2 years, 1 month ago
via iphoneqna.com
The Official Verdict in the stolen iPhone Case
Jason Nation Mailing list: http://jasonnation.com
Subscribers: 21,922
Unsubscribe: email unsubscribe@calacanis.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jason
Last Show: Sky Dayton http://bit.ly/b5Rsi1
Rights: Forwarding by email OK, but please do not publish on web
=======================================
Nation,
I am not a lawyer and I do not have all the facts about the stolen iPhone, but I'm not going to let that stop me from passing judgement on this case.
Background
================
As you all know, Gawker Media which publishes the gadget blog Gizmodo.com, recently bought a lost iPhone prototype for $5,000. The police have started an investigation into the case, which so far has included a raid on Gizmodo blogger Jason Chen's home resulting in the confiscation of his computers. Gawker Media is claiming that Jason is protected under the journalist shield laws and everyone is debating exactly the wrong issue: the legal ones.
Now, I know Nick Denton very well and consider him a friend. We were vicious competitors when my company Weblogs Inc battled his Gawker Media--a battle that resulted in our gadget site Engadget decimating Gizmodo in the rankings since inception. I'm told that despite Denton's best efforts and false claims, Gizmodo has never caught the Engadget.
Bottom line: I think Nick is a publishing genius and I've enjoyed our stolen moments, and the fine meals we've shared in Aspen, Los Angeles and New York over the last few years.
Of course, I'm saying all of those nice things about Nick because I'm about to trash him.
Reality Check
================
The fact that we're even debating a very simple case like this shows exactly how entitled and misguided our world has become. This is all very simple, so let's see if we can sum it up in ten points or less and get back to work shall we?
1. You can not knowingly traffic in stolen or "found" goods. It is unethical and illegal. When you find a phone in a bar you give it to the bartender. You do not try and sell it for 10x it's value. If you do, you are a scumbag and a criminal.
2. If someone offers you a pile of cash for an item you found, and that you know is not yours, than you are a thief. A criminal. That's it--there is no further discussion.
3. If you disagree with #2, then let me take your little brain through a bigger and illuminating example (That's what we do with dumb people--or children--when they are confused: you make something bigger so they can understand it!).
You see a silver Mercedes parked in front of your house. There are keys in it. You get in the car and see that it has a bunch of new features that the standard Mercedes you drive lacks. Oh, and it belongs to someone named Dieter Zetsche. You take the car and drive it home, then call automotive magazines and offer to sell this prototype you found, and know the owner of, for 10x the street value of the car (say, $1M). What are you now? Yes, a criminal! Whether the item is worth $600 or $60,000 is not relevant.
4. If you offer to pay someone for stolen goods you are, well, a criminal (or, if you prefer, a fence, as Loren Feldman pointed out in his excellent video on the subject (http://bit.ly/aouSzB). A fence is someone who buys stolen goods for resale later. In this case the later resale is page views and more importantly inbound links, which considering the SEO value makes the $5,000 at a heck of a bargin. Gizmodo and Gawker have made $10M worth of media on this--literally. If you even could buy the air time on TV, radio and the print space they've gotten it would cost tens of millions of dollars. Nick Denton is a genius who knows this--and that is why he did this.
5. I don't know Jason Chen, but based on his behavior he is either really stupid or naive. Jason, you got some really bad legal advice from Nick Denton when he told you that there was nothing to worry about. Nick Denton's publishing model has always been to hire young kids and get them to do stupid things on his behalf for the chance at a low paying job and a nice resume building gig. Getting a blogger to traffick in stolen goods is his greatest accomplishment to date, but on a regular basis he gets kids to attack and try to destroy people on his behest on a regular basis--all in the name of traffic (and sometimes his own personal politics and sense of justice). Sometimes these people deserve it and sometimes the facts are correct. Many times they don't and they're not.
6. Using the journalist shield laws to traffic in known stolen goods is really lame. Those laws were setup to protect journalists doing really important work--not for profiteering. If Denton is allowed to abuse these laws then get ready for a free-for-all as TMZ journalists start breaking into Nick Denton's SoHo loft to raid his collection of home made, HD quality sex tapes. Note: I don't know that Denton has a collection of HD quality sex tapes--but I don't know that he doesn't! See what I did right there by saying "I don't know, but I don't not know?" That's called CYA journalism right there baby... do whatever the f- you want!!! Yeah bitches!!! Free for all journalism FTW!
7. The police raiding a bloggers house over a phone that is coming out in six weeks is, on the surface, equally lame. Do the police really need to raid his home when he is not there? Can't you simply subpoena his records? Then again, if we blow this up to the stolen Mercedes example, or perhaps a stolen billion-dollar cancer drug being worked on by a pharmaceutical company, would it seem as extreme? Anyway, it's lame. These cops are from a sleepy town and this is their Columbo moment, so I guess we have to let them have it. But breaking a blogger's door down? Really? Come on.
8. Steve Jobs is responsible for all this. He created an environment where consumers and bloggers are on tilt, desperatly trying to get a few crumbs of information about his amazing new products. Jobs will go down in history as the greatest marketer of all time.
9. If you are a journalist and you found the phone, played with it and wrote a story about the experience before giving it back to Apple that would be OK. On an ethical basis you could debate the issue of taking the high road and returning it without covering the details of it, but that's a personal style issue in my mind. You find something and write about the experience there is no issue. That is NOT what happened here.
10. If this was a case of buying stolen or found prison photos from Abu Ghraib, and there was a societal benefit to the release of those photos, people would be forgiven. In fact, if there were photos of Abu Ghraib in someone's private residence or a company and a journalist broke in to get those photos society might actually forgive them. In this case, you don't get any wiggle room because getting society the details of the iPhone's upcoming features--that were in Nokia phones from two years ago--does nothing to help society or cure some injustice. If you think Gawker solved some huge injustice here you need your head examined.
In summary:
a) Gawker/Nick Denton = guilty
b) Jason Chen = guilty (of being gullible)
c) iPhone seller = guilty
d) Using Shield Law defense = lame
e) Gestapo Cops = very lame
Bottom line: What is wrong with the world that we're obsessed with the lame features in the next iPhone--"OMG!!! it's got a camera on the front and the back!!!"--when we're still occupying two countries in the Middle East, unemployment is cresting at known civil unrest levels and Goldman Sachs raped and pillaged our Union, then GOT BAILED OUT for doing so with the help of dopey President Obama whose trusted advisors are--wait for it--Goldman alumni!
Rome is burning while Denton and Jobs are running the Colosseum.
panem et circenses
-----------------
Jason Nation mailing list: www.jasonnation.com to singup or sign off.
If you have a problem unsubscribing email unsubscribe@calacanis.com
Jason McCabe Calacanis
902 Colorado Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90401
--
---------------------
Jason McCabe Calacanis
CEO, http://www.Mahalo.com
Office: 310-593-6134 / Mobile: 310-456-4900
Blog: http://www.calacanis.com
Mailing list: http://bit.ly/jasonslist
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jason
AOL IM/Skype: jasoncalacanis
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$6 Answers
"I have an iPad" really. I bought it.
I know this discussion is on the iPhone but this discussion is reminiscent of the "I have an iPad" farce displayed by you a few months ago.. except yours was ACTUALLY funny and NOT illegal.. just a good time prank that was well played and duped a nation.
I think it is funny how all of this is taken so seriously. I know the legal issues are real but this entire story seems like a Geek Squad Jerry Springer episode. I lost interest before this story even started and nearly vomited with disgust as it snowballed into "La cirque"
"Here at Apple we like to think we are giving customers features they do not even know they need yet"
"Nothing is more simple that one giant button"
"i'll buy anything if its shiny and made by Apple"
Steve .. Mr. Jobs ...you sir are brilliant.
I know this discussion is on the iPhone but this discussion is reminiscent of the "I have an iPad" farce displayed by you a few months ago.. except yours was ACTUALLY funny and NOT illegal.. just a good time prank that was well played and duped a nation.
I think it is funny how all of this is taken so seriously. I know the legal issues are real but this entire story seems like a Geek Squad Jerry Springer episode. I lost interest before this story even started and nearly vomited with disgust as it snowballed into "La cirque"
"Here at Apple we like to think we are giving customers features they do not even know they need yet"
"Nothing is more simple that one giant button"
"i'll buy anything if its shiny and made by Apple"
Steve .. Mr. Jobs ...you sir are brilliant.
videos:
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Report Abuse
I am 95% in agreement here.
I am going to start at the end because that is the only place that I really disagree.
While the whole Gestapo cops thing is extremely lame, I can see why Apple is not taking it lightly. Now cops and Apple are two different things, but with Apple's role in helping set up the unit in question, I would be very surprised if they did not release the hounds.
They are not doing it simply for the deterrence factor, they are doing it because not doing anything would make it open season on Apple every time they come up with something new. Their technology was stolen and used to make a lot of money. If people see a good risk vs. reward ratio in there, you can bet that a lot more people will start trying it. For Apple that would be really, really bad news.
So they released the hounds, that is the only thing that would explain what happened. If my cell phone were stolen, the police wouldn't be kicking in any doors to find out who did it - I would probably just be told to be more careful in the future and that would be the end of it.
If you ask me, it was the only thing that they could do.
---
Now that shield law defense thing, I must agree that it is lame, very lame in fact. As far as I am aware, being a journalist does not entitle one to commit crime; otherwise journalists would be able to bury bodies in their backyards, set up meth labs in their houses and traffic in stolen goods with impunity. The very suggestion that shield laws can make a journalist's home off limits when police are investigating a crime is absurd.
---
---
Regarding the thief - I liked your car analogy. I used a similar one myself before I read your question. Stealing is stealing, it doesn't matter if it is a million bucks, 600 bucks or 6 bucks. The phone was stolen and the thief do all that he could to find the rightful owner. When you find something that doesn't belong to you, that is what you should be doing - not contacting unscrupulous tech blogs to make $5000.
----
Which brings us to Mr. Chen. He is an extremely good writer, but his actions in this case demonstrated some dangerous naivety. Not that I am encouraging crime, but if you are going to engage in it, you have to make sure that the risk is worth the reward. For all the money his move made Gawker, I doubt Chen saw too much return. He was taking all of the risks and Denton was making all of the money. The Chief Operating Officer of Gawker doesn't cut it as legal counsel as far as I am afraid, regardless of whether the person has a law degree. He was advised by someone who had his boss's interests at heart - exactly the wrong sort of person to be handling his legal affairs.
---
And last but not least, Denton. I don't know him and have never met him. I made a bit of money off the guy once for a couple of weeks of extremely stressful work a year or so ago, but that is it.
If Chen forked over $5000, it almost certainly wasn't his own money. More than likely the cash was fronted by someone near the top; whether that was the top of Gizmodo or the top of Gawker is not clear. A blogger doesn't part with that much money for a story at someone else's blog, it doesn't matter how big it is.
So it would seem that the story was given the green light by somebody, whether that was Denton or someone else is not clear. Given the risk, and the money involved, chances are that discussions made it to the top... (just Cing my A).
If he used Chen as a pawn in all of this, then it was far more ethically questionable move than simply buying a stolen phone and taking pictures of it.
But yeah, it is just a phone.
I am going to start at the end because that is the only place that I really disagree.
While the whole Gestapo cops thing is extremely lame, I can see why Apple is not taking it lightly. Now cops and Apple are two different things, but with Apple's role in helping set up the unit in question, I would be very surprised if they did not release the hounds.
They are not doing it simply for the deterrence factor, they are doing it because not doing anything would make it open season on Apple every time they come up with something new. Their technology was stolen and used to make a lot of money. If people see a good risk vs. reward ratio in there, you can bet that a lot more people will start trying it. For Apple that would be really, really bad news.
So they released the hounds, that is the only thing that would explain what happened. If my cell phone were stolen, the police wouldn't be kicking in any doors to find out who did it - I would probably just be told to be more careful in the future and that would be the end of it.
If you ask me, it was the only thing that they could do.
---
Now that shield law defense thing, I must agree that it is lame, very lame in fact. As far as I am aware, being a journalist does not entitle one to commit crime; otherwise journalists would be able to bury bodies in their backyards, set up meth labs in their houses and traffic in stolen goods with impunity. The very suggestion that shield laws can make a journalist's home off limits when police are investigating a crime is absurd.
---
---
Regarding the thief - I liked your car analogy. I used a similar one myself before I read your question. Stealing is stealing, it doesn't matter if it is a million bucks, 600 bucks or 6 bucks. The phone was stolen and the thief do all that he could to find the rightful owner. When you find something that doesn't belong to you, that is what you should be doing - not contacting unscrupulous tech blogs to make $5000.
----
Which brings us to Mr. Chen. He is an extremely good writer, but his actions in this case demonstrated some dangerous naivety. Not that I am encouraging crime, but if you are going to engage in it, you have to make sure that the risk is worth the reward. For all the money his move made Gawker, I doubt Chen saw too much return. He was taking all of the risks and Denton was making all of the money. The Chief Operating Officer of Gawker doesn't cut it as legal counsel as far as I am afraid, regardless of whether the person has a law degree. He was advised by someone who had his boss's interests at heart - exactly the wrong sort of person to be handling his legal affairs.
---
And last but not least, Denton. I don't know him and have never met him. I made a bit of money off the guy once for a couple of weeks of extremely stressful work a year or so ago, but that is it.
If Chen forked over $5000, it almost certainly wasn't his own money. More than likely the cash was fronted by someone near the top; whether that was the top of Gizmodo or the top of Gawker is not clear. A blogger doesn't part with that much money for a story at someone else's blog, it doesn't matter how big it is.
So it would seem that the story was given the green light by somebody, whether that was Denton or someone else is not clear. Given the risk, and the money involved, chances are that discussions made it to the top... (just Cing my A).
If he used Chen as a pawn in all of this, then it was far more ethically questionable move than simply buying a stolen phone and taking pictures of it.
But yeah, it is just a phone.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Jason, this is my favorite line in the entire email, because it's exactly what any sober or hammered person would do in reality, it's the root of the whole dirty dandylion: "When you find a phone in a bar you give it to the bartender".
I was commenting, every time there was a lame 'update' to the iphone Gizmodo article(s), while Gizmodo was scrambling for attention and at the same time, trying desperately to justify theft for their readers and advertisers.
None of my posts bubbled up to the comments page, but I'm sure I contributed a couple posts of the 6000 a day.
This was on the day they told the bar story.. "So a guy walks into a bar and.."
I was commenting, every time there was a lame 'update' to the iphone Gizmodo article(s), while Gizmodo was scrambling for attention and at the same time, trying desperately to justify theft for their readers and advertisers.
None of my posts bubbled up to the comments page, but I'm sure I contributed a couple posts of the 6000 a day.
This was on the day they told the bar story.. "So a guy walks into a bar and.."
images:
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
The worst part of this whole post is the title. Why is this the "official verdict"? At least qualify it as Jason Calacanis's official verdict.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
If you're going to make factual statements about politics you should do a little more research. The bank bailout, "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008", Public Law 110-343, division A. This law creates the "Troubled Asset Relief Program" aka TARP.
This law was signed by *President Bush* on October 3, 2008. Obama did not take office until over a year later.
What President Obama signed was the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009", Public law 111-5, which is does not bail out banks.
This law was signed by *President Bush* on October 3, 2008. Obama did not take office until over a year later.
What President Obama signed was the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009", Public law 111-5, which is does not bail out banks.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
I'm sure above there are some excellent points about politics.. but whoever created the acronym TARP is actually the best marketer in the world.
Sounds like a metaphor for 'giant band-aid solution' to hold things together.. as a layman reading it, somehow I trust it without understanding a thing..yea, just throw a TARP on it, it'll hold things down, whatever it is.
Re: "Obama did not take office until over a year later. "
Reality check: Obama took office Jan 20, 2009. That's only 3 months later. He worked closely with Bush on the bailout (he expanded it by $350B at Obama's request). Furthermore, Obama was a sitting US Senator at the time of the bailout passage (he voted "Aye" on TARP aka H. R. 1424). He is equally culpable if not more since he was not only in favor of the bailout, but he also presided over the implementation for a much longer period of time than Bush.
Report Abuse
The wrong with the world is that the American consuming public has been led to believe that the economy is now returning to normalcy and it is being urged to go back to the buying binge in order to pay the trillion deficits that has morphed into an uncontrollable figures. Fortunately, President Obama has been assisted by Steve Jobs persistent introduction of new products that is way to expensive for ordinary consumers.
With regards to Iraq and Afghanistan, as long as the casualties are minimal, the government will always say America is winning. President Obama recently has just admitted that he has been too immersed in Washington and Health Care Reform that he lost touch with main street and the important thing is jobs, jobs and more jobs....
As for Goldman Sachs recent hearing with Congress, they forgot the reason why the executives were called. The most they should have admitted is that they lost the moral obligation to admit that what they did was unethical and failed to disclose to their client the complexities of their investments.
The hidden agenda here is that the Federal Government is more concerned with Wall Street than main street, since if business fails the Chinese will not lend America any money.
And finally, I agree with all of your verdict of Guilty on all accounts and all of the accused. Stealing or in any other terms or form is always 'stealing' and it is very, very wrong. And I will never be obsessed with an iPhone or any Apple products. What is important to me, is a mobile phone that can call and text.
With regards to Iraq and Afghanistan, as long as the casualties are minimal, the government will always say America is winning. President Obama recently has just admitted that he has been too immersed in Washington and Health Care Reform that he lost touch with main street and the important thing is jobs, jobs and more jobs....
As for Goldman Sachs recent hearing with Congress, they forgot the reason why the executives were called. The most they should have admitted is that they lost the moral obligation to admit that what they did was unethical and failed to disclose to their client the complexities of their investments.
The hidden agenda here is that the Federal Government is more concerned with Wall Street than main street, since if business fails the Chinese will not lend America any money.
And finally, I agree with all of your verdict of Guilty on all accounts and all of the accused. Stealing or in any other terms or form is always 'stealing' and it is very, very wrong. And I will never be obsessed with an iPhone or any Apple products. What is important to me, is a mobile phone that can call and text.
source(s):
Personal opinion.
Personal opinion.
images:
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
