Last Friday night, California’s Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team entered editor Jason Chen’s home without him present, seizing four computers and two servers.
They did so using a warrant by Judge of Superior Court of San Mateo. According to Gaby Darbyshire, COO of Gawker Media LLC, the search warrant to remove these computers was invalid under section 1524(g) of the California Penal Code.
Here is all the documentation (Jason Chen’s personal details are pixelated).
Search Warrant
Inventory of seized material
Gawker’s legal response to the police
Gizmodo Editor-in-Chief’s Jason Chen account of the events
Jake
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 6:49 AMWhat the… Over an iphone?
Smitty
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 6:58 AMServes him right for accepting stolen property and then publicly outing the victim of corporate espionage!
Sebastian Kossowski
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 12:15 PMwait, what? he deserves to have the terms of a search warrant violated because he bought something, anything? a warrant is a set of legal boundaries. if the police overstep it, they’re no better than any other criminal.
zag
Wednesday, April 28, 2010 at 6:25 AMYeah I’m thinking the same deal.
The IPhone has been stolen from the pub and then sold to him, so he’d have to give that stolen iphone back to apple and he can sue the person he bought it from for the money he paid.
Then on top of it he could get done for the corporate espionage as the iphone isn’t a released product from apple, and is a test unit.
Then on top of it, the COO response doesn’t cover any of the above only sources it doesn’t stop the cops from coming in and busting down the door for stolen proptery or the fact that the guy has done corporate espionage whether he knows it or not.
Donnie
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 7:15 AMi have no sympathy to Jason…while i applaud his scoop, what did he really think was going to happen, you went to far by naming the guy…apple has a history of making a example of people who embarrass them…
I do know it would have been traumatic and that scary. …
RawPrawn
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 7:29 AMWant to play cricket with the big boys? Better bring a big bat…
Alan D
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 7:38 AMIt’s called KARMA guys. Gizmodo acted irresponsibly and immaturely in the way they named Gray Powell, beat up the story in the following days and then claimed the moral high ground in their constant justifications for their actions.
You probably would have gotten away with it if you just stuck with the phone details and offered it back to Apple as soon as you realised it was genuine (you’d have had the scoop and the gratitude of Apple). Finally you are being held accountable.
Sorry, but no sympathy on this occassion.
simon
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:47 AMi personally think they did the right thing by outting gray.
really… apple has a history of firing people who leak info, by outting gray, they made him a very public figure and doing so may have saved his job, otherwise it would have been all hush hush, one guy fired, and nobody knowing about him.
it would look very bad on apple now with the amount of public scruitiny it would face over an accidental misplacement of a iphone 4g.
Robert
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:13 AMThats an excellent point Simon. I doubt all these simplistic “serves you right” commentators would have thought of this.
Does anyone seriously believe that Apple would have not fired the guy who left the newest iPhone in a bar after a drunken night out ?? Naming the guy was probably the only way to save his job !
Gizmodo had a sensational story and they reported on it. They have done an excellent job. I hope they sue Apple all the way for raiding Jason’s house – an act possibly illegal, but certainly immoral.
zag
Wednesday, April 28, 2010 at 6:30 AMWould be sacked maybe moved to another area, I’d ask you… why would apple keep him seeing as he’s testing the unit outside leaves it at a pub and it gets sold off.
may have even told people at the pub that it’s a test unit as well.
I do find it odd that Chen got sold a test ubit IPhone before anyone else or it was even sold at $5,000 for it, people at the pub had to of known it was a test unit iphone.
Daniel
Wednesday, April 28, 2010 at 10:26 PMThere was actually another article which displayed apple’s official letter to gizmodo requesting for the iphone to be returned. In that same article, the author wrote that this was more than enough evidence of it being a genuine prototype, and then displayed their reply back to apple.
This reply pretty much said that they were sorry for what had happened, and that they were MORE THAN HAPPY to return it to it’s rightful owner.
Mate, i’d keep up to date with the events in the story before making harsh judgements against the editors.
I personally don’t believe it’s corporate espionage because they didn’t have the intention of releasing a legitimate apple product’s information in the time that it was in their possession. They bought it without proper knowledge, and gave it back to them without hesitation
Boots
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 7:42 AMGood. Live by the sword, die by the sword. You guys broke the law. You outed a young professional who made a mistake needlessly. You shrieked like a banshee with delight at your “Scoop”. Your behaviour has been that of a tabloid shock-jock.
I hope you get convicted of felony.
glennc
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:08 AMso what you are saying is you refuse to read any leaked articles???
Boots
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 11:46 AMNo – not saying that. I read the articles up until the poor hack who lost the phone was outed. What a despicable act. Suggestions in the comments that this ‘probably saved his job’ are fanciful.
I deleted all bookmarks to this site after I read that article… and then have come back to read how this gutter-snipe shock-jock blogger (no journalism involved here) was rationalising the inevitable legal repercussions.
I shan’t be here again…
Richo
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 1:10 PMThank god he won’t be here again.
He smelt funny anyways.
Mark
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 7:49 AMJason, next time please take the opportunity to see whether it will Blend!!!
ij
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:06 AMWell, well, well.
Will Jason’s face and details now be plastered all over the web?
Jordan Morra
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:12 AMYou brought it on yourself dude.
Paying for stolen property and then releasing every detail about it you could find.
And now in this post you make it sound like the police were out of control with your innocent tone.
You are framing (a media term, look it up) Apple and Cali police to look like they are part of the evil empire sent to Chen with the only intention of making his life difficult.
Maybe practice some self control in future topic posts. Next are we going to hear about the time the grocery store ran out of milk that Chen needed? You should provide us with scans of the Purchase Orders and make it really well documented.
My conclusion, either you are a media whore or you just don’t get how silly this makes you and your site look.
Respect for CEO whatshisname for sticking up for you, its the only part of the story I am impressed with.
Robert
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:24 AMThe iPhone was found, after an APPLE EMPLOYEE lost it, on a drunken night out. So what if they paid for it.
It could have been a plastic copy made overseas, it could have been a real phone but a Chinese rip-off, or it could have been a competitors phone. Until they examined it, one could not be sure. When they found out it really was Apples, they notified Apple, and returned the phone.
Gizmodo had a great story and they reported on it. The buzz surrounding the new iPhone has increased 1000% because of Gizmodo’s story. Yet you want them to “practice self control” and not report on it ?? That is a ridiculous notion.
FInally, you claim Gizmodo are a “media whore”, yet here you are, reading and posting on the site. What a hypocrite.
Jordan Morra
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 5:58 PM1. So what if they bought it? It illegal and immoral to pay sell or pay for something that isn’t legally obtained. He knew this as it was claimed to be Apple’s new iPhone by the seller.
2. Chen knew exactly what it was before he paid for it. This has been pointed out many times but ill say it once more. A techie like Chen wouldn’t pay for what was being claimed as a new iPhone without giving it a check…as you can see by the pics it was obviously a new iphone…he could tell by the improved screen at the very least. So stop with this “you never know untill you buy it” crap. He knew exactly what he was doing.
3. I want Chen to practice self control and not treat every situation like he is being attacked are at the centre of the world, I think his documenting every word of the “evil” police was ridiculous.
4. Chen is the media whore, not Gizmodo. My post is about him.
The only thing you are right about is my hypocrisy about contributing to a topic I think is a waste of time. In the future i wont even click to see about the next trivial episode in Chen’s life.
Andrew Plummer
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:18 AMthe irony is that if proven an illegitimate search, they would have stolen 2 macbooks an ipad and an iphone…
thats a lot of apple products taken over the theft of an apple product
f4cti0n
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:27 AMYeah, no support from me either. While I’m all for raising the legal issues here, Gizmodo lost all respect and sympathy when they outed the poor Apple employee.
max
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:29 AMGood job on pricking the hype bubble but that’s what happens when you upset the apple cart!
Peter Zaharis
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:41 AMThe police doing something illegal and using bullying tactics?
Say it aint so!
And for the invariable stream of comments about *stolen goods* *he deserved it* etc etc etc *whinge* *whinge* *i love apple and you are so mean* so what you are saying is that it is perfectly acceptable for the police to act illegaly and do whatever they want because a big multi-naitonal corporation got embarrased?
Wow. Way to kill civil liberties!
FunkyJ
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:17 AMWell said my good man!
Even if Jason did break the law to get this story – and given the information in previous articles I doubt if that is even true – there is absolutely no way this illegal action by the police and the judge is justifiable.
What harm has come to Apple over this incident that they need to resort to breaking the law to correct it?
Will any of you now not consider buying a new iphone when it launches? Has any of Apple’s competitors gained an advantage over this leak? Has Apple’s massive bottom line been harmed at all?
And considering the amount of commentators who are so much against the Internet Filter and the introduction of more draconian laws as they relate to file sharing / piracy, I find the hypocrisy from the idiots posting on Gizmodo over this matter incredibly distasteful.
Paul F
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:36 AMWHY am I sensing overwhelming hypocrisy in the viewpoints expressed by those bashing Jason and Gizmodo? You’re all taking the moral high road, but the great majority of you PROBABLY read the stories eagerly to find out as much detail as possible about the device. Now you’re disregarding the fact that what the police did (ie confiscating the hardware) may have actually been illegal!? Gizmodo had no reason NOT to acquire this device. Apple had said NOTHING WHATSOEVER about the loss or theft of this item. When Gizmodo was contacted by Apple Legal, they immediately arranged to return the phone. What they did was cheeky but not, seemingly, illegal. And just on Gray Powell: Outing him was unfortunate, but probably inevitable, and the massive public profile this story has garnered puts Apple in an awkward position were they to terminate his employment.
nozlaf
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:43 AMgot what was coming to him, unfortunately I guess this means more articles about the stupid iphone and how it all “went down”
Jamie
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:43 AMWhile I agree that naming the employee wasn’t necessary, apple should just suck it up.Prosecuting is way way to far.
Maybe apple should take some responsibilty and not give out phones to employees who take it out on big booze up nights? (Who would have thought that a drunk person could have lost their phone!)
It’s not like they don’t have massive QA teams at apple for testing on site…
Heath
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:49 AMI don’t understand all the hate for Jason. He was doing a job, getting a massive scoop like the new iPhone is the ultimate for a tech reporter, it’s Apple’s fault for losing the device. Legally the law is on Gizmodo’s side in this case, no one knew who the rightful owner was, once it was discovered that it was infact Apple they gave the phone back. Apple must have friends in high places to get around a 1st amendment right like that. No one should be cheering for a massive souless company like Apple, who cares if they’ll lose a few million, no sweat off their sack – but Jason and his family have been violated by this, nothing will change that now.
Camb3h
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:04 AMYou had me until the last line – this mere inconvenience does not measure up to the possible career ending outing. Gray will have a very difficult time making it anywhere in the industry if he is/has been fired due to this mistake.
Yes it was a big one and would have definitely been on his performance review, but by outing him theres a high chance thats all he would be known for now in the industry.
Rappo
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:31 AMThe Apple employee’s mistake was exactly that, HIS mistake. He should have never taken the phone out of Apple, but he did. He should never gotten drunk and left the phone sitting at a pub and gone home without it, but he did. He screwed up, and will be punnished, I doubt it will end his career, it may slow it a little.
Gizmodo did what any tech journal would do, and Jason what any reporter would do, he got the story.
The Momment Apple asked for it back, it was returned – undamaged (yes they opened it, but they did so carfully and were sure not to break it).
Ward Paterson
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 8:57 AMWhile I have no sympathy for Jason, the police have acted inappropriately and they will be found wanting in a court of law.
This is another reason why no one should buy Apple products. Jobs is a head job and should be fcuked into obscurity.
glennc
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:06 AMapple is not the problem, they just make electronics stuff. it is like blaming journalists for gossip… there is a demand there. my problem is not with the company, but the users. have you been to an apple store lately, fricken hilarious. everyone loved up over apple, sharing their apple stories. the guys behind the counter thinking they are king.
Volg
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:00 AMWhat pigs! The Iphone has been returned right? so why the need for the search of Jason’s house?
meh
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:25 AMreceiving stolen goods and paying $5K for it, disassembling it and outing the apple staff member before return the item in question …
They disassembled the phone that is not trying to return it to apple in the condition found .. that’s the bit that says you “reaper what you sow” …
hope they do get charged for it they certainly deserve it…
Kakyoin
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:03 AMi m looking forward to see this news published worldwide again, i’ve seen the previous iphone news from HK papers and Australia TV shows.
Shannon Wulff
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:15 AMsheer awesomeness.
randomambling
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:25 AM@SJobs “This do no evil thing is BS” – reference to Google
Sending the cops around might not quite be “evil”, but like any celebrity, if you manage to harness the media the way Apple and other celebs do, you might have to take a little bad with the good.
Even the naysayers have read the articles and seen the photo’s. It’s because you are interested – one way or another, a thirst Giz and others quenches as best they can.
Thank them that they don’t engage in true guerrilla paparazzi style journalism, and provide a reasonable insight to the bleeding edge.
Apple created this monster. They have no one else to blame.
/randomambling
ij
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:19 AMSteve Jobs sent in the police?
Do you really believe that? Wow.
How’s your supply of tin foil?
Bad Karma Chen
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:37 AMJason Chen this is just the begining of bad karma for you.
Gizmodo should fire you if Gray is fired.
Rob G
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:25 AMSeriously? Read this and tell me Apple has the moral high ground:
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/04/steve-wozniak-on-apple-security-employee-termination-and-gray-powell/
Likely the story has no bearing on Powell employment. But if it does I would think the publicity is helping him. Apple already knew it was lost, and knew who lost it.
shanster
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 9:45 AMKarma – give me a break.
How many journalists have outed people from official secrets, through obtaining information that would/should not have become public normally? The people who have been reported on haven’t always ended up well – that’s life isn’t it. Phone/Documents all the same really. Still public interest.
Gray Powell is no doubt lying about the phone being stolen; rather than lost in a drunken birthday haze – hell I’ve done it.
Bernie
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:29 AMWhy do you think Gray Powell is lying? Hi might be, but he might not be.
On the other hand, the person that took the phone is definately evil. They knew what they had, they knew the owner as they got his details from his facebook page on the iPhone, that’s how we know about Gray Powell. Yet this thief, never tried to contact him, not really. He could have contacted him directly. He could even have left it at the bar, but no, he chose instead to SELL it and contacted both Engadget and Gizmode straight away.
So we know for certain that this person was a criminal and probably told the story so they wouldn’t look bad, like all criminals do.
In all likelihood then, Gray could be telling the truth. He didn’t lose the phone, it was stolen.
Regardless of the truth of the loss or theft of the iPhone, Gizmodo’s behaviour in outing Gray Powell was unwarranted and reprehesible. This was a public violation against Powell, who may not even have done anything wrong. Though he may have made a mistake. But Jason Chen and his superior did not make a mistake, the made a calculated attack on Powell and purchased property they KNEW was stolen/Apples property. You don’t pay $5000 unless you know its worth. They knew its worth, which means they knew it was Apples property/prototype, which of course means they knew it was HOT.
Jason Chen had full control over his future and is reaping it now.
glennc
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:03 AMhaha whatever. as if he cares, this will make a great story for the grandkids.
Simon
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 10:04 AMGood luck Jason you were just doing your job, its called being a journalist and anyone who claims otherwise is proabably an Apple fan boy/girl who woulkd never complain when another companies products are outed early.