Question to the left, should Apple follow the law?

[pt0217]

I'm wondering what those on the left of this site are thinking on this issue? Should Apple follow the law and do what the court order says, or is it ok to ignore it?

[diplomat019]

How Is this a left issue? Judt curious

[Tacti_Steve]

They should not ignore it but they should follow the process to appeal it. I for one don't have anything to hide and still load custom roms on my phones to avoid as much government and Google tracking as I can. If it doesn't do anything it at least makes me feel better. If I built a homemade PC and installed windows on it and set it so if you entered the password too many times it exploded Microsoft wouldn't be called in to hack my system. Terrorism or not some people just don't want the govt in their stuff. The FBI should be using their own resources and if they can't do it move on or hire better people. 

[ants]

I think, what Apple is being told, is not to just give away the technology, to get into just that one phone, but to give away the technology to get into all the phones they have made and will ever make.

[pt0217]

How Is this a left issue? Judt curious

Not saying it's a "left issue". I think this case creates a great opportunity to debate whether or not the law is over stepping. Many of the lefties on this site have been very critical of others that have challenged the law.

[diplomat019]

Got ya.

[hunterman7956]

This falls into the catagory of the greater good .if the purpose is to backdoor then no , but if it is for the UNITED STATES security then yes .p.s. I am a hawk as far right as can be .

Edited February 22, 2016 by hunterman7956

[philoshop]

"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

If the FBI is actually incapable of retrieving information from this phone, maybe they should focus more on not letting these a***oles into our country to begin with. A thorough investigation of the Obama/Jarret agenda would likely obviate the need for trying to screw with The People in a Free-market economy.

[The_Field_Ager]

This story is a farce when one considers the 10s of thousands of unvetted 'refugees' that are being bused into the country, and the Islamic supremacist compounds that are allowed to operate across the nation.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Papist

[nyslowhand]

Back to the OP... I can see both Apple's & the Fed's side of this issue. Govt want to find out if there was any facilitating or funding involved in the Calif terrorist attacks. Apple doesn't want to simply hand over there proprietary technology, thinking it could be used in future situations. Or... it might cost Apple $M to redevelop their encrypting technology, which surely would be passed on to future I-phone costs.

 

I'm no rocket scientist, but it appears clear to me that they (both) should stop the pissing match and simply hand over the phone(s) to Apple and let them tell the Feds what they found! TOO simple..?

[Curmudgeon]

Left-right? This is a civil liberties issue that goes beyond political leanings. Anyway, the lefties on this site are so middle-of-the-road real lefties wouldn't tolerate their company.

[philoshop]

Back to the OP... I can see both Apple's & the Fed's side of this issue. Govt want to find out if there was any facilitating or funding involved in the Calif terrorist attacks. Apple doesn't want to simply hand over there proprietary technology, thinking it could be used in future situations. Or... it might cost Apple $M to redevelop their encrypting technology, which surely would be passed on to future I-phone costs.

 

I'm no rocket scientist, but it appears clear to me that they (both) should stop the pissing match and simply hand over the phone(s) to Apple and let them tell the Feds what they found! TOO simple..?

 

The problem with having Apple or someone else simply extracting the information for the FBI is 'chain of evidence' if there is information that could be used to build a future case. Unless the FBI does it, it's considered 'hearsay' and is not admissible in court.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

The Feds, should have just called China. They would be in the phone in about 2 hours. 

[Black Bellamy]

This has nothing with Apple following "the law".  There is NO LAW that says Apple has to do anything.

 

The only thing that exists is a court order.

 

Court orders are fought all the time.

 

When the court orders you to pay twenty billion dollars a month to your ex-wife, that's not the law, that's just a court order.  So you hire a lawyer and you challenge the order because you don't like it.    Then the order is modified, or it's not, or it's withdrawn, or whatever.   The point is that every year there are millions of court orders, and the same court orders are challenged left and right by people who disagree.

 

So your question should be "Should Apple lay down and accept the court order as is or should they hire Ted Olson to challenge it?"

 

What do you think?  What should ANY BUSINESS do when presented with a court order they don't like?

[Tacti_Steve]

The problem with having Apple or someone else simply extracting the information for the FBI is 'chain of evidence' if there is information that could be used to build a future case. Unless the FBI does it, it's considered 'hearsay' and is not admissible in court.

That's not entirely true. First they're not asking Apple to take any information off of the phone. They're just asking them to disable the auto destruct so they can unlock it. Apple therefore hasn't touched the data. Secondly if an FBI involved process is strictly adhered to then it is admissible. Law enforcement uses outside contractors all the time. There just needs to be documented procedures to prove it wasn't tampered with. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

This has nothing with Apple following "the law". There is NO LAW that says Apple has to do anything.

The only thing that exists is a court order.

Court orders are fought all the time.

When the court orders you to pay twenty billion dollars a month to your ex-wife, that's not the law, that's just a court order. So you hire a lawyer and you challenge the order because you don't like it. Then the order is modified, or it's not, or it's withdrawn, or whatever. The point is that every year there are millions of court orders, and the same court orders are challenged left and right by people who disagree.

So your question should be "Should Apple lay down and accept the court order as is or should they hire Ted Olson to challenge it?"

What do you think? What should ANY BUSINESS do when presented with a court order they don't like?

Agreed. I obviously don't know all the details. I can't see the government asking for a backdoort to every phone but if I had control of Apple it would have been a closed door meeting. For obvious national security reasons I have to believe Apple could have given them the contents of that phone. They sell them world wide and I have to believe that if China ordered the contents be turned over it would have been.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Uptown Redneck]

I side with Apple and personal privacy. In my eyes the Feds are simply on a "fishing trip", hoping that the phone belonged to a terrorist would dampen any cries about invasion of privacy. In no way should Apple submit. Besides we all know that the government has numerous ways of gathering information, Apple shouldn't be a part of the governments stripping its citizens of their civil liberties

[jrm]

How Is this a left issue? Judt curious

Very interesting comment. It bothers me that this has been turned into an party-line issue (in general - not singling out the OP).

I lean very right and was surprised to find out that I am apparently very "left" on this one. Of course, there are many conflicting "facts" out there and people are spinning the story in different directions. As I understand it, the feds want Apple to write and provide software that will enable the feds to hack the phone. Based on this, I have to side with Apple.

Edited February 23, 2016 by jrm

[Culvercreek hunt club]

As I understand it, the feds want Apple to write and provide software that will enable the feds to hack the phone. Based on this, I have to side with Apple.

That should never happen. Given the other countries where the IPhone is marketed, I would believe that the ability to get the data already exists. Turning over the contained data on THAT phone should have been no different than any other search warrant with cause. 

[philoshop]

That's not entirely true. First they're not asking Apple to take any information off of the phone. They're just asking them to disable the auto destruct so they can unlock it. Apple therefore hasn't touched the data. Secondly if an FBI involved process is strictly adhered to then it is admissible. Law enforcement uses outside contractors all the time. There just needs to be documented procedures to prove it wasn't tampered with. 

 

That's not entirely true. First they're not asking Apple to take any information off of the phone. They're just asking them to disable the auto destruct so they can unlock it. Apple therefore hasn't touched the data.

 

I haven't heard that extenuation. Provide a few details and maybe I'll take your word for it.

 

Secondly if an FBI involved process is strictly adhered to then it is admissible. Law enforcement uses outside contractors all the time.

 

I was unaware that Apple was considered a 'Government contractor' in a case such as this. Please, do explain the relationship between Apple and the government. It would be enlightening for many of us.

[pt0217]

Black Bellamy, I posed this question to the lefties on the site because I was curious if they felt Apple should ultimately ignore the courts and stand up for what they believe.

I feel this issue is interesting because it finds many on the right who scream about civil liberties, saying Apple should do what the government says.

The left on the other hand, when it comes to big business against the government will come down on the side of the government, looking out for what's good for the people.

I saw this issue as a time when people on the left may agree with people on the right.

[jrm]

That should never happen. Given the other countries where the IPhone is marketed, I would believe that the ability to get the data already exists. Turning over the contained data on THAT phone should have been no different than any other search warrant with cause.

Not sure about that. According to Apple, the ability to get the data does not exist. If it does, it is closely guarded secret among hackers. I'm not swearing that Apple is telling the truth, but not even the FBI is challenging them on that point... if there was another way to get the data, they probably would have used it already. Since the local government owns the phone and gave permission, it is not a question of legally accessing the data through a warrant. The FBI already has the legal ability to access the data through whatever means is can.

There is also the matter of the password change. Apparently, Apple could have and would have been able to assist with access. However, someone apparently changed the password after the fact and complicated the situation. I don't fully understand this as you normally have to know the old password to create a new one - and you should know the new one you created. Some stories have mentioned this as a change in user name. As is usually the case, news reporting is less than complete and often filled with errors.

If the courts are going to issues orders on this, they should prosecute the person who changed the password for tampering with evidence and obstruction.

If they were serving a proper warrant on Apple, I would agree that Apple should comply. However, they are asking Apple to create software that allows a third party to hack a phone through a brute force attack. By its very design, such software could be used on any phone at any time. Once it exists, then Apple would be legally bound to release that software to any government in any country it operates (thorough legal court orders in those countries). It the software doesn't exist, there is nothing to turn over.

Do we want China, Russia or Nigeria to have that software? Does anyone believe if those governments have such software it will be safe and not leaked?

Aside from the privacy issues at stake, there is another important point. A large part of Apple's success rests on the iPhone. One part of the device's popularity is that all your personal information is secure and encrypted. If they were compelled to create a method to defeat their own security, that puts them at a severe competitive disadvantage vs. Google, Microsoft and any other phone OS. One can argue the reality of it, but markets are based on public perception. If Apple is perceived as less secure because governments (and thieves, which are sometimes the same as governments) around the world now have to ability to break into your phone, they will lose market position. Can a court compel a company to invalidate one of its biggest (legal) selling points for one of its top products?

[pt0217]

Good points JRM. I think that gets to the heart of the issue. What is the downside to Apple complying? I'm sure one could think of endless possibilities.

[G-Man]

Personally, I think apple should unlock the phone. A terrorist attack , both attackers are dead. Maybe more conspirators can be found. I'm against giving the government a program , but no reason foe apple to not unlock the phone... who's privacy is invaded they are both dead...

[HuntOrBeHunted]

Being that Apple like all these other big timers is looking to protect their means of making all that money by not giving out anything they don't have to. I can't say that I would want to buy anything that coincides with apple if they gave them a backdoor to everything that happens on their product.