Police investigating lost iPhone prototype raid Gizmodo editor's home
By Nilay Patel 
posted April 26th 2010 5:23PM
posted April 26th 2010 5:23PM
Update: TechCrunch reports that the investigation is on hold for now following claims by Gawker that Chen should be protected under California's Shield Laws, meant to help protect journalists from revealing sources. The District Attorney will reportedly reevaluate whether those laws do apply, and as such will not go through the seized possessions until a decision's been reached in the coming days.
Best run! Steve has that crazy look in his eyes again...
he got so owned.
He bought the damn iPhone, he didn't steal it!
@tehpinner i think all future product reviews are going to be very interesting
I wonder what they are doing to the guy that lost it, behind closed doors...when this is what they are doing in the public's eye to someone who just took advantage of their carelessness.
@BlueSpud45
Does anyone see the irony of this considering Gizmodo's Apple fanboiism?
@Evan
I am thinking the same thing. Probably in some Apple dungeon getting 500 lashings.
@Eli Haj
On a positive note, Gizmodo earned enough from the story to pay for Jason's bail! I bet they'll still have some loose change left once they are through with this!
@Edmunn
In Cali its illegal to purchase goods from a seller when it isn't the sellers to sell.
In other words, just 'cause that guy "found" that iPhone in a bar, didn't make it his to sell
@Eli Haj after tearing it apart and taking a lot of pictures... at that point getting it back meant nothing to apple... Giz deserves everything they get for the mismanagement of this whole situation
@BlueSpud45
AHAHHHAAHAHHHA
Gizmodo what goes around comes around... this is for that stupid stunt you pulled at CES with the universal remote changing HDTV's
Confiscate all the pr0n!
(But F-The Police!)
@BlueSpud45
Nothing implies that Apple asked for that... it could very well have been on that task forces own decision.
And oh, this should put the "controlled leak" speculations to rest.
Cue the Apple Haters Brigade to wail and gnash their teeth about the evil Apple.
I despise Microsoft, but if someone had taken Steve Ballmer's phone from a bar and sold it to a news site, I'd argue to lock that thief up too. Theft is theft, regardless of your personal biases. And finding a phone, *finding the name of the phone's owner* on that phone, and then selling it to someone else without following due process (turning it in to the police would have been a smart move) is a crime. Period.
@Edmunn
The purchase of stolen goods is a crime, if the purchaser knew or had reason to believe the goods were stolen. Given that Gizmodo clearly knew that the device was a prototype at the time of purchase, there might be an argument for this case.
@Edmunn when someone buys your stolen car, its no problemo eh?
@who said what
Jason wasn't arrested. They didn't care about him, only about the stuff he had at home.
absolutely ridiculous.
Especially considering Gizmodo offered and returned the phone to Apple.
@BlueSpud45
Bad Boy, Bad boys,
Whatcha gonna do?
@Edmunn He bought stolen property, knowing it was stolen, and not only did he not try to return it until a few weeks later, but he allowed it to be taken apart, photographed, and its trade secrets spread across the internet.
someone should tip this to Gizmodo for their on going coverage :P
@Edmunn this is totally fair. is it ok to buy an item you know full well is stolen, when you also know full well who it belongs too (i.e the engineer)? if the phone had been given by an insider it would be a different story, what giz did is not cool.
@Edmunn
still illegal in CA.
@erik1080 It'll just add to their page views. Whether it was worth it or not remains to be seen.
I foresee a mass of highest ranked comments
@BlueSpud45 No kidding. It's been nice knowing you Giz; shit just got real.
@Edmunn
Wrong. You can't buy something that wasn't for sale. Moron, lol.
@BlueSpud45 HOW THINGS SHOULD HAVE GONE DOWN: Hi, I found this phone. It looks just like the new iPhone. Want to buy it? Well, it should probably be returned to the owner. I would call the police. While you are doing that, can look it over and take some pics? No, I want $5000 bucks! Well, in that case, I will call the police and let them know you have it and they can arrest you. Alright, take some pics and how about a beer while we are waiting for them to arrive.
@Edmunn If the US is like the UK then buying a stolen item (knowingly or otherwise) still gives the owner the right to retrieve it. Of course this wasn't technically stolen, but I'm sure Jobsy won't let that get in the way of federal pound-you-in-the-ass prison.
@Yoda Holy crap!!! A flying pig just whizzed by my head.
@Edmunn No he just purchased stolen property knowing that it was stolen
@TimeForTheFairTax Yeah! It's crazy
@kingofwale After publishing all the details, holding it for over a week, and breaking into it. Yeah, Gizmodo are real saints.
They bought property from someone who had no legal right to sell it, wait check that, they KNOWINGLY bought something from someone who had no legal right to sell it. That is buying stolen goods. Thats a felony under California law. Gizmodo crossed the line by purchasing the device. If they had merely posted pictures and descriptions (ala Engadget) they would have been fine. But they didn't.
Not only that they a-holishly posted the engineer who lost the devices personal information all over the internet (yet kept Jason Chen's details private). Real class act those guys. What do you expect from a blog run by gossip mag company.
@slamEVIL
No, Giz is a moron for thinking they could get away with this...they deserve it...who posts a leaked prototype that was acquired illegally and then thinks nothing will happen...just stupid.
@BlueSpud45 : In another unrelated story, Apple donates 50 new mac-books to California's REACT computer crimes task force.
Don't forget that issuing a warrant to seize the property of a journalist that let's them do their work isn't legal in the state of California. Chen and Giz's attorney are too smart not to have thought this out completely before they did it. I'm just waiting for the PD or DA to end up looking like a fool when none of the "evidence" is admissible in a case with little to no grounds.
@Edmunn oh yeah, buying stuff from people don't actually own the stuff......its totally ok....esp. when you know the guy selling it doesn't own it........love to see the argument on this one......."so you paid $5000 for something you honestly thought was a FAKE?" haha yeah right.....he thought it was real, knew it didn't belong to the guy who was selling, and still decided to purchase....he's fucked.....and should be
@Mike It wasn't stolen butthead.
@BlueSpud45
See kids, the police are always on your side if you have billions of dollars, even if you were at fault for losing your toy.
@One Love
Not even Macbook Pro's?
@Sarcasme
It was stolen under California law.
There are some pretty specific things you have to do when you pick up a "lost" item before claiming it as yours. And once you sell something "lost", you are claiming it as yours to sell. So, the guy who found it never turned it in where he found it, never called police, instead called Apple's customer service line (indicating he knew it belonged to them), then when that got him nowhere, turned around and sold it to Gizmodo.
Once he sold it, it was stolen goods. And once Gizmodo bought it, they were receiving stolen goods.
The fact that they later returned it is immaterial. A guys steals your car for a day, then brings it back and says "no harm done, I returned it." That gonna fly with you or the cops? Didn't think so.
Gizmodo's in for a world of hurt here.
@BlueSpud45 All this is going to do is make Apple look bad. This is a bloody PR nightmare.
So your iPhone got leaked. Big freaking deal. You are still going to sell a gazillion of them.
@ummmwhat I agree it would be easy to prove they unlawfully received stolen property but the punishment shouldn't be terribly severe, a fine or a few months jail time?
@HotFuzz What part of IT WASN'T TAKEN do you not understand? The device was found. It was not forcibly removed from the owner. The device was lost and that's that. Not to mention there was no way to identify the owner of the device other than it being an Apple. Does that mean that EVERYTHING out there that has an Apple logo on it is stolen? Seriously. Apple needs a smackdown and I truly hope that the law sides with Gizmodo on this. Apple needs to be taken out at the knees and then smacked in the head a few times on the way down.
@tehpinner This is certainly definitive evidence that the iPhone was leaked accidentally, and not "accidentally" on purpose. We'd have big problems in our republic if this were a "fake criminal investigation"
@BlueSpud45 It's the anti-rejection drugs for the stolen liver kicking in. The man has lost it. Kinda cool though.
@BlueSpud45 Holy crap that's crazy! I guess he had to know that it wasn't going to be as easy as just giving it back to Apple as some whould have thought. Seizing his things is a pretty harsh step forward though! Hope he didn't have anything too incriminating on his stuff!
@brrip Maybe now their site won't be so Apple-oriented. Nice.
@kingofwale according to what i was able to find about purchasing stolen goods, that isn't a defense....plus its not true....apple wrote giz asking for its return......sorry.
@GenericMessage
But what if they guy who found it tried to return it but the company denied it being their property than what is he to do?
I'm not saying what giz did is good journalism i'm just saying that maybe apple are going way OTT with this. LEAKS HAPPEN!!! Just ask Dell and its not the person who found it's fault its the person who lost it if you ask me...
But still WAY OTT!!!!!!