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

[hiddenmarkov]

Apple is playing with dangerous power by trying to usurp the government.

Government's job is to govern.

Government has a legal court order, obtained ethically.

ABOUT TERRORISTS WHO HAVE COMMITTED BIG ACTS.

At least we can vote in people we don't like or make stupid decisions. We don't have that power with Cook.

Cook is not doing this for America's benefit, what with it offshoring jobs, hiding from tax laws like how all businesses have to pay for, has lobbyists to try to have laws changed in its favor (higher profit(eering)) and other acts that are cancerous to America and its workers... Apple does not give one whit about any of us. Or hasn't before, so why is it making such a big pity-violin case on how it will be bad for America? He's done and condoned lots that are bad for America, so he's no saint.

MANY Americans are offended by Cook's supporting the terrorists and using this whole event to effectively advertise to them for free. I'm sure Microsoft is feeling envious right now. Maybe Microsoft will give out free Surface Tablets, engineered in other counntries it gave source code to earlier, to make life easier for terrorists?

First of all apple wanted to keep this on the DL. DOJ made this the media circus. They gave Apple the violin if you must use the analogy. They probably counted on oh, we will back off now. It backfired. Its not the 1950's, there is no big bad McCarthy to fear.

Second its a court order for something doesn't exist. Apple by design made this a one way path. It was not meant to be reversed engineered. Stop believing the spin. Many non terrorists appreciate this level of tech. I wished the government would have it in place. It doesn't. I am a veteran. Current gov. employee and one of the many lucky ones to have data leaked by OPM. Data that won't take a team of cryptographer geniuses to unravel. In short...I will have to worry for many years to come about when someone else would like to be me. Literally, military/government records store more than pure private sector ones do.

Purely from a security standpoint security that cannot be undone is the best security you can have.

Third you are aware these terrorists used burn phones which they...you know burned before the act. Kind of why they got that name.

Lastly you are aware civil disobedience is how this country got to where it is now right. Women's rights, Black rights, etc....all came from from people asking the government "why?" when they came down and said why can't you all play ball with us. Hell its how this country got founded. England thought its laws fair and just (most in power usually do it seems). For some reason our fore fathers did not agree.

 

[You are the One]

This is not a fair match.

Apple, a bunch of very smart and very well prepared people vs. the FBI, a tobacco chewing bunch of dimwit cowboys and some lover court idiot judge.

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Apple make a very valid point in that once the "rogue" OS is created, then far less honest and upright governments than the USA will start to demand access to this OS if they are to permit sales of Apple products in their country. You don't have to think too hard to come up with a head of state, who works hand in glove with organised crime. It would not be a big stretch of the imagination to conceive of this head of state handing the rogue OS to organised crime in return for certain favours, such as eliminating nosy journalists, political competitors etc.

 

[The Monkey]

The word "official" in the headline is redundant. The filing of a motion in court makes it official, by its nature. There are no "unofficial" motions.

 

[FatMax]

The 4th Amendment.

You sure that didn't start with Bush..?

 

[nt5672]

Go Apple!

Edit: so this could get really interesting if it makes it to SCOTUS and there's still an open seat. A 4-4 tie would defer to the lower court which makes whichever court of appeals this ends up in critical. One more fun twist in the current Scalia controversy.

Edit 2: although I think it is inevitable that congress will attempt some form of legislation on this I still think that Apple stating that is the correct avenue is a bit like poking at the hornets nest. As much as I dislike the precedent this case potentially sets I see far more damage that could be done via legislation.

Exactly, it is an unfortunate fact that except when people go crazy with calls, protests, demonstrations, and general civil disobedience, Congress sees no need to listen to anyone but their own self interest. So in the end, if you want privacy, we all need to raise civil hell.

 

[zioxide]

In which case you don't understand the difference between cannot and will not. Which is the basis for the current debate.

Yes, I replied to your comment as I found it comical that you attacked your own politicians for not understanding the issue, while "reading" your comments..... The irony

Agreed, read something in here to understand why this is a debate.....and trust me, Apple "can" provide access. They never stated they cannot .... they even stated it just needs to be a version of iOS ..... Read something in here...

This is inaccurate.

Apple cannot provide access. Period.

In its current state, the phone will erase it's encryption keys rendering all the data on it useless after 10 failed passcode attempts.

The FBI wants Apple to build and sign a new version of iOS that bypasses the 10 attempt security feature and gives the FBI the ability to programmatically try to guess the passcode. The FBI would still have to brute force it. It's not like Apple can just open the door and say "come on in."

Regardless, there is already established court precedent for the following:

- corporations are considered people and afforded all the same constitutional rights as people.
- Computer code is protected free speech under the first amendment.
- "Compelled speech", or the government forcing a person to say something they don't want is illegal.

Therefore, it's illegal for the FBI to request Apple write or sign code.

 

[dk001]

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.

Great point. Congress complains of the President doing this (doing things and bypassing Congress) and now we have the federal law enforcement doing it. Symptom or disease?

 

[zioxide]

Apple is playing with dangerous power by trying to usurp the government.

Government's job is to govern.

Government has a legal court order, obtained ethically.

ABOUT TERRORISTS WHO HAVE COMMITTED BIG ACTS.

At least we can vote in people we don't like or make stupid decisions. We don't have that power with Cook.

Cook is not doing this for America's benefit, what with it offshoring jobs, hiding from tax laws like how all businesses have to pay for, has lobbyists to try to have laws changed in its favor (higher profit(eering)) and other acts that are cancerous to America and its workers... Apple does not give one whit about any of us. Or hasn't before, so why is it making such a big pity-violin case on how it will be bad for America? He's done and condoned lots that are bad for America, so he's no saint.

MANY Americans are offended by Cook's supporting the terrorists and using this whole event to effectively advertise to them for free. I'm sure Microsoft is feeling envious right now. Maybe Microsoft will give out free Surface Tablets, engineered in other counntries it gave source code to earlier, to make life easier for terrorists?

What a bunch of fearmongering nonsense.

Apple isn't "protecting the terrorists". They're protecting the rights, privacy, safety, and information security of all of their users.

If a side effect of that is that the FBI can't read the data on a criminal's phone, so be it. The world isn't perfect. The FBI doesn't have the right to put hundreds of millions innocent civilians at risk.

 

[LordBeelzebub]

Go Apple!! F the lying gov! FBI is using the "terrorist" card to yet again strip us of another freedom! The terrorist did not use his work phone for terror plots, duuurrr! They use their two droid devices they smashed, dura durr FBI!

But all FBI has to do is say terrorist and half educated America gives up their freedoms and privacy.

When will our country wake up to the terror scam our bs gov pulls to rob us of out freedom!?!?!?

It's kind of hard to call it a BS scam when we actually get attacked. If it's happening, then it's not a scam, it's reality.

Although I agree the government could be using it as a ploy to force Apple to create this backdoor version of the software. Sadly people watch the news and believe everything they are told. So companies and our government carefully craft how they want information released to the public so they can purposfully be swayed. It's called "the court of public opinion", and sadly our real courts of law are being persuaded by that. There is no such thing as far justice in this country any more for big profile cases.

People riot based on speculation and public opinion alone. Any more our country sickens me that our population as a whole have become so weak minded and have turned into sheep.

 

[dk001]

Please elaborate on this 'Constitutional' right to privacy.

Do you have a right to privacy in a safety deposit box?
Do you have an absolute right to privacy for your banking records?

No you say? Why are any of these scenarios different?
Banks help law enforcement with safety deposit boxes and bank record requests all the time with a court order.

Well then. The right to privacy is irrelevant here because

A) There is a court order
B) The actor is dead

I would hope you have read all sides of this issue however judging by your post I doubt it.
The "data" is a small piece of the much broader picture and not in issue. It is the how to get the data that is being demanded, the effort it would take, the potential impact to other areas besides privacy, the conscription of effort, and an expansion of legal powers without any precedent.
Too many folks stop at the "data" and "terrorism" labels, make a decision to support or not and never take the time nor effort to really look at the issue. We call that headline decision making.

 

[Doomtomb]

Sheesh Apple, we get it, it's a dangerous precedent, a slippery slope, and now dangerous power!

 

[nt5672]

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.

The phone is not or should not be the property of the state. It is being held by the state and is the property of the terrorist's next of kin. While there are laws allowing various government entities to seize property, they are also unconstitutional, but currently legal. We should never accept that the state has the power to just seize property. That is what hitler and many other governments have done throughout history and we all see (if we care to look) how badly that turned out for the average citizen. The same will happen to us.

 

[dk001]

No, I heard it on the news, remember I am English living in England, so I don't see the American news on it all. You have a VERY different attitude and it seems law on 'privacy' in America to the UK, plus your news culture is slightly different I think. In the UK I believe Cook would just be thrown in jail for obstructing justice no ifs or buts, but in America it seems not so?
It's different culture I guess and way things are done.
I've no doubt distrust in the government is well placed as you say, who does fully trust their government? but I think there needs to be leeway with your security services too, far too many sick people in this world for their not to be.
How that leeway is agreed on I guess you may well find out over the coming weeks, there should in no way be a total ban on device access, but their should be stringent controls.
But I live in a country where we have millions and millions of camera's, all you email and internet activity is recorded, all you other data is recorded like phone records, SMS messages etc, all is accessible if required, I think a court order is required to access this information and obviously due to the humongous amount of data it is, rest assured only data actually needed by security services is accessed.
So we have the controls in place and that different culture about it all, that's why I stopped fully posting my opinions on it all, because I appreciate I am not American, so will have a different view by default.

What other none American corporations are supporting them as I have only heard American ones like Google and Microsoft etc.

Thanks for the alternative and non-USA viewpoint. It is as you say, a different world and mindset on this side of the pond.
Let me ask one question though; do you know how your country handles encrypted smartphones when it comes to warrants? This scenario is very likely realistic in your country. Maybe more so than here.

 

[Apple_Robert]

The phone is not or should not be the property of the state. It is being held by the state and is the property of the terrorist's next of kin. While there are laws allowing various government entities to seize property, they are also unconstitutional, but currently legal. We should never accept that the state has the power to just seize property. That is what hitler and many other governments have done throughout history and we all see (if we care to look) how badly that turned out for the average citizen. The same will happen to us.

The phone in question did not legally belong to the deceased. It was the legal property of the state. The phone was purchased by the state as a work phone for the deceased.

 

[spacemnspiff]

Which brand of beer?

Any brand that has no artificially added hop to it, a natural beer.

 

[Thunderhawks]

Sheesh Apple, we get it, it's a dangerous precedent, a slippery slope, and now dangerous power!

Good everybody who gets it is one more educated person about the subject!

 

[Orlandoech]

The word "official" in the headline is redundant. The filing of a motion in court makes it official, by its nature. There are no "unofficial" motions.

Lol, some people wouldn't know that. It would only be "unofficial" if it were filled out and not filed lol. As a civilian, non-member of the bar having to fill out several motions, orders and expungements, it sucks.
[doublepost=1456500501][/doublepost]

I would hope you have read all sides of this issue however judging by your post I doubt it.
The "data" is a small piece of the much broader picture and not in issue. It is the how to get the data that is being demanded, the effort it would take, the potential impact to other areas besides privacy, the conscription of effort, and an expansion of legal powers without any precedent.
Too many folks stop at the "data" and "terrorism" labels, make a decision to support or not and never take the time nor effort to really look at the issue. We call that headline decision making.

He clearly doesn't know what the "k" means in the word "know".

 

[8692574]

This is not a fair match.

Apple, a bunch of very smart and very well prepared people vs. the FBI, a tobacco chewing bunch of dimwit cowboys and some lover court idiot judge.

Did not know that gnome and a gun could kill...

 

[QuantumLo0p]

This is not a fair match.

Apple, a bunch of very smart and very well prepared people vs. the FBI, a tobacco chewing bunch of dimwit cowboys and some lover court idiot judge.

A very interesting, if not accurate, opinion of all sides.

All I have to say is good luck to Apple since the current administration and DOJ has no regard for the constitution, natural law nor any significant respect for rule of law unless it suits their agenda, which is not usually in line with generally accepted principles of liberty. Obama was not kidding when he said he planned to fundamentally change the country. Tyrannical and oppressive have become common words to describe the current state and Obama will forever live infamously. He never worked significantly worked in the private sector and had zero experience managing a state, county or city yet his constituents were blind to the truth and he goose stepped his way to the White House.

Your fellow subject,
QL

 

[nikhsub1]

I'm not a lawyer but how can the law force Apple to create something it doesn't want to? Seems to me this country is going down the tubes.

 

[zioxide]

I'm not a lawyer but how can the law force Apple to create something it doesn't want to? Seems to me this country is going down the tubes.

They can't. That's why Apple is going to win this case.

Computer code is considered speech, and it's illegal for the government to compel speech.

 

[gnasher729]

Apple is playing with dangerous power by trying to usurp the government.

Government's job is to govern.

Government has a legal court order, obtained ethically.

ABOUT TERRORISTS WHO HAVE COMMITTED BIG ACTS.

The first sentence is nonsense.

The second sentence is not incorrect, but it is the citizen's job not to let them get away with dangerous nonsense, by resisting, educating, or, as Apple is doing here, both. And the FBI is not the government. It is one branch of the government. Other branches, like the NSA, are absolutely FOR unbreakable encryption because unbreakable encryption PROTECTS the government.

The third sentence is wrong. There is no court order yet. There is a proposed court order. Apple was given time to come up with arguments why the proposed court order shouldn't become a court order, and that's what they are doing. Since the proposed court order was created after a judge listened only to one very biassed side, I think the "obtained ethically" is very dubious to say the least.

The fourth sentence just shows that you resemble one of Pavlov's dogs. Throw in the word TERRORIST and there are reflex reactions that you cannot control. You should THINK instead. Some evil killer killed 14 people. But they are dead, and the killer is dead, and there is good reason to believe that there is nothing of any interest on the phone.

 

[jlseattle]

Sheesh Apple, we get it, it's a dangerous precedent, a slippery slope, and now dangerous power!

What I don't think you DON'T get is that there are many small minded people that don't get what Apple is trying to do.

It really concerns me when we're so quick to give up our rights, freedoms and liberties based on our fear. Good old fashion detective work against the enemies will work just fine. We don't need to be invading and creating back doors into ordinary citizens phones. I feel very strongly about this.

 

[mytdave]

If you're one of the people who supports privacy and freedom, then it's time to contact your elected officials in support of Apple, and ask them to work on a bill that protects encryption and privacy. This is bigger than just Apple and iPhones. The outcome of this case will have an impact (for better or worse) on encryption of all types on all platforms and communication channels. This is serious ****.