of the "finders keepers" believers out there. (The ones that are, apparently, still in grade school.) Once the thief has to hire a lawyer to defend him/herself, he/she will wish he/she had gotten a lot more than $5K from Gawker Media. In fact, I bet that person is worried sick right now. As he/she should be!
2) By Gawker Media's own admission, they knew the prototype iPhone did not belong to the person they purchased it from. That's all that we need to know. They KNEW it was not the rightful property of the person selling it. In my opinion, by purchasing it, Gawker Media became guilty of purchasing stolen property.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
4) "Freedom of speech" and "Freedom of the press" will not protect Gawker Media in this case. This isn't a first amendment case. It's a criminal case about stolen property. The first amendment issues would only come into play during a subsequent civil suit (filed by Apple) over the release of trade secrets, etc.
5) Apparently, the only good advice Gawker Media got from their "legal team" was to make sure the prototype iPhone remained in California. That saved Gawker Media from the biggest bag of hurt. Had the prototype crossed state lines, then it would be the US District Attorney and the FBI investigating this situation. The federal laws on the transportation of stolen property across state lines are quite clear. It would have been a felony.
6) Lastly, the story linked at the beginning of this thread is about a CRIMINAL investigation. Nowhere does it say that Apple is suing Gawker or anyone else. Apple may be preparing a civil suit, but, as of now, none has been announced. This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement. If, during their investigation, they discover that the prototype iPhone ever crossed state lines, I am sure the feds will get involved too. If Santa Clara law enforcement finds sufficient evidence of violation of California law, then charges will be brought.
And HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART... In a CRIMINAL case, Gawker Media cannot use a first amendment defense to protect the person that found and sold the prototype iPhone. In a CRIMINAL case, they will be forced to reveal the identity of that person. If Gawker Media refuses, then principles at Gawker Media will likely find themselves behind bars for contempt of court and charged with interfering with a criminal investigation.
If the person that "found" this prototype iPhone is reading this... You should be very very worried right now! You are in for a world of hurt if law enforcement and the DA decides to move forward with criminal charges. You could be facing jail time and significant fines. Gawker Media will not be able to protect you. Your best bet is to come forward immediately and contact the Santa Clara district attorney to try to work a plea deal in exchange for your testimony against Gawker Media. I'm sure the district attorney would rather make the bigger headlines of hanging Gawker Media out to dry vs. some John Doe that happened to make a really really stupid error in judgement in a bar.
Then, after the criminal part is done, then you can start worrying about the civil suit that Apple might bring. But at least that won't land you in jail.
BTW, the above recommendation applies to Jason Chen, who is, apparently, the Gawker Media employee that is based here in California that held possession of the prototype iPhone for Gawker. Jason is likely to be the "fall guy" in any criminal prosecution. If there is an arrest (fingerprinting and photos and all that stuff), Jason is likely to be the first one. Jason just might want to consider working a plea deal himself.
The irony here is that Gizmodo are massive Apple fanboys. And now they won't get invited to another Apple event ever again. Apple has a very long memory. The Register were banned about 10 years ago and still aren't allowed to attend.
What's with all the Gizmodo hate? Every single person on this thread probably read their article on the new iPhone and loved every minute of it, just like I did.
I agree with your sentiment. The holier-than-thouness in this thread is quite breathtaking.
What's with all the Gizmodo hate? Every single person on this thread probably read their article on the new iPhone and loved every minute of it, just like I did.
+ 1
all the comments against gizmodo are ridiculous ....
I find it rather interesting that Nick Denton's Twitter page has been on fire with smug tweets about their iPhone "scoop" since Monday. That is, until yesterday. So far, no more iPhone article tweets since the news broke regarding the criminal investigation:
What's with all the Gizmodo hate? Every single person on this thread probably read their article on the new iPhone and loved every minute of it, just like I did.
I admit I was initially interested in the story and was shocked anyone at Apple could be so careless, but the more I found out the more I realized Gizmodo had probably crossed the line.
I'm of the opinion that Gawker Media committed a criminal act with the purchase and sharing of the prototype iPhone. I've read up on some of the laws that apply to the situation and my armchair analysis is this:
I agree with your sentiment. The holier-than-thouness in this thread is quite breathtaking.
I couldn't agree more. There is so much righteousness here and yet everyone lapped up every single video and photo that Gizmodo produced about this.
Only after the fact everyone is critical of Gizmodo so they can be smug about Apple's propriety in this. Apple doesn't need protecting from a mistake that they made.
All over the world the media is aggressively opportunistic with their stories and routinely blurb busines secrets out before the companies are ready to formally release them. That's the way a competitive media industry works. We are all better informed as a result while the companies are kept on their toes to keep innovating faster and faster to keep up with it all.
All over the world the media is aggressively opportunistic with their stories and routinely blurb busines secrets out before the companies are ready to formally release them. That's the way a competitive media industry works.
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
I couldn't agree more. There is so much righteousness here and yet everyone lapped up every single video and photo that Gizmodo produced about this.
Only after the fact everyone is critical of Gizmodo so they can be smug about Apple's propriety in this. Apple doesn't need protecting from a mistake that they made.
All over the world the media is aggressively opportunistic with their stories and routinely blurb busines secrets out before the companies are ready to formally release them. That's the way a competitive media industry works. We are all better informed as a result while the companies are kept on their toes to keep innovating faster and faster to keep up with it all.
I want my news sources to be a bit on the scrappy and envelope-pushing -- although ethical -- side.
I genuinely believe that both political and corporate power (and sometime the two are intertwined; although that is not necessarily true of Apple) can be kept in check only with an aggressively free press. While the payment portion of the transaction makes me queasy -- it creates a National Enquirer aspect to the story -- on balance, it is better that the story is out there than not. As we have witnessed from the stock market reaction, Apple investors have basically shrugged it off as a non-event.
It's also helpful to remember a few other things: Gizmodo's 10+ million hits is something that equivalent media will kill for, and I have to believe that lots of media outlets would have run with the story in a similar way; Apple has actually got incredibly valuable 'consumer reaction' testing out of this for free; it is only two months from release anyway, and many signficant Apple products have had the details of both internals and externals 'outed' much earlier -- indeed, the details of the first iPhone were know more than 6 months prior and this one is a fourth generation, for goodness sake; Gizmodo probably knows much more than they are letting on (e.g., the processor details), and in that sense, they have been somewhat circumspect; finally, it is not at all obvious to me that the whole thing was just a coincidence.
Apple should -- and will -- let it go with a shrug and a laugh. That's my bet.
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
No one should be above the 'law.' But in a country such as the US, the 'law' is constantly evolving, and that's the way it should be. The envelope-pushing is a necessary part of that evolution.
I'm of the opinion that Gawker Media committed a criminal act with the purchase and sharing of the prototype iPhone. I've read up on some of the laws that apply to the situation and my armchair analysis is this:
1) Although the prototype iPhone was supposedly found in a bar, the person that found it did NOT make reasonable attempts to return the iPhone to its proper owner. The moment that person removed the iPhone from the bar, he/she became guilty of theft. It was not his/hers to take and it CERTAINLY was not his/hers to sell. This is the person that I have the most desire to see prosecuted for criminal activity. Having him/her spend a bit of time in jail would send a nice message to all of the "finders keepers" believers out there. (The ones that are, apparently, still in grade school.) Once the thief has to hire a lawyer to defend him/herself, he/she will wish he/she had gotten a lot more than $5K from Gawker Media. In fact, I bet that person is worried sick right now. As he/she should be!
2) By Gawker Media's own admission, they knew the prototype iPhone did not belong to the person they purchased it from. That's all that we need to know. They KNEW it was not the rightful property of the person selling it. In my opinion, by purchasing it, Gawker Media became guilty of purchasing stolen property.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
4) "Freedom of speech" and "Freedom of the press" will not protect Gawker Media in this case. This isn't a first amendment case. It's a criminal case about stolen property. The first amendment issues would only come into play during a subsequent civil suit (filed by Apple) over the release of trade secrets, etc.
5) Apparently, the only good advice Gawker Media got from their "legal team" was to make sure the prototype iPhone remained in California. That saved Gawker Media from the biggest bag of hurt. Had the prototype crossed state lines, then it would be the US District Attorney and the FBI investigating this situation. The federal laws on the transportation of stolen property across state lines are quite clear. It would have been a felony.
6) Lastly, the story linked at the beginning of this thread is about a CRIMINAL investigation. Nowhere does it say that Apple is suing Gawker or anyone else. Apple may be preparing a civil suit, but, as of now, none has been announced. This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement. If, during their investigation, they discover that the prototype iPhone ever crossed state lines, I am sure the feds will get involved too. If Santa Clara law enforcement finds sufficient evidence of violation of California law, then charges will be brought.
And HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART... In a CRIMINAL case, Gawker Media cannot use a first amendment defense to protect the person that found and sold the prototype iPhone. In a CRIMINAL case, they will be forced to reveal the identity of that person. If Gawker Media refuses, then principles at Gawker Media will likely find themselves behind bars for contempt of court and charged with interfering with a criminal investigation.
If the person that "found" this prototype iPhone is reading this... You should be very very worried right now! You are in for a world of hurt if law enforcement and the DA decides to move forward with criminal charges. You could be facing jail time and significant fines. Gawker Media will not be able to protect you. Your best bet is to come forward immediately and contact the Santa Clara district attorney to try to work a plea deal in exchange for your testimony against Gawker Media. I'm sure the district attorney would rather make the bigger headlines of hanging Gawker Media out to dry vs. some John Doe that happened to make a really really stupid error in judgement in a bar.
Then, after the criminal part is done, then you can start worrying about the civil suit that Apple might bring. But at least that won't land you in jail.
BTW, the above recommendation applies to Jason Chen, who is, apparently, the Gawker Media employee that is based here in California that held possession of the prototype iPhone for Gawker. Jason is likely to be the "fall guy" in any criminal prosecution. If there is an arrest (fingerprinting and photos and all that stuff), Jason is likely to be the first one. Jason just might want to consider working a plea deal himself.
Mark
Great post. Additionally, Gizmodo's defense will likely include some language regarding their inability to verify the validity of the device until after purchasing it. This will be thrown out the window given the fact that they published a dissection of the device with verification of its authenticity, rather than simply keeping it private and returning it to Apple.
They can't prove their ignorance or intent, when their actions say otherwise.
I agree with your sentiment. The holier-than-thouness in this thread is quite breathtaking.
The funniest aspect of that phenomenon is that AppleInsider published every single tidbit that they found on Gizmodo, but few of the Holy types criticize AI.
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
They are not above the law. The law accommodates the people's right to know. It also accommodates competing interests.
I don't see a mistakenly-revealed trade secret as trumping the public's rights. This isn't a matter of national security. The media should have a WIDE latitude to keep us informed.
And Apple needs to be more careful with its secrets if it wants to keep them secret.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
To say they 'knew' is an assumption, and you lose a bit of credibility when you make it sound so certain. I am sure they suspected it was something special. They'll simply claim they wanted to confirm it. After all, (a) Apple knock-offs are dime a dozen, and (b) they (and dozens of others like them) take stuff apart like this all the time and make the information public.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth
This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement.
If Apple had filed the criminal complaint, wouldn't that be public knowledge by now? Also, unless it was specifically requested by the 'injured party' (in this case Apple), I would have to believe that Santa Clara police have cost-benefit trade-offs to make: I'll bet this is far from the most pressing law enforcement issue in that town/county.
Comments
I love Apple, the company makes great stuff and I wish them well. I get tired of the secrecy and mystery. It wears thin three phones in. Not to mention the iPad. I don't see how most people, especially gadget lovers, can be upset about seeing what is arguably the ultimate gadget early. You should be happy.
People around here award themselves points if they care more about Apple than they do about themselves.
They forget that they are consumers, and identify directly with the corporate interests rather than the interests of consumers.
1) Although the prototype iPhone was supposedly found in a bar, the person that found it did NOT make reasonable attempts to return the iPhone to its proper owner. The moment that person removed the iPhone from the bar, he/she became guilty of theft. It was not his/hers to take and it CERTAINLY was not his/hers to sell. This is the person that I have the most desire to see prosecuted for criminal activity. Having him/her spend a bit of time in jail would send a nice message to all of the "finders keepers" believers out there. (The ones that are, apparently, still in grade school.) Once the thief has to hire a lawyer to defend him/herself, he/she will wish he/she had gotten a lot more than $5K from Gawker Media. In fact, I bet that person is worried sick right now. As he/she should be!
2) By Gawker Media's own admission, they knew the prototype iPhone did not belong to the person they purchased it from. That's all that we need to know. They KNEW it was not the rightful property of the person selling it. In my opinion, by purchasing it, Gawker Media became guilty of purchasing stolen property.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
4) "Freedom of speech" and "Freedom of the press" will not protect Gawker Media in this case. This isn't a first amendment case. It's a criminal case about stolen property. The first amendment issues would only come into play during a subsequent civil suit (filed by Apple) over the release of trade secrets, etc.
5) Apparently, the only good advice Gawker Media got from their "legal team" was to make sure the prototype iPhone remained in California. That saved Gawker Media from the biggest bag of hurt. Had the prototype crossed state lines, then it would be the US District Attorney and the FBI investigating this situation. The federal laws on the transportation of stolen property across state lines are quite clear. It would have been a felony.
6) Lastly, the story linked at the beginning of this thread is about a CRIMINAL investigation. Nowhere does it say that Apple is suing Gawker or anyone else. Apple may be preparing a civil suit, but, as of now, none has been announced. This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement. If, during their investigation, they discover that the prototype iPhone ever crossed state lines, I am sure the feds will get involved too. If Santa Clara law enforcement finds sufficient evidence of violation of California law, then charges will be brought.
And HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART... In a CRIMINAL case, Gawker Media cannot use a first amendment defense to protect the person that found and sold the prototype iPhone. In a CRIMINAL case, they will be forced to reveal the identity of that person. If Gawker Media refuses, then principles at Gawker Media will likely find themselves behind bars for contempt of court and charged with interfering with a criminal investigation.
If the person that "found" this prototype iPhone is reading this... You should be very very worried right now! You are in for a world of hurt if law enforcement and the DA decides to move forward with criminal charges. You could be facing jail time and significant fines. Gawker Media will not be able to protect you. Your best bet is to come forward immediately and contact the Santa Clara district attorney to try to work a plea deal in exchange for your testimony against Gawker Media. I'm sure the district attorney would rather make the bigger headlines of hanging Gawker Media out to dry vs. some John Doe that happened to make a really really stupid error in judgement in a bar.
Then, after the criminal part is done, then you can start worrying about the civil suit that Apple might bring. But at least that won't land you in jail.
BTW, the above recommendation applies to Jason Chen, who is, apparently, the Gawker Media employee that is based here in California that held possession of the prototype iPhone for Gawker. Jason is likely to be the "fall guy" in any criminal prosecution. If there is an arrest (fingerprinting and photos and all that stuff), Jason is likely to be the first one. Jason just might want to consider working a plea deal himself.
Mark
/QUOTE]
lol .... you're right !!!!
... and all comments around here defending Apple are ridiculous ....
how can you talking about trade secrets when you can left them on a bar stool ? lol ...
Appel has a childish attitude in this case .... if the related story is confirmed.
What about the President leaving the atomic bomb plans in a bar ? who is responsible ? The President or the iranian waiter ? .... lol
Next question. Who took the pictures?
And by the way, your sentence says that they stole NY, but they didn't have it.
Technically they did steal NY because they stole an apple which is also NY (the big apple)
Slightly off topic, but...
What's with all the Gizmodo hate? Every single person on this thread probably read their article on the new iPhone and loved every minute of it, just like I did.
I agree with your sentiment. The holier-than-thouness in this thread is quite breathtaking.
Slightly off topic, but...
What's with all the Gizmodo hate? Every single person on this thread probably read their article on the new iPhone and loved every minute of it, just like I did.
+ 1
all the comments against gizmodo are ridiculous ....
The irony here is that Gizmodo are massive Apple fanboys.
I can think of many things they are: arrogant, irrelevant, annoying... but fanboy does not come to mind.
+ 1
all the comments against gizmodo are ridiculous ....
Call it what you will... doesn't change the fact that they stepped over the line and this is what people are passionate about.
http://twitter.com/nicknotned
Apparently, the cat has Nick's tongue.
Mark
Slightly off topic, but...
What's with all the Gizmodo hate? Every single person on this thread probably read their article on the new iPhone and loved every minute of it, just like I did.
I admit I was initially interested in the story and was shocked anyone at Apple could be so careless, but the more I found out the more I realized Gizmodo had probably crossed the line.
I'm of the opinion that Gawker Media committed a criminal act with the purchase and sharing of the prototype iPhone. I've read up on some of the laws that apply to the situation and my armchair analysis is this:
--big snip--
Mark
Excellent analysis!
I agree with your sentiment. The holier-than-thouness in this thread is quite breathtaking.
I couldn't agree more. There is so much righteousness here and yet everyone lapped up every single video and photo that Gizmodo produced about this.
Only after the fact everyone is critical of Gizmodo so they can be smug about Apple's propriety in this. Apple doesn't need protecting from a mistake that they made.
All over the world the media is aggressively opportunistic with their stories and routinely blurb busines secrets out before the companies are ready to formally release them. That's the way a competitive media industry works. We are all better informed as a result while the companies are kept on their toes to keep innovating faster and faster to keep up with it all.
All over the world the media is aggressively opportunistic with their stories and routinely blurb busines secrets out before the companies are ready to formally release them. That's the way a competitive media industry works.
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
I couldn't agree more. There is so much righteousness here and yet everyone lapped up every single video and photo that Gizmodo produced about this.
Only after the fact everyone is critical of Gizmodo so they can be smug about Apple's propriety in this. Apple doesn't need protecting from a mistake that they made.
All over the world the media is aggressively opportunistic with their stories and routinely blurb busines secrets out before the companies are ready to formally release them. That's the way a competitive media industry works. We are all better informed as a result while the companies are kept on their toes to keep innovating faster and faster to keep up with it all.
I want my news sources to be a bit on the scrappy and envelope-pushing -- although ethical -- side.
I genuinely believe that both political and corporate power (and sometime the two are intertwined; although that is not necessarily true of Apple) can be kept in check only with an aggressively free press. While the payment portion of the transaction makes me queasy -- it creates a National Enquirer aspect to the story -- on balance, it is better that the story is out there than not. As we have witnessed from the stock market reaction, Apple investors have basically shrugged it off as a non-event.
It's also helpful to remember a few other things: Gizmodo's 10+ million hits is something that equivalent media will kill for, and I have to believe that lots of media outlets would have run with the story in a similar way; Apple has actually got incredibly valuable 'consumer reaction' testing out of this for free; it is only two months from release anyway, and many signficant Apple products have had the details of both internals and externals 'outed' much earlier -- indeed, the details of the first iPhone were know more than 6 months prior and this one is a fourth generation, for goodness sake; Gizmodo probably knows much more than they are letting on (e.g., the processor details), and in that sense, they have been somewhat circumspect; finally, it is not at all obvious to me that the whole thing was just a coincidence.
Apple should -- and will -- let it go with a shrug and a laugh. That's my bet.
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
No one should be above the 'law.' But in a country such as the US, the 'law' is constantly evolving, and that's the way it should be. The envelope-pushing is a necessary part of that evolution.
I'm of the opinion that Gawker Media committed a criminal act with the purchase and sharing of the prototype iPhone. I've read up on some of the laws that apply to the situation and my armchair analysis is this:
1) Although the prototype iPhone was supposedly found in a bar, the person that found it did NOT make reasonable attempts to return the iPhone to its proper owner. The moment that person removed the iPhone from the bar, he/she became guilty of theft. It was not his/hers to take and it CERTAINLY was not his/hers to sell. This is the person that I have the most desire to see prosecuted for criminal activity. Having him/her spend a bit of time in jail would send a nice message to all of the "finders keepers" believers out there. (The ones that are, apparently, still in grade school.) Once the thief has to hire a lawyer to defend him/herself, he/she will wish he/she had gotten a lot more than $5K from Gawker Media. In fact, I bet that person is worried sick right now. As he/she should be!
2) By Gawker Media's own admission, they knew the prototype iPhone did not belong to the person they purchased it from. That's all that we need to know. They KNEW it was not the rightful property of the person selling it. In my opinion, by purchasing it, Gawker Media became guilty of purchasing stolen property.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
4) "Freedom of speech" and "Freedom of the press" will not protect Gawker Media in this case. This isn't a first amendment case. It's a criminal case about stolen property. The first amendment issues would only come into play during a subsequent civil suit (filed by Apple) over the release of trade secrets, etc.
5) Apparently, the only good advice Gawker Media got from their "legal team" was to make sure the prototype iPhone remained in California. That saved Gawker Media from the biggest bag of hurt. Had the prototype crossed state lines, then it would be the US District Attorney and the FBI investigating this situation. The federal laws on the transportation of stolen property across state lines are quite clear. It would have been a felony.
6) Lastly, the story linked at the beginning of this thread is about a CRIMINAL investigation. Nowhere does it say that Apple is suing Gawker or anyone else. Apple may be preparing a civil suit, but, as of now, none has been announced. This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement. If, during their investigation, they discover that the prototype iPhone ever crossed state lines, I am sure the feds will get involved too. If Santa Clara law enforcement finds sufficient evidence of violation of California law, then charges will be brought.
And HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART... In a CRIMINAL case, Gawker Media cannot use a first amendment defense to protect the person that found and sold the prototype iPhone. In a CRIMINAL case, they will be forced to reveal the identity of that person. If Gawker Media refuses, then principles at Gawker Media will likely find themselves behind bars for contempt of court and charged with interfering with a criminal investigation.
If the person that "found" this prototype iPhone is reading this... You should be very very worried right now! You are in for a world of hurt if law enforcement and the DA decides to move forward with criminal charges. You could be facing jail time and significant fines. Gawker Media will not be able to protect you. Your best bet is to come forward immediately and contact the Santa Clara district attorney to try to work a plea deal in exchange for your testimony against Gawker Media. I'm sure the district attorney would rather make the bigger headlines of hanging Gawker Media out to dry vs. some John Doe that happened to make a really really stupid error in judgement in a bar.
Then, after the criminal part is done, then you can start worrying about the civil suit that Apple might bring. But at least that won't land you in jail.
BTW, the above recommendation applies to Jason Chen, who is, apparently, the Gawker Media employee that is based here in California that held possession of the prototype iPhone for Gawker. Jason is likely to be the "fall guy" in any criminal prosecution. If there is an arrest (fingerprinting and photos and all that stuff), Jason is likely to be the first one. Jason just might want to consider working a plea deal himself.
Mark
Great post. Additionally, Gizmodo's defense will likely include some language regarding their inability to verify the validity of the device until after purchasing it. This will be thrown out the window given the fact that they published a dissection of the device with verification of its authenticity, rather than simply keeping it private and returning it to Apple.
They can't prove their ignorance or intent, when their actions say otherwise.
I agree with your sentiment. The holier-than-thouness in this thread is quite breathtaking.
The funniest aspect of that phenomenon is that AppleInsider published every single tidbit that they found on Gizmodo, but few of the Holy types criticize AI.
Really? So the media should be above the law! Have you even thought about what you wrote?
They are not above the law. The law accommodates the people's right to know. It also accommodates competing interests.
I don't see a mistakenly-revealed trade secret as trumping the public's rights. This isn't a matter of national security. The media should have a WIDE latitude to keep us informed.
And Apple needs to be more careful with its secrets if it wants to keep them secret.
3) Gawker Media's argument that "they didn't know what they had until they opened it" is pure nonsense. There's no way they would spend $5K to purchase a phone device if they didn't already know it was something special. They knew.
To say they 'knew' is an assumption, and you lose a bit of credibility when you make it sound so certain. I am sure they suspected it was something special. They'll simply claim they wanted to confirm it. After all, (a) Apple knock-offs are dime a dozen, and (b) they (and dozens of others like them) take stuff apart like this all the time and make the information public.
This story is about possible criminal activity. Other than Apple possibly filing the actual criminal complaint (which I suspect they did and, frankly, predicted they would), the investigation is now in the hands of Santa Clara law enforcement.
If Apple had filed the criminal complaint, wouldn't that be public knowledge by now? Also, unless it was specifically requested by the 'injured party' (in this case Apple), I would have to believe that Santa Clara police have cost-benefit trade-offs to make: I'll bet this is far from the most pressing law enforcement issue in that town/county.