There may also be a distinction between what is allowed by journalistic standards and what is allowed by the law. There are things that may be allowed by journalistic standards by not allowed by the law, and vice versa. Just because it's ethical doesn't mean it's legal, and just because it's legal doesn't mean it's ethical.

I guess, as a journalist, if you think you are within the bounds of journalistic standards but outside the letter of the law, perhaps you do bend/break the law for the story, but with the understanding that you might face prosecution (and hope for a sympathetic jury)

In this case, where an organization is making no qualms about the fact that laws were broken to obtain the information, it seems that they're asking for trouble be retaining and using the information. In additional to criminal charges, there is the very real possibility of a civil lawsuit. Civil lawsuits have a lower burden on the plaintiff (preponderance of the evidence vs. beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal trial)