61–70 of 306 posts
I bet the police waited until they saw him leave the house.
Good luck if you think that hardware is coming back to you this decade, even if charges are dropped, or if you think you'll get the door paid for.
An important New Jersey appellate court decision, interpreting New Jersey law, just came down ruling that bloggers are not journalists and are not entitled to the protection afforded by the shield laws. (See the write-up here: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202451742674&No_R... ). Regardless of the legality of this particular search, this confirms that the authorities are likely looking at this as a felony in…
I feel for his wife. But I have to wonder whether Jason Chen is the guy who chose to wreck Powell's life to cram one more factoid into a big story, and what just consequences from that would look like.
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 secrets, or hey, ethics -- then they deserve what they get, legally speaking.
Anybody who thinks about it for a minute would realize that buying a prototype device that "got found at a bar" ("fell off the back of a truck"), made by a company with notoriously tight seals, and a huge legal team, and then explaining to the world that you bought it off some dude… well, that's gonna have consequences.
If bloggers aspire to be journalists, they're going to have to learn to have those second thoughts.
And learn that "checkbook journalism" just flat-out doesn't count. Even when they're paying people for interviews, instead of buying hot goods.
I wish the best of luck to Jason for getting his stuff back. Forensics/law enforcement is notorious for not returning your stuff in a timely manner (think years) without a lawsuit. Hope he has an offsite backup.
I am impressed that he said that they did very little damage during the search. The last time I saw a search and seizure, it made a tornado look like a minor incident.
Seems a bit overkill? JUST for a moment, forget about the your bias on Gizmodo or Apple... When's the last time you or someone you know reported something stolen, knew who took it and possibly had just as much evidence of who has possession, and there was no search warrant and raid done on your behalf? I experienced several examples where there was video evidence of the theft, the value of the goods were anywhere bet…
- your robbers didn't tresspass or coerce you to give them anything
- your 'robbers' didn't state they called repeatedly offering to give it back and being ignored
An important New Jersey appellate court decision, interpreting New Jersey law, just came down ruling that bloggers are not journalists and are not entitled to the protection afforded by the shield laws. (See the write-up here: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202451742674&No_R... ). Regardless of the legality of this particular search, this confirms that the authorities are likely looking at this as a felony in…
Does the NJ decision have any bearing on the CA shield law? My understanding is that they don't have much in common.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh, no worries :) in many cases illegitimate delays are simply due to incompetence, so it's good to complain then. Turn around is pretty good; we serve a mid to large police force in the UK (around 5000 computer investigations a year). Average return time for evidence where no charges were brought last year was about 2 1/2 months. Complaints over delays were in the 10's.
Wait a minute -- even when no charges are brought, you keep other people's computer gear, ON AVERAGE, for two and a half months? Like hell that's "pretty good" turnaround.
Of the rest; the vast majority were legitimately suspected of a crime (I can count on my fingers the number who were not - to my mind anyway). Proving it either way is, I feel, reasonable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As Derbyshire points out, it's illegal to seize computers used for journalism Except that's not a carte blanche shield. If a computer used for journalism was also used to store, say, records of a drug-running ring, would that computer be inviolable? Or seizable, with a warrant, as evidence in the commission of a crime?
This is the crux of the issue. The warrant wasn't issued to determine the source of a trade secrets leak. It was used to procure evidence for the buying and selling of stolen goods. Trade secrets are a civil matter. The fact that the police sought a warrant implies that they're pursuing the criminal case regardless of Gizmodo's publication. IOW: Running a blog or being a journalist doesn't protect your computers from…
Well said. I'm surprised Gizmodo people are making 'I'm a news organization' noises at the moment - it's a flaky excuse, and has little to do with the charges.
An important New Jersey appellate court decision, interpreting New Jersey law, just came down ruling that bloggers are not journalists and are not entitled to the protection afforded by the shield laws. (See the write-up here: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202451742674&No_R... ). Regardless of the legality of this particular search, this confirms that the authorities are likely looking at this as a felony in…
It ruled that the lady in question "exhibited none of the recognized qualities or characteristics traditionally associated with the news process, nor has she demonstrated an established connection or affiliation with any news entity". Ie, this lady wasn't considered a journalist. Chen is an employee of a media organization. That the organization has a blog doesn't make it different to, say, AA Gill writing for The Ti…
A media organization with a legal staff, I might add.