Computers Seized From Home of Blogger in iPhone Inquiry
By BRIAN STELTER and NICK BILTON
NYT
Gawker Media said Monday that computers belonging to one of its editors, Jason Chen, were seized from his home on Friday in an apparent investigation into the sale of a next-generation Apple iPhone. Gawker suggested the action violated California’s shield law for journalists.
The technology blog Gizmodo, which Gawker owns, published articles last week about the phone after buying the device for $5,000 from a person who, according to the site, found it at a bar in California last month.
The authorities in San Mateo County are considering criminal charges in connection with the sale of the phone, which Gizmodo returned to Apple last week. Some media writers have said that Gawker Media could find itself in legal trouble if the phone was classified as stolen.
Last week, people familiar with the investigation said charges would most likely be filed against the person or people who sold the prototype iPhone, and possibly the buyer. The people were not authorized by their employers to speak on the record.
(More here.)
NYT
Gawker Media said Monday that computers belonging to one of its editors, Jason Chen, were seized from his home on Friday in an apparent investigation into the sale of a next-generation Apple iPhone. Gawker suggested the action violated California’s shield law for journalists.
The technology blog Gizmodo, which Gawker owns, published articles last week about the phone after buying the device for $5,000 from a person who, according to the site, found it at a bar in California last month.
The authorities in San Mateo County are considering criminal charges in connection with the sale of the phone, which Gizmodo returned to Apple last week. Some media writers have said that Gawker Media could find itself in legal trouble if the phone was classified as stolen.
Last week, people familiar with the investigation said charges would most likely be filed against the person or people who sold the prototype iPhone, and possibly the buyer. The people were not authorized by their employers to speak on the record.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home