Gizmodo Avoids Indictment in iPhone Prototype Scandal

Prosecutors say there was not enough evidence to charge the tech blog or its editor.

Published on Feb. 22, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The 2010 investigation into how the tech blog Gizmodo obtained an unreleased iPhone prototype has concluded, with no criminal charges filed against the publication or its editor Jason Chen. San Mateo County District Attorney Steven Wagstaffe stated that while the correspondence between Gizmodo editors was "juvenile," there was insufficient evidence to support charges of possessing stolen property or extortion.

Why it matters

The Gizmodo iPhone prototype case raised questions about media rights, the limits of journalism, and how tech companies should respond when unreleased products are obtained. The decision not to indict Gizmodo sets a precedent that may influence how similar cases are handled in the future.

The details

In 2010, Gizmodo obtained and published details about an unreleased iPhone prototype that had been left in a bar. This led to a police raid on Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home and a lengthy investigation. Prosecutors ultimately determined there was not enough evidence to charge Chen or anyone else at Gizmodo with crimes like possessing stolen property or extortion, despite characterizing the blog's internal communications as "juvenile."

  • The investigation into the Gizmodo iPhone prototype case began in 2010 after the blog published details about the unreleased device.
  • On October 12, 2011, San Mateo County District Attorney Steven Wagstaffe announced that no charges would be filed against Gizmodo or its staff.

The players

Gizmodo

A popular technology blog that published details about an unreleased iPhone prototype in 2010, leading to a high-profile investigation.

Jason Chen

The Gizmodo editor whose home was raided by police as part of the investigation into the iPhone prototype case.

Steven Wagstaffe

The San Mateo County District Attorney who decided not to file criminal charges against Gizmodo or its staff despite the juvenile nature of their internal communications.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“What we were looking at was possession of stolen property and whether the evidence supported extortion. You can say we were looking at whether their actions supported that they participated in the theft of the phone. We didn't think it supported either.”

— Steven Wagstaffe, San Mateo County District Attorney (CNET)

The takeaway

The decision not to indict Gizmodo in the iPhone prototype case highlights the challenges prosecutors face in determining when media outlets have crossed legal lines in their reporting, even when their actions may be considered unethical or immature. This case could influence how similar situations are handled in the future as technology companies and journalists navigate the boundaries of intellectual property and press freedoms.