I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud - however, unlike most of the self-proclaimed lawyers in this thread who will dispute my opinion in favor of Gizmodo, I don't claim to know the law, and I don't know if he can actually take them to court on any grounds?
I sure hope you don't live in the San Fernando Valley, cuz I definitely want my property back and I don't want to go on a wild-goose hunt to get it. I simply want to call the bar and have the bartender find it in the Lost and Found box.
But then simple and straight-forward aren't on your list, right?
It doesn?t matter if anyone hates Apple or likes the iPhone?the law is the law. If the law allows journalists to be somehow free from searches no matter what, then every criminal is about to start a blog
Fortunately, that's not what the law reads. You're simply hearing the obfuscation from the attorneys who weren't even good enough to get hired by Psystar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters
I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud - however, unlike most of the self-proclaimed lawyers in this thread who will dispute my opinion in favor of Gizmodo, I don't claim to know the law, and I don't know if he can actually take them to court on any grounds?
What an inane post. A crime was reported. Chen announced to the world that he was involved in the crime. Now, the public information is probably almost enough to convict, but it's certainly more than enough to get a valid search warrant - which is what the police did.
So why are you posting crazy ideas when you admit you don't know the law?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department. The basis for the search and seizure warrant was an accusation of theft. Yet, theft was not established nor do circumstances lead a reasonable person to believe that theft was committed.
Finding lost property is never theft.
Actually, it is if you don't make a REASONABLE attempt to return it or if you sell it before you've met the requirements for taking ownership. That applies in CA and almost every other state in the union (maybe all of them, but I didn't verify it). It also applies in any country whose legal system is based on British Common Law.
Please at least make an effort to stick to reality, OK?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdav
If they press you on that, you could also explain that your didn't actually buy the car, you merely paid for exclusive access to the car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters
and expose the dealer who lost the car when he left it unlocked in a parking lot.. after you've contacted Ferrari first to return it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney
Don't forget to publicize on your blog that you are offering the $5000 bounty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macslut
Hey, I know a place in Los Angeles that's filled with all kinds of high performance sports cars. And they're all lost. They're just sitting there with the keys in the ignition in a lot with a sign that says Valet Parking on it.
I'll find one of those, maybe say a Ferrari, and then I'll call a Ferrari mechanic just to make sure it doesn't actually belong to anyone who wants it back. In the meantime, I'll drive it over so it can be disassembled and collect my $5,000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple
You forgot to add at the end... "as he went into the Beer Garden for a few German Beers! Don't drink and drive!
Thank you all for helping me refine my business plan.
Although I think I'll have to add one more section to the business plan - threaten to sue the DA if you're caught.
The cops ought to make copies of the contents of Chen's hard drives and then post them on the web. Then they can give the originals back. No harm, no foul.
What an inane post. A crime was reported. Chen announced to the world that he was involved in the crime. Now, the public information is probably almost enough to convict, but it's certainly more than enough to get a valid search warrant - which is what the police did.
So why are you posting crazy ideas when you admit you don't know the law?
I was referring to the damaged reputation of the engineer, dullard. Since when does having a want/desire/any ol' passing thought require passing the bar and showing you my degree in law? God forbid I have an opinion
I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud - however, unlike most of the self-proclaimed lawyers in this thread who will dispute my opinion in favor of Gizmodo, I don't claim to know the law, and I don't know if he can actually take them to court on any grounds?
What an inane post. A crime was reported. Chen announced to the world that he was involved in the crime. Now, the public information is probably almost enough to convict, but it's certainly more than enough to get a valid search warrant - which is what the police did.
So why are you posting crazy ideas when you admit you don't know the law?
I don't think you understand what he wrote. He was talking about the engineer having a basis for filing a suit against Gizmodo for dragging his name through the mud.
I don't think you understand what he wrote. He was talking about the engineer having a basis for filing a suit against Gizmodo for dragging his name through the mud.
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department. The basis for the search and seizure warrant was an accusation of theft. Yet, theft was not established nor do circumstances lead a reasonable person to believe that theft was committed.
Finding lost property is never theft.
Instead of relying only on shield laws and the benevolence of police officers, Gizmodo and Jason Chen should contact lawyers working for the American Civil Liberties Association and claim punitive damages from Apple for making false accusations of theft, thereby staining the good reputation of Jason Chen, and claim punitive damages against the San Mateo County Police Department for an abusive search and seizure when:
1- The identity of the finder of the iPhone was known to the San Mateo County Police Department and he was interviewed by the San Mateo County Police Department;
2- Gizmodo and Gawker have publicly acknowledged that they held the iPhone prototype by publishing news report that were acknowledged by mainstream media like ABC World News;
3- Jason Chen agreed to return the iPhone prototype to Apple following the request by Apple's legal Vice President.
There was no basis for a search and seizure warrant. Sue for punitive damages.
All of this is true in Reverse World, but back here on Planet Earth it's not the same story. You should stop by for a visit some time, you might like it!
I sure hope you don't live in the San Fernando Valley, cuz I definitely want my property back and I don't want to go on a wild-goose hunt to get it. I simply want to call the bar and have the bartender find it in the Lost and Found box.
But then simple and straight-forward aren't on your list, right?
Gizmodo is the guy. Apple is the car. The road might as well be the iPhone prototype that they "found"
Actually I know from a reliable source that this video is a dramatization of what will happen to Chen when he goes to the slammer with the guy being Chen and the car being Chen's new cellmate Bubba.
These losers aren't "journalists" That ended with Woodward and Bernstein. All we have are hacks with agendas. Saying his house is a newsroom is beyond ludicrous. They broke the law, now do the time. I would like to see someone at Gizmodo learning the fine art of teabagging.
I was referring to the damaged reputation of the engineer, dullard.
Well, let's see if you can understand simple context:
1. The title of the thread is "Gizmodo may attempt to sue police over iPhone prototype raid"
2. You posted a message that said "I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud"
Since you didn't say who 'them' is, it's not unreasonable to assume that you meant the police. I can see how you could have meant Gizmodo, but I don't think you should be calling someone 'dullard' when you can't seem to write a paragraph clearly stating your intent.
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department. The basis for the search and seizure warrant was an accusation of theft. Yet, theft was not established nor do circumstances lead a reasonable person to believe that theft was committed.
Finding lost property is never theft.
Instead of relying only on shield laws and the benevolence of police officers, Gizmodo and Jason Chen should contact lawyers working for the American Civil Liberties Association and claim punitive damages from Apple for making false accusations of theft, thereby staining the good reputation of Jason Chen, and claim punitive damages against the San Mateo County Police Department for an abusive search and seizure when:
1- The identity of the finder of the iPhone was known to the San Mateo County Police Department and he was interviewed by the San Mateo County Police Department;
2- Gizmodo and Gawker have publicly acknowledged that they held the iPhone prototype by publishing news report that were acknowledged by mainstream media like ABC World News;
3- Jason Chen agreed to return the iPhone prototype to Apple following the request by Apple's legal Vice President.
There was no basis for a search and seizure warrant. Sue for punitive damages.
Ah yes, the finders keepers precedent, established in Mrs. Bergmans 3rd grade class. With the losers weepers provision I assume.
Taking possession of lost property obligates you to several things. First you have to make a good faith effort to return it to the owner. Apparently the finder claims to have done this, although the specifics sound a bit lame let's assume his effort was a good faith one. If you can't find the owner you're required to turn it in to the police. The finder is legally obligated to take one or both of these actions or he can be found criminally liable. Shopping the lost item around to several tech blogs- wired, engadget, gizmodo was an incredibly dumb idea. The first two seemed to recognize this as trafficking in stolen merchandise and wisely declined.
More facts may come to light but right now the finder would be smart to plea bargain to avoid a federal theft charge and Giz should cut a deal to avoid a fedral charge of trafficking in stolen merchandise.
Comments
I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud - however, unlike most of the self-proclaimed lawyers in this thread who will dispute my opinion in favor of Gizmodo, I don't claim to know the law, and I don't know if he can actually take them to court on any grounds?
I sure hope you don't live in the San Fernando Valley, cuz I definitely want my property back and I don't want to go on a wild-goose hunt to get it. I simply want to call the bar and have the bartender find it in the Lost and Found box.
But then simple and straight-forward aren't on your list, right?
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department.
REACT - a joint task force of Federal and State Law-Enforcement Officials.
Only the first of many errors in your post.
It doesn?t matter if anyone hates Apple or likes the iPhone?the law is the law. If the law allows journalists to be somehow free from searches no matter what, then every criminal is about to start a blog
Fortunately, that's not what the law reads. You're simply hearing the obfuscation from the attorneys who weren't even good enough to get hired by Psystar.
I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud - however, unlike most of the self-proclaimed lawyers in this thread who will dispute my opinion in favor of Gizmodo, I don't claim to know the law, and I don't know if he can actually take them to court on any grounds?
What an inane post. A crime was reported. Chen announced to the world that he was involved in the crime. Now, the public information is probably almost enough to convict, but it's certainly more than enough to get a valid search warrant - which is what the police did.
So why are you posting crazy ideas when you admit you don't know the law?
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department. The basis for the search and seizure warrant was an accusation of theft. Yet, theft was not established nor do circumstances lead a reasonable person to believe that theft was committed.
Finding lost property is never theft.
Actually, it is if you don't make a REASONABLE attempt to return it or if you sell it before you've met the requirements for taking ownership. That applies in CA and almost every other state in the union (maybe all of them, but I didn't verify it). It also applies in any country whose legal system is based on British Common Law.
Please at least make an effort to stick to reality, OK?
If they press you on that, you could also explain that your didn't actually buy the car, you merely paid for exclusive access to the car.
and expose the dealer who lost the car when he left it unlocked in a parking lot.. after you've contacted Ferrari first to return it.
Don't forget to publicize on your blog that you are offering the $5000 bounty.
Hey, I know a place in Los Angeles that's filled with all kinds of high performance sports cars. And they're all lost. They're just sitting there with the keys in the ignition in a lot with a sign that says Valet Parking on it.
I'll find one of those, maybe say a Ferrari, and then I'll call a Ferrari mechanic just to make sure it doesn't actually belong to anyone who wants it back. In the meantime, I'll drive it over so it can be disassembled and collect my $5,000.
You forgot to add at the end... "as he went into the Beer Garden for a few German Beers! Don't drink and drive!
Thank you all for helping me refine my business plan.
Although I think I'll have to add one more section to the business plan - threaten to sue the DA if you're caught.
and expose the dealer who lost the car when he left it unlocked in a parking lot.. after you've contacted Ferrari first to return it.
You mean after cruising around the country for weeks desperately "trying" to find the owner!
What an inane post. A crime was reported. Chen announced to the world that he was involved in the crime. Now, the public information is probably almost enough to convict, but it's certainly more than enough to get a valid search warrant - which is what the police did.
So why are you posting crazy ideas when you admit you don't know the law?
I was referring to the damaged reputation of the engineer, dullard. Since when does having a want/desire/any ol' passing thought require passing the bar and showing you my degree in law? God forbid I have an opinion
Originally Posted by Mister Sweaters
I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud - however, unlike most of the self-proclaimed lawyers in this thread who will dispute my opinion in favor of Gizmodo, I don't claim to know the law, and I don't know if he can actually take them to court on any grounds?
What an inane post. A crime was reported. Chen announced to the world that he was involved in the crime. Now, the public information is probably almost enough to convict, but it's certainly more than enough to get a valid search warrant - which is what the police did.
So why are you posting crazy ideas when you admit you don't know the law?
I don't think you understand what he wrote. He was talking about the engineer having a basis for filing a suit against Gizmodo for dragging his name through the mud.
I don't think you understand what he wrote. He was talking about the engineer having a basis for filing a suit against Gizmodo for dragging his name through the mud.
"thorough reading" is a foreign concept to him..
Jason Chen has retained outside criminal counsel.
Step 1 to cutting a deal and rolling on your bosses.
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department. The basis for the search and seizure warrant was an accusation of theft. Yet, theft was not established nor do circumstances lead a reasonable person to believe that theft was committed.
Finding lost property is never theft.
Instead of relying only on shield laws and the benevolence of police officers, Gizmodo and Jason Chen should contact lawyers working for the American Civil Liberties Association and claim punitive damages from Apple for making false accusations of theft, thereby staining the good reputation of Jason Chen, and claim punitive damages against the San Mateo County Police Department for an abusive search and seizure when:
1- The identity of the finder of the iPhone was known to the San Mateo County Police Department and he was interviewed by the San Mateo County Police Department;
2- Gizmodo and Gawker have publicly acknowledged that they held the iPhone prototype by publishing news report that were acknowledged by mainstream media like ABC World News;
3- Jason Chen agreed to return the iPhone prototype to Apple following the request by Apple's legal Vice President.
There was no basis for a search and seizure warrant. Sue for punitive damages.
All of this is true in Reverse World, but back here on Planet Earth it's not the same story. You should stop by for a visit some time, you might like it!
I sure hope you don't live in the San Fernando Valley, cuz I definitely want my property back and I don't want to go on a wild-goose hunt to get it. I simply want to call the bar and have the bartender find it in the Lost and Found box.
But then simple and straight-forward aren't on your list, right?
I don't follow..
Gizmodo is the guy. Apple is the car. The road might as well be the iPhone prototype that they "found"
Actually I know from a reliable source that this video is a dramatization of what will happen to Chen when he goes to the slammer with the guy being Chen and the car being Chen's new cellmate Bubba.
All of California law enforcement and the judge that issue the warrent are Apple users. Apple bribe them with free iPads to bash Gizmodo.
best conspiracy I've heard yet.
Go Gizmodo!
Imagine if the guy or Gizmodo sold the iPhone to the Chinese?
Yea! Count your blessings you got it back.
How do you know it wasn't?
I was referring to the damaged reputation of the engineer, dullard.
Well, let's see if you can understand simple context:
1. The title of the thread is "Gizmodo may attempt to sue police over iPhone prototype raid"
2. You posted a message that said "I personally hope the engineer files suit for them dragging his name through the mud"
Since you didn't say who 'them' is, it's not unreasonable to assume that you meant the police. I can see how you could have meant Gizmodo, but I don't think you should be calling someone 'dullard' when you can't seem to write a paragraph clearly stating your intent.
What would YOU have done if you have found that phone?
Probably sell it to the highest bidder.
image: http://www.spootylinks.com//HLIC/9ef...dfeb4b4b23.gif
Gizmodo is the guy. Apple is the car. The road might as well be the iPhone prototype that they "found"
I'm always amazed at how shoes always pop off.
There seems to be a clear abuse of power from the San Mateo County Police Department. The basis for the search and seizure warrant was an accusation of theft. Yet, theft was not established nor do circumstances lead a reasonable person to believe that theft was committed.
Finding lost property is never theft.
Instead of relying only on shield laws and the benevolence of police officers, Gizmodo and Jason Chen should contact lawyers working for the American Civil Liberties Association and claim punitive damages from Apple for making false accusations of theft, thereby staining the good reputation of Jason Chen, and claim punitive damages against the San Mateo County Police Department for an abusive search and seizure when:
1- The identity of the finder of the iPhone was known to the San Mateo County Police Department and he was interviewed by the San Mateo County Police Department;
2- Gizmodo and Gawker have publicly acknowledged that they held the iPhone prototype by publishing news report that were acknowledged by mainstream media like ABC World News;
3- Jason Chen agreed to return the iPhone prototype to Apple following the request by Apple's legal Vice President.
There was no basis for a search and seizure warrant. Sue for punitive damages.
Ah yes, the finders keepers precedent, established in Mrs. Bergmans 3rd grade class. With the losers weepers provision I assume.
Taking possession of lost property obligates you to several things. First you have to make a good faith effort to return it to the owner. Apparently the finder claims to have done this, although the specifics sound a bit lame let's assume his effort was a good faith one. If you can't find the owner you're required to turn it in to the police. The finder is legally obligated to take one or both of these actions or he can be found criminally liable. Shopping the lost item around to several tech blogs- wired, engadget, gizmodo was an incredibly dumb idea. The first two seemed to recognize this as trafficking in stolen merchandise and wisely declined.
More facts may come to light but right now the finder would be smart to plea bargain to avoid a federal theft charge and Giz should cut a deal to avoid a fedral charge of trafficking in stolen merchandise.