I don't think the legal intricacies are that complicated, though lawyers will undoubtedly make them so before this hits the courts.
The phone was not the finder's to sell. AFAIK, finders keepers is not a legal defence. Gizmodo must have known they were buying hot property - they didn't buy it from the owner and they paid far more than the going rate for smart phones.
The phone was not the finder's to sell. AFAIK, finders keepers is not a legal defence. Gizmodo must have known they were buying hot property - they didn't buy it from the owner and they paid far more than the going rate for smart phones.
Draw your own conclusions.