141–150 of 306 posts
confiscation of server is still beyond me
You don't think that they would be interested in having records of email correspondence? It's not unreasonable that people running a site like gizmodo would run their own mail servers to increase privacy. Even if it wasn't a mail server (probably wasn't I'd think), there could easily be evidence on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chen is an employee of a media organization. A media organization with a legal staff, I might add.
But not a very good one, clearly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've got extraordinary mixed feelings on this one. On the one hand, people shouldn't feel like it's okay to buy stolen property for their own gain at the expense of the people it was stolen from. But then there's reasonable search and seizure... Hmm, I don't know, I think I'm going to lean slightly towards stolen-property-bad side of the equation. If the editor wasn't a journalist, we wouldn't be having this discussi…
> should there be exemptions made for doing it for journalism? No. That would mean that journalists could steal anything, write a story about it, and not face justice. Suppose that you became famous for fifteen minutes (this happens to people from time to time: see Susan Boyle, etc.) The exemption you propose would allow the press to enter your home, steal things, and plaster images of you and those things everywhere…
http://www.sitemeter.com/?a=stats&s=sm7gizmodous&r=3...
They will probably milk more traffic from this new iteration to this drama.
Whats the worst possible scenario for Gawker? Will they get fined or will the editor go to jail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Espionage_Act_of_199...
Everyone is debating the whole "Good Faith" thing again. Here's a suggestion: Ask how it is "Good Faith" to "find" something in a bar? This isn't your house, your place of work, or a public space, it's somebody else's property (a phone) inside somebody else's property (a bar). Since when do you leave a bar with something that doesn't belong to you unless it's somebody else's spouse? Long before we get to the question…
Since you're a good person who wants to call the owner and give it back the next morning before someone less scrupulous steals it? What do you want them to do, leave it there? Give it to the bar staff who you don't know? Give it to the cops who'll simply tell you to contact the owner yourself?
"These are Jason Chen's computers" http://topherchris.com/post/551530253
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why didn't he do something reasonable, like turn it into the bartender or the police?
His legal obligation was to return it to the bartender, but calling Apple to return it is hardly "unreasonable."
I'm glad. Around this whole thing, there seemed to be this aura of "teehee, it's ok, we're on the internet!" It seems like they don't believe they could have possibly done anything wrong. It's not that I can't imagine the glee they'd feel when they were offered the opportunity to buy the prototype. But since that glee was not followed up by any second thoughts -- for exmaple, about receiving stolen property, or trade…
"And learn that 'checkbook journalism' just flat-out doesn't count. Even when they're paying people for interviews, instead of buying hot goods." Why is this?