For the tl;dr crowd:<p>The opening:<p><i>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.</i><p>The end:<p><i>In summary:<p>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 </i>
Others (e.g., techcrunch.com) have said that they would have published about the iPhone prototype but not have paid for it. This wouldn't make any difference. The California statute includes buying, acquiring, POSSESSING, or Concealing stolen property a crime. Money need not have changed hands, at all.
Isn't a "leak" technically also stolen information? Someone decides to give out information that is meant to be private.<p>And Jason, you would have <i>really</i> turned down this opportunity if it knocked on your door while you were running Weblogs?