back to article Gizmodo editor reunited with seized goods

Gizmodo editor Jason Chen will get his stuff back. The San Mateo, California, district attorney petitioned for and was granted a withdrawal of the search warrant that his office used to seize a trove of materials from Chen's home in the purloined–iPhone 4 prototype investigation. "All items seized shall be returned forthwith …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

        1. jake Silver badge

          @DZ-Jay

          "I just searched in Google"

          That well know bastion of all that's holy, truth & light ...

          "for the following terms, "california law lost goods stolen." The first handful of results gave the proper answer."

          Internet law experts always make me giggle ... Try to remember that the only so-called "perp" in this case tried to return the "lost property" to the (seemingly) proper owner ... who in turn refused to accept the return of the goods.

          "Idiot."

          Back atcha, big boy.

          1. DZ-Jay

            Wait, what??

            Are you claiming that the quoted statute is not real? May I remind you that your comment was:

            >> >> "Your wrong. California law says you can not sell lost property ."

            >>

            >> A) Cite me chapter & verse of said law. Seems to me that schools (and police departments!) routinely sell off lost property here in The Golden State ...

            And so I did. Your comment was a response to a comment by Kain Preacher who claimed that it was a mere "moral" obligation and not legal.

            Here's another "chapter & verse" for you:

            California Civil Code § 2080.5. Authority to sell:

            "The police department or sheriff's department may sell such property by public auction, in the manner and upon the notice of sale of personal property under execution, if it is a thing which is commonly the subject of sale, when the owner cannot, with reasonable diligence, be found, or, being found, refuses upon demand to pay the lawful charges[...]"

            So it is only legal for the police department or the sheriff to sell, not the finder.

            -dZ.

        2. Tom 13

          Cool. Chen made reasonable and just efforts to return the property.

          He ID it as Apple kit, they said it wasn't theirs. At that point he no longer had "knowledge of or means of inquiry as to" and the section of law no longer applies. It's not Chen's fault Apple told him a bald faced lie before they went to the police to file a report about "stolen merchandise".

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Does this bit mean..

    "As we pointed out, the police could (for example) attempt to subpoena the same material without running afoul of section 1524(g) and still proceed with their case."

    Does this mean he's not allowed to sell his PC and mobile phones?

  2. nsld
    Black Helicopters

    didnt they get told to keep it?

    Didnt the guy that found it call apple and was told to keep it as it was a cheap chinese knock off?

    All the people shouting "theft", "stolen goods" etc. need to get a grip. Journalism and news scoops are often down to material that gets into a journalists hands through non standard means and thats why journalists are protected in the US in that manner.

    I would rather have a free press thats able to take risks to break stories than a press thats muzzled by corporate or governmental bullying.

  3. Paul
    Grenade

    the apple secrecy gestapo

    so, apple buyers complained when the foxconn employees were found to be working like slaves, but when will they protest about the inhuman way apple employees are treated?

    http://gizmodo.com/5427058/apple-gestapo-how-apple-hunts-down-leaks

    note the article pre-dated the iLoss4 fiasco

  4. Graham 25

    Grip of Death ?

    Has anyone tested it yet to see if it suffers from the same issue ?

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like