Just because you do an expose on a newsworthy item does not mean you are not going to return it when the owner asks. If all I do is put up posters on the local telephone poles “found, lost puppy” am I automatically guilty of theft?
Making a major news story out of it kind of defeats they argument “they meant to keep it”- again by the laugh test. If you have something “stolen” or found which you want to keep, the last thing you do is plaster the fact all over the internet in ten-foot-high Times Roman. Their site likely has a “Contact Us” link which proves that when the real owner sees it, all they have to do is call.
Just because it wasn’t the super-express route to return the item does not mean it was not meant to be returned. The law does not prevent a journalist from writing a story about what they encountered on the way to returning it.
Is it theft if you post your find on the web site, the owner knows exactly where to find it? What logic is there in calling the police instead of just going there and collecting it? If they went there to collect it and were turned away, they might have a case; or if they claimed it was theirs, and Gizmodo did not accept reasonable proof… But if they gave it to a contractor to evaluate (a completely hypothetical scenario) and he lost it, is it the contractor’s or Apples? What proof would you demand before handing the thing over to someone who walked through your door? The devil and the lawyers are in the details…
I suspect an interesting argument will be the “unathorized hacking” if they “broke into” the phone in any way.
How did the special computer squad get involved in a l"ost property under minor $X" case anyway? In what way does this fall under their jurisdiction unless there was hacking? Undue influence? The lawyers will have a field day with that one too.
Under the common law, lost property belongs foremost to the owner, of course. However, if the owner cannot be identified (as is the case with money found on a street), it belongs to the finder if it is found in a public place, but to the owner of the land if found in a private place.
According to the ComputerWorld article that JoelUpchurch linked to a couple of posts ago, Apple reported it stolen, and Gizmodo acknowledged that it was stolen:
According to the ComputerWorld article that JoelUpchurch linked to a couple of posts ago, Apple reported it stolen, and Gizmodo acknowledged that it was stolen:
[/QUOTE]
Maybe that is why Chen’s apartment was raided? Maybe the police were trying to find some evidence, such as an email or a text message that would indicate that Gizmodo knew they buying stolen merchandise.
It wasn’t clear to me why they were bothering to hold onto Chen’s computer once they knew Hogan’s identity.