Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Men in blue suits raid Gizmodo

�Finders keepers� isn�t exactly a legal concept

Many bloggers and commentators are making much of the fact that San Mateo police served a search warrant on the home of Gizmodo blogger Jason Chen and confiscated computers, servers and other equipment, probably as a result of his postings about the capabilities of the lost prototype Apple 4G iPhone.

Gawker Media, which owns Gizmodo, made public the fact that it paid $5,000 for the prototype iPhone which was accidentally left in a bar by one of Apple�s software engineers last month.

Gawker publisher, Chief Operating Officer Gaby Darbyshire, has claimed that the search was unlawful because Chen is a journalist and protected by shield laws.

Tech Herald story here.

New York Times coverage here.

The claims that Chen is a �journalist� and protected by shield laws is so far off base it�s absurd. If a journalist COMMITS a crime he isn�t protected under any shield law. Shield laws only protect them from punishment for failing to reveal their sources.

Chen and Gawker basically presented the prosecution with a prima facie case. They publicized the fact that Gawker paid $5,000 for the iPhone and had physical possession of it. Chen appears in a video with it.

If you find something and keep it, that falls under laws with names like �theft of property lost or mislaid.� And if you buy something you know was stolen, well, that's "receiving stolen property."

Gawker and Chen really should have known that something as valuable as a prototype next-gen iPhone was high profile enough that there was going to be some legal action. And along with a conviction will be restitution for damage to Apple that could be in the range of millions of dollars.

Shield laws are intended to protect journalists working in the public interest � which generally translates to investigating government misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance.

Publicizing the fact that you paid for a stolen prototype so you can scoop the world and reveal its feature is way-not public interest. It�s just dumb. It�s world-class dumb. It�s �lets-invade-Russia-in-October� class dumb.

This isn�t about protecting the rights of journalists/bloggers, it about breaking the law to get a scoop.

Tom Kelchner

No comments:

Post a Comment