I’m pretty sure that acquiring stolen goods is illegal. That being said, everyone involved in this knew from the get-go that the next gen iPhone, which is only a few weeks away, was indeed stolen. The fact of the matter is that Gizmodo spent $5,000 on this phone, paid by Nick Denton from Gawker media. In essence, at the end of the line, Denton’s the one responsible for this fiasco.
Now this brings to surface another interesting debate: are web-journalists real journalists? The print media would like to disagree, but all in all, I’m certain that if you write for a publication and get paid for your writing, you are a journalist, no matter what the medium might be.
The thing that Jason Chen and Nick Denton didn’t really think about is the fact that Apple isn’t a cuddly little bear, it’s a corporation. Any corporation has access to a full squad of corporate lawyers, meaning that they can make your life hell if you are in their radar.
Having dealt with a few lawyers when I was working in finance a few years ago, I know for a fact that justice is for sale and the people with the deepest pockets tend to win. How does an average citizen afford to pay a lawyer $100-500 an hour? Not easily. Corporations don’t really care about this expenditure. I’m actually surprised that Apple hasn’t made life harder for Denton and company. They probably will in the near future.
I think the main issue here is whether the law considers Jason Chen’s home a newsroom or not. He works from home, like most web journalists. It would be different if he were to work in an office. That would have made things harder for Apple to flex its muscles.
I’ve heard people refer to the actions of Gizmodo as reprehensible. Even though I don’t agree with buying stolen goods, it is akin to someone buying something stolen from a fence. So Gizmodo isn’t a fence, but they bought stolen goods, which is kind of like buying stuff from a fence. They weren’t fencing stolen goods.
No matter which way it goes, I’m sure that Denton is quite happy with himself. What did this fiasco generate? Pageviews. In the world of web journalism, pageviews is the key. This episode has probably resulted in millions of extra pageviews. Since most Gawker bloggers get paid by pageviews, I’m sure that Jason Chen is laughing his way to the bank as well.
I found it surprisingly compelling. Unlike most reviews, it doesn’t go on about the iPad tech specs. It focuses on places and reasons where you could actually use the device successfully. The verdict? Medium-ish. The review has some great photos of the device, taken with a Canon 1D.
Cooking without appliances is one thing, but we never imagined using a coffeemaker for anything else but making coffee. But apparently you can do loads of things with it, like poaching chicken with couscous. We’re actually quite serious, but even to the most accepting, this sounds like a ludicrous claim…
I’ve been searching for a full review on this beast, and finally Gizmama delivers. The only negative point is the fact that they managed to get between 4 and 5 hours out of the battery, that was supposed to deliver 7 to 8 hours of autonomy. Does that make you reconsider or do you still lust after this hulking beast? I know that I dreamt about having it…