Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Files Official Motion to Vacate Court Order, Says FBI Seeks 'Dangerous Power'

CaTOAGU said:
This looks like a fairly strong argument to me.
Click to expand...

Yep..

Maybe Apple should have actually understood what they were saying before piling it all on to the the courts.

The NSA sweeps up data (and says it only looks at meta-data, ya right to make users easier)... From Apple's stand-point this would be against the law too.. Of course if you ask any Apple employee, they first response is "What the hell is the PRISM program?" Since its all done captured upstream... but this augment Apple is making to the courts kinda falls short of an iphone not being unlocked being "against the law"

This would mean i could buy an iphone, run a muck, and no one can stop me, from Apple's view point. Although i also see the other side as a compelling case too...

(sits down with popcorn "I think i'm gonna enjoy this one")
 
Last edited:
Candlelight said:
...Donald Trump will no doubt think of something...
Click to expand...

Yeah you butchered that by putting Trump and think in the same sentence.

The rest of the world though thinks its funny the US may vote in a president who is not welcome anywhere else in the world, and we all want to see his face when he discovered that being president is not the same as being god and he is NOT omnipotent .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Candlelight
Tech198 said:
Yep..

Maybe Apple should have actually understood what they were saying before piling it all on to the the courts.

The NSA sweeps up data (and says it only looks at meta-data, ya right to make users easier)... From Apple's stand-point this would be against the law too.. Of course if you ask any Apple employee, they first response is "What the hell is the PRISM program?" Since its all done captured upstream... but this augment Apple is making to the courts kinda falls short of an iphone not being unlocked being "against the law"

This would mean i could buy an iphone, run a muck, and no one can stop me, from Apple's view point. Although i also see the other side as a compelling case too...
Click to expand...

The purpose of the constitution isn't to make life easy for the FBI. The CELEA act 1994 does not authorise Law enforcement agencies to do what the FBI wants here. Many terrorist acts have been prevented without this kind of power in the past. If the FBI did have is power and another terrorist act was committed what rights would you suggest we give up next? Bare in mind there is no such thing as complete safety.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672 and spinnyd
This case could take years to get through the system. It would be good if Apple worked overtime to get their new encryption OS done, so that if they were to lose the case, there would be no way for them to brute force the phone.
[doublepost=1456445415][/doublepost]
usarioclave said:
Does filing a motion to dismiss automatically cut off other avenues of appeal if the motion is denied?
Click to expand...
No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
There should be a way for Apple to get into a phone if need be.
I think the Government needs to be able to get information from terrorists and Apple is going to lose this PR war, IMO
 
If I were the FBI, I'd fold right about now before I get even more embarrassed. Apple's got a strong hand and a darn good poker demeanor by the looks of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SantaFeNM
\-V-/ said:
I love that so many people can just carelessly label their Constitutional privacy as a "PR stunt" ... very encouraging to see so many people just plain not care what this whole ordeal could mean to them ... to the world.
Click to expand...
Playing devil's advocate for a moment...By all accounts, the phone of the deceased was the property of the state. With said ownership of the phone, did the deceased have an 'expectation of privacy' ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tuxon86
steve333 said:
There should be a way for Apple to get into a phone if need be.
I think the Government needs to be able to get information from terrorists and Apple is going to lose this PR war, IMO
Click to expand...
That isn't the issue here ... because this isn't what the FBI is requesting Apple do. What they're requesting will put half a billion iPhone users' privacy at stake by creating a tool for the FBI that can break through the phone's passcode limitations ... a tool that will inevitably reach people that you very much do not want it to. If the FBI was simply requesting a partnership in which they could have Apple decrypt the data for them ... instead of giving them this tool and a ridiculously vulnerable version of iOS ... that would be a different matter. The problem is not Apple ... it's the FBI's idiotic request to put us all at risk because they want to do whatever they want with any phone they get. You people scare me, truly.


BasicGreatGuy said:
Playing devil's advocate for a moment...By all accounts, the phone of the deceased was the property of the state. With said ownership of the phone, did the deceased have an 'expectation of privacy' ?
Click to expand...
That is not the issue. And I'm not sure what he was expecting when he chose to be a terrorist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wondercow, spinnyd, St.John Smith and 1 other person
This is really a great message by Apple. Law makers should not be allowed to make up the rules as they go along. The people need to be prepared and be entitled to enter the debate around it. The problem the FBI have is that they know they are over powered by the want of the people for encryption. It's in fact what the second amendment in the US constitution was based on, protection from the government. Way to go Apple. A Goliath for the people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001, Wondercow, SantaFeNM and 1 other person
fitshaced said:
This is really a great message by Apple. Law makers should not be allowed to make up the rules as they go along. The people need to be prepared and be entitled to enter the debate around it. The problem the FBI have is that they know they are over powered by the want of the people for encryption. It's in fact what the second amendment in the US constitution was based on, protection from the government. Way to go Apple. A Goliath for the people.
Click to expand...
It's honestly refreshing to see Americans finally standing up for something big like this for a change. We've become extremely docile and careless as our rights are slowly being stripped away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pianophile, nt5672, dk001 and 5 others
\-V-/ said:
That isn't the issue here ... because this isn't what the FBI is requesting Apple do. What they're requesting will put half a billion iPhone users' privacy at stake by creating a tool for the FBI that can break through the phone's passcode limitations ... a tool that will inevitably reach people that you very much do not want it to. If the FBI was simply requesting a partnership in which they could have Apple decrypt the data for them ... instead of giving them this tool and a ridiculously vulnerable version of iOS ... that would be a different matter. The problem is not Apple ... it's the FBI's idiotic request to put us all at risk because they want to do whatever they want with any phone they get. You people scare me, truly.



That is not the issue. And I'm not sure what he was expecting when he chose to be a terrorist.
Click to expand...
I contend, that it is very much the issue at hand. While I stand with Apple's overall message on the matter, I don't think they have a very strong case. Tim has done a good job of appealing to emotion. I think Apple's case against would be much stronger if said phone was not the property of the state.
 
apolloa said:
Why is it only 'American' corporations supporting this stance?

Apple are very much playing this as some sort of PR stunt as well to advertise they are going to make uncrackable devices, they are on a marketing stint for sales.
But I have also read they do not have the full support of the American public, some accusing them of supporting terrorism.

I am pretty certain where this will all end up, but you carry on your wave of people power.

It's meaningless in the rest of the world anyway as I believe each country has different laws, pretty sure in the UK Cook would have been out in jail by now. So it is an interesting insight into American law.
Click to expand...


Its not just American corporations supporting them. Are you referencing that poll a few days ago where its almost a 50/50 split roughly?

Polling of the American people also not a good measure. See long ago when the buzzword was not terrorism but communism, many sheeple said please Mr. McCarthy and Hoover piss and crap all over my civil rights.

This is what sheeple do....buy the lines the government feeds out of ignorance. Or they do it out of fear. Had to agree with McCarthy....you were un-American otherwise and there was your name on the list too .

Years later not worried about the wrath of Hoover and McCarthy and realizing they were idiots (Spy 101.....blend in,) those polls changed and McCarthyism viewed as a bad spot in US history.

Now its new war on a new "ism" and the circle starts again.

Moral to this story....time changes polling validity.

Another moral is some Americans remember their history and some don't. The promise this won't happen again is empty. And by coincidence....one of the players in McCarthyism is making a repeat show. I know...its a new FBI and they learned from the last time. So says their PR reps....
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and spinnyd
\-V-/ said:
This isn't about the one phone ...
Click to expand...
The 'expectation of privacy' is the core issue for not just this case, but the others inquired of by the FBI.

The other aspect of this overall issue that affects us all, is Stare Decisis. And whether we like it or not, the courts put a lot of weight on Stare Decisis, even if the current foundation is faulty. Over the years, the inferior courts (and Congress) as well as the SCOTUS, has taken (in my opinion) a liberal (read: broad) interpretation of the Elastic Clause. And as such, has helped to grant the government power that it should not have in the first place.
 
BasicGreatGuy said:
Playing devil's advocate for a moment...By all accounts, the phone of the deceased was the property of the state. With said ownership of the phone, did the deceased have an 'expectation of privacy' ?
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: No one is claiming that the terrorists still have the right to privacy. Apple has already turned over a great deal of information from his iCloud account.

BasicGreatGuy said:
I contend, that it is very much the issue at hand. While I stand with Apple's overall message on the matter, I don't think they have a very strong case. Tim has done a good job of appealing to emotion. I think Apple's case against would be much stronger if said phone was not the property of the state.
Click to expand...
The FBI is the one appealing to emotion by making this about terrorism. Cook is doing the exact opposite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001, Wondercow, spinnyd and 3 others
I LOL'ed a bit when I saw today that Microsoft are going to file an amicus brief supporting Apple, going against Bill Gates' opinion.

http://recode.net/2016/02/25/microsoft-wholeheartedly-supports-apple-in-fbi-encryption-case/

"Speaking at a congressional hearing today, Microsoft President and Chief Legal Officer Brad Smith said that his company “wholeheartedly” supports Apple in the ongoing case that’s pitted the iPhone maker against the FBI.

“We at Microsoft support Apple and will be filing an amicus brief next week,” Smith said. An amicus brief is a “friend of the court” filing that allows parties not directly involved in the case to weigh in. Before today, Microsoft had offered only tepid support for Apple, but now it’s getting behind the company in a big way."
 
  • Like
Reactions: spinnyd, SantaFeNM, St.John Smith and 3 others
tampageek said:
Under your argument the exact opposite it true. The US govt is the one supporting terrorism, since the law allows "known terrorists" to buy all the guns they want to commit terrorist acts on American soil.
Click to expand...

haha, blame yourselves as a country for that one, not your government, considering it's considered a God given right to own a gun in America. Obama would have done plenty to change gun laws but to me it seems so utterly enshrined in American culture, it will take a massive American culture shift to change people's opinions. And that will probably take generations, not years, Obama would have no chance to change America's gun laws. Your argument is very weak on that one, you need only look at your country to see that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Belly-laughs
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back