1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Updated: Gizmodo stole Steve Jobs' thunder (new iPhone debuted today)

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Rumpleforeskin, Apr 19, 2010.

Page 5 of 8
  1. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    The NY Times was never accused of anything criminal. The court case was a civil case, in which the government wanted to stop publication, claiming National Security concerns.

    I believe Ellsberg himself was indicted and tried for espionage, but the case was dismissed (someone please correct me if I am wrong).
     
    The Big Ragu, Apr 26, 2010
    #49
  2. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    Looks even more to me like they're carrying Apple's water -- and the DA might think so too.

     
    YankeeFan, Apr 26, 2010
    #50
  3. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    The only objective source in what you just linked to (not the prosecutor, not people from Gawker) is a fellow at some law center. And his quote is essentially what I posted.

    He said the case could hinge on whether there is an exception in the law involving a journalist committing a crime, “in this case receipt of stolen property. He said “this seems unlikely based on the plain language of the statute.”

    To use your language, it really is that "clear cut." If they can convict him of knowingly buying stolen property (it is likely he did, which is why he isn't a cause celebre for anyone but Nick Denton), a shield law doesn't protect him from having committed a felony.

    Do I think the phone should be fair game -- because it was found sitting in a bar? Personally, yes. I think this is a nonsensical prosecution. But if they indict him, it is a LEGAL prosecution. It's different from a reporter being threatened with jail for not naming names of sources. In those cases, you don't have people who flirted with legalities. Chen did that when he bought something he knew belonged to Apple. He has to be ready to accept the consequences of that. "I'm a journalist" doesn't give you legal immunity, and the fight for shield laws have never been about that.
     
    The Big Ragu, Apr 26, 2010
    #51
  4. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    It might be the only objective quote, but don't you think it's an important fact if Apple's on the steering committee for this task force?

    And that the ADA hasn't searched the computer because of "further considerations"?

    Sounds like the ADA is worried that he got burned by the cop who has a working relationship with Apple.
     
    YankeeFan, Apr 26, 2010
    #52
  5. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    Obviously, there are many differences in the cases. However, does culpability shift if I am a working journalist who is freely given stolen material rather than paying for stolen material.
    Also, does private work product, perhaps Apple corporate reports about how the iPhone was developed, marketed and future plans for the product, differe from state work product, such as the Pentagon Papers?
     
    Buck, Apr 26, 2010
    #53
  6. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    When you accept actual material, yes, you always do have to think through the ramifications of it. If you break the law, being a journalist isn't a defense, legally or morally. So you had best have your principles sorted out in your head.

    When you PAY for something -- and you likely knew it belonged to someone else -- you are not going to have the same high ground that the NY Times had in the Pentagon Papers case -- for obvious reasons.

    There are two issues, also, that I can think of. You brought one up. The Pentagon Papers case was a civil case, actually, not a criminal one, which makes it completely different. But because it involved government information, the Supreme Court ruled on it as a First Amendment case. So yeah, when you are acting as a watchdog on government, you have an additional argument that you don't have when it is a matter involving a private entity, such as Apple.

    Then there is an issue regarding the type of property. In the case of an iPhone it is an actual, tangible product. If I have it the prototype, it means I am depriving Apple of it (aside from the harm I can do to their business since it has not been released yet). In the case of the Pentagon Papers, it was not an actual widget, the way an iPhone is. It was information -- it was actually possible for the New York Times to have access to the information and not deprive the DOD of it. They were just photocopied papers. I think that is why the government ultimately litigated it on National Security claims, not with "stolen property" as the centerpiece of their claim.
     
    The Big Ragu, Apr 26, 2010
    #54
  7. Pilot

    Pilot Well-Known Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    What a bunch of stupid assholes Apple is. Their guy fucks up, leaves their precious Iphone in a bar, and this is how they respond.

    Gizmodo spends about 50% of all its millions and millions of words blowing Apple like it's Samuel L., but Gizmodo gets out off the company line for one second -- in a move that only builds Apple's stupid fuck mystique -- and this is how they respond.

    What a bunch of dicks.

    And if you really don't think the guy forgot his iPhone, then let's see some fucking assault charges for where this random guy who ended up with it punched the guy's ass out. Because if he really stuck it in his pocket, that's what would have had to have happened.
     
    Pilot, Apr 27, 2010
    #55
  8. OrthogonalWaterfowl

    OrthogonalWaterfowl Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    The phone's not stolen in the sense that one guy robbed another guy and stole his phone, it's stolen in the sense that the source sold something that was not his to sell - and the fact that it was lost changes nothing, it still belongs to the original owner. Selling something you find and do not own is illegal, whatever people's opinions on the matter of lost items may be.

    Nobody's arguing that the guy didn't actually forget his phone, unless I missed something.
     
    OrthogonalWaterfowl, Apr 27, 2010
    #56
  9. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    I would think there were repercussions for the guy who lost the prototype.
    And regardless of the coverage Gizmodo has given Apple products, publicizing information about the prototype could represent a real loss.
    But that's part of what I was getting at in my questions.
    The value of the prototype is not the physical widget itself. The value is the information that can be gotten from it: what feature and specs it has, how it differs from the previous models, etc. In that way, it's value is similar to a copy of the R&D report. The value is the information it represents rather than the thing itself.
    So if a reporter is given a copy of an Apple R&D report on the new iPhone prototype, is he/she less culpable than if he/she was given the actual prototype?
     
    Buck, Apr 27, 2010
    #57
  10. OrthogonalWaterfowl

    OrthogonalWaterfowl Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    I am not a lawyer, but... as far as the law is concerned, the value of the prototype IS the physical widget itself and nothing else. That's the only thing potentially illegal going on here. None of the legal ramifications have anything to do with stolen information or anything like that. Of concern to the law is only the property that was bought and sold, not what was done with it or what the information it contained meant to any parties.

    I don't know how a copy of an R&D report would work legally but it probably wouldn't fall under laws dealing with physical property, like this does. And if it did, the only value would be a couple pieces of paper. And if they were copies, maybe not even that?

    Now, if a civil suit were to be brought against Gizmodo by Apple, that'd be different. As far as I know, all this business is solely to do with a criminal case. Apple has no involvement, except (theoretically) as the "victim". And I also think a civil suit would be unreasonable and more than a bit stupid, because Gizmodo didn't publish any trade secrets and probably didn't cause any material damage to Apple that they could demonstrate. In that case, I'd be perfectly happy to say, "They lost it, tough shit." But as a criminal case, lost property is still their property.

    edit: Edited to clarify/expand on a couple things.
     
    OrthogonalWaterfowl, Apr 27, 2010
    #58
  11. OrthogonalWaterfowl

    OrthogonalWaterfowl Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    Oh, one more thing: I also don't think there'd be any culpability if they were *given* the thing, assuming they returned it when asked. And why couldn't they write about it, in that case? Like Ragu said before... good argument for not paying for stuff like this, because the act of paying is what's getting them in hot water. If they'd been given it, they'd have a solid argument that they just wanted to return it to its rightful owners.
     
    OrthogonalWaterfowl, Apr 27, 2010
    #59
  12. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    Re: Steve Jobs must be pretty unhappy right now (new iPhone leaks)

    So if I am given an unpublished Stephen King manuscript it has no value other than the paper on which it was photocopied?
    I find that difficult to believe.
    I think the same would go for an R&D report. The value is what's on the paper.
    If you have an R&D report on a automobile that runs on water, the information in the report is worth something.
     
    Buck, Apr 27, 2010
    #60
Page 5 of 8
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page