Slashdot Mirror

In TFA, they are complaining that the sheriff isn't doing anything about their $4000 drone getting shot down.

Maybe the officers are being generous, and considering $4000 in damage a painful enough lesson. After all, they *could* just arrest them for interfering with a legal hunt.

"Do you have a citation for that?"

He doesn't, but I do:

Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes. Title 34 Pa.C.S.A. Game. Chapter 23. Hunting and Furtaking. Subchapter A. General Provisions. Â 2302. Interference with lawful taking of wildlife or other activities permitted by this title prohibited

Citation: PA ST 34 Pa.C.S.A. Â 2302

Summary: This reflects Pennsylvania's hunter harassment law. It is unlawful for another person at the location where the activity is taking place to intentionally obstruct or interfere with the lawful taking of wildlife or other activities permitted by this title. Activities prohibited by this law include: driving or disturbing wildlife for the purpose of disrupting the lawful taking of wildlife; blocking, impeding or harassing a person engaged in lawful taking; using various stimuli to affect wildlife behavior to hinder lawful taking; and interjecting oneself into the line of fire, among other activities. Violation of this section is a summary offense of the second degree. A person adversely affected by prohibited activities may bring an action to restrain such conduct and to recover damages.

Never mind the lettuce, what about the cows?

Fuck the cows (no, not like that... well, not unless the cow likes it); what about grass, man?!

:p

Maybe not in common law, but California State Law is pretty clear on the matter. If you find lost property, which the iPhone prototype was, you are duty bound to turn it in so it can be reunited with it's owner.

You're misinterpreting this a bit. You don't have an obligation to return an item that you find; you can always leave it where you found it. You are obligated to return the lost item only if you take it.

Informally put, the law codifies the idea that returning lost property to its owner is a favor that you can do them. But as such, the only things you can do with lost property are those that you can justify as helping the owner reclaim their property. So, for example, if you take a guy's lost phone to return it to them, you can inspect and operate the phone to identify the owner—and even call the owner using their own phone to tell them that you found it—but you can't use it to go on a 900 number phone sex orgy at the owner's expense.

Another example: you're generally forbidden to sell lost property, but there's an exception that if the property is perishable, you may sell it and later give the proceeds to the owner. Again, the reasoning is that selling the items before they spoil is in the interest of the owner, so you're doing them a favor by selling it on their behalf.

Maybe not in common law, but California State Law is pretty clear on the matter. If you find lost property, which the iPhone prototype was, you are duty bound to turn it in so it can be reunited with it's owner.

Also Ebony grows in the US, what do you think golf clubs were first made out of?

http://www.grownincalifornia.com/fruit-facts/persimmon-facts.html

Maybe Gibson's millionaire CEO should stop taking private jets to 3rd world countries trying to outsource every penny and start paying American lumberjacks. He might also want to pay and treat his employes better since Gibson has one of the worst employee ratings on glass door. In 2008, the company was the 5th worst company to work for by employee reviews.

http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Gibson-Guitar-Reviews-E6869.htm

FYI this law was made and passed by fellow Republicans, no liberals were involved, it follows a Republican ideology of national sovereignty and regulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Lacey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McKinley

And in '81, under a Republican controlled Senate and with a Republican President, Congress removed the heightened proof standard of "willfully" from the statute, making "knowingly" the standard. The amendments also allowed for warrantless arrest for felony violations under the Act and expansion of the role of federal wildlife agents. I would hardly call Senate Leader George Bush and President Ronald Reagan liberals.

http://www.animallaw.info/articles/ovuslaceyact.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/97th_United_States_Congress

Were this from the US, here's some wonderful perspective;

"The Lacey Act provides that it is unlawful for any person to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in violation of any Indian tribal law whether in interstate or foreign commerce..." Damn

Odds are good it wouldn't matter what you did or didn't say. We've elected reasons to find a way around your rights... or at least some hard working folks who... well, spend their time doing something.

Ignore me. I'm a silly little citizen.

Funny ho wyou asked for a source but then made a wild claim as to what the laws are in 30 states without a single source.

It's not a wild claim, and you dont need to quote everything when it can be easily verified true with a simple Google search.

California has a 90 day period, but it also requires that a found item valued over $100 must be turned over to the local police.

Heres a nice summary of all state lost and found laws, including California.: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/ovuslostdogpropertystatutes.htm

Almost nowhere are you required to report such things to the police. If you find an abandoned item, it's yours. Anything beyond that is good-Samaritan territory. Now if it's discovered in this case then you MAY have some legal recourse on getting the property returned to you, but you'll never - EVER be able to pen theft on anyone for not reporting it to the police.

Perhaps you don't live in the US, but your second sentence is simply not true at common law, and the first sentence isn't true by statute in many US states.

At the common law, you can claim an item if you find it, but your rights are only secure against everyone but the original owner. In many jurisdictions, if you know who the original owner is, then you are not a "finder," and keeping the item is just theft. Even if you don't know who owns the item, many jurisdictions hold that you have certain duties to the original owner until their claim is extinguished. You can't convert the item for your own use (e.g. by disassembling it), and you can't deliver the object to another but the original owner (e.g. by selling it to Gizmodo). It's not actually yours until the statute of limitations runs for the owner to bring suit against you to get the item back, and if the owner is able to prove their claim in the meantime, you have to give it back.

On top of that, over 20 states have laws requiring some additional duties by finders to report or return items. You can find a list here. Here's a few of examples:

• Connecticut. Must contact police within 48 hours and deliver to police within 7 days. Failure to do so can get you a $100 fine or 30 days in jail. Police keep the item for six months, and you have to pay for storage and efforts to contact the original owner to get it back.
• Florida. Must contact police (immediately?) and turn over the item to them if you want to make a claim with money up-front for the cops to store it. (You're reimbursed if by the true owner if they claim it.) The police hold onto it for 90 days before giving it to you.
• Missouri. Must swear an affidavit before a county judge within 10 days of finding the items telling when & where you found it, that you don't know the owner, and that you're reporting all of it. Appraisal by court-summoned community members and public notice is given. If no one claims it within 30 days, you have to run ads in the paper. Otherwise, it's yours after 180 days.
• Oregon. If you don't know who owns an item worth >$100, you have to turn it over to the county clerk within 10 days and post a notice within 20 days in a local newspaper once each week for two consecutive weeks. You own the item after 3 months. The statute is silent on what happens if you know the owner.
• Washington. Must turn over item to cops within 7 days. Only yours after 60 days. Item's owner must be unknown to claim; code is unclear about what happens when you know who owns it and they never claim it after the cops have it. Keeping an item w/o reporting or whose owner you know seems to be theft under criminal code.

I wondered the legality of this whole situation myself. As it turns out, the item would be considered "mislaid property" and what the person who found it was supposed to do was leave it with the property owner (the bar in this case) on the theory that the person would return to reclaim their mislaid item.

Given that this didn't transpire, the finder of mislaid items is the new owner, unless the original owner returns to claim it. The law also talks about the new finder making a "reasonable effort" to return the mislaid item.

The finder did apparently did try to contact Apple... but has since sold it to Gizmodo. Apple has made a formal demand for the property being returned to them, so it will be... but the damage has already been done, to an extent. I wonder if Apple has any recourse at all.

Here's the CA penal code on the matter: Lost and Unclaimed Property. Article 1. Lost Money and Goods.

I wondered the legality of this whole situation myself. As it turns out, the item would be considered "mislaid property" and what the person who found it was supposed to do was leave it with the property owner (the bar in this case) on the theory that the person would return to reclaim their mislaid item.

Given that this didn't transpire, the finder of mislaid items is the new owner, unless the original owner returns to claim it. The law also talks about the new finder making a "reasonable effort" to return the mislaid item.

The finder did apparently did try to contact Apple... but has since sold it to Gizmodo. Apple has made a formal demand for the property being returned to them, so it will be... but the damage has already been done, to an extent. I wonder if Apple has any recourse at all.

Here's the CA penal code on the matter: Lost and Unclaimed Property. Article 1. Lost Money and Goods.

Not in California:

http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stuscacalpencode598d.htm

Common law is that the finder of a lost item could claim the right to possess the item against any other person in the world except the true owner. If I find a phone on the street, it is mine unless someone who can prove ownership asks me for it. I am not obliged to look for them, and I am not obliged to return it in the absense of proof of their ownership.

60-01-34 Finder - Depositary for hire - Assumption of ownership by finder.
One who finds a thing lost is not bound to take charge of it but, if the person does so, the person is thenceforward a depositary for the owner with the rights and obligations of a depositary for hire. ...
60-01-35 Finder must notify owner.
If the finder of a thing knows or suspects who is the owner, the finder must give such owner notice of the finding with reasonable diligence. If the finder fails to do so, the finder is liable in damages to the owner and has no claim to any reward offered by the owner for the recovery of the thing nor to any compensation for the finder's trouble or expenses.
60-01-36 Finder may require proof of ownership.
The finder of a thing, before giving it up, may require in good faith, reasonable proof of ownership from any person claiming it.
60-01-37 Compensation and reward to finder.
The finder of a thing is entitled to compensation for all expenses necessarily incurred by the finder in its preservation and for any other services necessarily performed by the finder about it and to a reasonable reward for keeping it.
60-01-38 Storing releases finder from liability.
title tells all, no quote needed
60-01-39 When finder may sell.
The finder of a thing may sell it, if it is a thing which is commonly the subject of sale, when the owner, with reasonable diligence, cannot be found, or, being found, refuses upon demand to pay the lawful charges of the finder in the following cases:
1. When the thing is in danger of perishing or of losing the greater part of its value; or
2. When the lawful charges of the finder amount to two-thirds of its value.