11–20 of 80 posts
Apple is a high level advisor to REACT, serving on their steering committee. There is no coincidence here.
Just try getting that kind of personal law enforcement reaction if your cellphone was lost and then sold on craigslist.
Summary: the warrant to gank Chen's equipment should not have been issued to begin with.
The article says that "Federal and California law both protect reporters against police searches aimed at uncovering confidential sources or seizing other information developed during newsgathering activities." The commentary discusses the author's opinion that Chen's equipment should not have been taken under sections of the Federal Privacy Protection Act and the California constitution designed to protect journalists. The article does not discuss whether Chen would be a journalist under those laws though it appears to tacitly assume that he would be.
Was the warrant excessively broad? I'd say! What exactly is the point of the police seizing someones mice and display screens in a case like this other than to ensure that Mr Chen now has an even bigger bill to pay if he wants to get back to work any time soon?
Summary: the warrant to gank Chen's equipment should not have been issued to begin with.
A link posted on HN the other day noted that, in the state of New Jersey, bloggers aren't considered journalists. Depending on context, editors may or may not be considered journalists. I don't know the relevant California state laws or court decisions.
Was the warrant excessively broad? I'd say! What exactly is the point of the police seizing someones mice and display screens in a case like this other than to ensure that Mr Chen now has an even bigger bill to pay if he wants to get back to work any time soon?
I had a mouse that had built-in memory. When plugged in, it looked like a mouse, a hub and a pendrive.
There are whole computers now that look like wall wart power supplies for other devices.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug_computer
They should probably (just to be on the safe side) confiscate all personal property, even for the most limited of warrants, juuust in case it might have some flash in it somewhere. I'm trying to think of a reason to grab all of the money in their bank accounts too, in case there's some hidden code in the account numbers and quantities as well...
Summary: the warrant to gank Chen's equipment should not have been issued to begin with.
I think that is correct with the caveat that the article assumes that Chen would be considered a journalist. The article says that "Federal and California law both protect reporters against police searches aimed at uncovering confidential sources or seizing other information developed during newsgathering activities." The commentary discusses the author's opinion that Chen's equipment should not have been taken under…
First, Chen must be considered a professional journalist, and securing journalist protections for bloggers seems to be actively pursued by the EFF (a conflict of interest to keep in mind).
Second, he must not have directly committed a crime himself, and receiving stolen goods is a crime. The claim that this was "lost" property may be the argument of the defense, but any case based on this seizure will surely claim that the phone was stolen. The evidence will be searched to determine Chen's knowledge of the phone's procurement.
This whole analysis is predicated on the idea that Gizmodo editors must not be the subjects of a criminal investigation because none of them have been arrested. Doesn't that whole analysis fail against the single word: "yet"?
It's not predicated on that, though, the broadness of the warrant seems to be a problem regardless of whether Jason Chen is suspected of anything.
It bothers the heck out of me that there is a corporate sponsored, multi-state police force out there (REACT) that jumps at their whim. Apple is a high level advisor to REACT, serving on their steering committee. There is no coincidence here. Just try getting that kind of personal law enforcement reaction if your cellphone was lost and then sold on craigslist.
Do you have any sources backing up that REACT is "corporate sponsored"? While I saw that Apple was on "a steering committee", where did you hear that they were a "high level advisor"? While "steering committee" sure sounds impressive, that doesn't tell us much about how they could have influenced the process for issuing and executing a (allegedly) illegal search warrant.
It bothers the heck out of me that there is a corporate sponsored, multi-state police force out there (REACT) that jumps at their whim. Apple is a high level advisor to REACT, serving on their steering committee. There is no coincidence here. Just try getting that kind of personal law enforcement reaction if your cellphone was lost and then sold on craigslist.
You or me, not so much.