Allowing courts to decide on encryption would result in haphazard approach, claims Apple lawyer

Posted:
in General Discussion
Appearing in a TV interview on Wednesday, Apple lawyer Ted Olson once again called for the U.S. Congress and not courts to decide whether the company can be made to crack a device's security, suggesting that relying on courts could deliver a piecemeal approach.




"You might have one court going one way and another court going another way," Olson told Bloomberg. "If you do this on a case-by-case basis, you're going to have different outcomes." The comment was in response to a recent argument by U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch that encryption-related cases should be judged one at a time.

Olson nevertheless cited a recent decision by a New York federal judge as supporting the view that Apple can't be forced to build a way into the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. In a separate case involving the iPhone of a suspected drug trafficker, New York Magistrate Judge James Orenstein ruled that asking Apple to build and distribute a vulnerable operating system would impose an "unreasonable burden" on the company.

Apple has a reponsibility to protect the privacy of its customers, Olson added.

"We're talking about the rights of Apple to make sure its iPhone has the integrity that it carefully built into it," he said. "Everyone has civil rights in this country, not just those accused of crime."

The debate in the San Bernardino case intensified on Tuesday as people like FBI Director James Comey and Apple general counsel Bruce Sewell testified in front of a House Judiciary Committee. The company has also filed a formal objection to the Central District of California's order to unlock the San Bernardino iPhone, making reference to the New York case.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,449member
    Our thoughts are "warrant-proof", too.
    So far.
  • Reply 2 of 14
    Urei1620Urei1620 Posts: 88member
    sog35 said:
    But I guess the FBI, President, DOJ ,want the USA to be a police state.
    We (US) are already there. Question is, can we fight back against the FBI, local police and NSA.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 3 of 14
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,449member
    sog35 said:

    Do I want my conversations with lawyers, my doctor, my priest, my 5 year old child to be open to the FBI?  HELL NO.
    Your priest might not want his conversations with your child to be open to the FBI either, at least not for a few years.  :p
    singularity
  • Reply 4 of 14
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,452member
    Wasn't so long ago that a certain CEO was mocked here for saying this, 

    “I don’t think it is Silicon Valley’s decision to make about whether encryption is the right thing to do. I understand Tim Cook’s decision, but I don’t think it’s his decision to make”… I personally think that this is an issue that should be decided by the American people and Congress, not by companies,”

    Now that it is Apple's legal position, everyone is on-board.  I'm digging on the irony.
  • Reply 5 of 14
    matrix077matrix077 Posts: 602member
    Wasn't so long ago that a certain CEO was mocked here for saying this, 

    “I don’t think it is Silicon Valley’s decision to make about whether encryption is the right thing to do. I understand Tim Cook’s decision, but I don’t think it’s his decision to make”… I personally think that this is an issue that should be decided by the American people and Congress, not by companies,”

    Now that it is Apple's legal position, everyone is on-board.  I'm digging on the irony.
     You have reading comprehension issue then. Encryption is a good and right thing. No question asked. It secures our privacy. But if government want companies to crack their own software, or make back door, this serious issue need to be made into law by Congress, not decided on a whim by government.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 6 of 14
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Wasn't so long ago that a certain CEO was mocked here for saying this, 

    “I don’t think it is Silicon Valley’s decision to make about whether encryption is the right thing to do. I understand Tim Cook’s decision, but I don’t think it’s his decision to make”… I personally think that this is an issue that should be decided by the American people and Congress, not by companies,”

    Now that it is Apple's legal position, everyone is on-board.  I'm digging on the irony.
    That's what MS dope said if you just read half the words he said and rewrote the rest...
  • Reply 7 of 14
    securtissecurtis Posts: 86member
    We'll see where apples allegiance lies when China asks for a backdoor into iPhones. I could see them saying give us a
    backdoor or you can't sell here anymore. I'm sure they'll oblige and take the money. 
  • Reply 8 of 14
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member
    I encourage the FBI to launch their own eyePhone, with govOS.

    Free of course :smile: 

    >:x
  • Reply 9 of 14
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,452member
    matrix077 said:
    Wasn't so long ago that a certain CEO was mocked here for saying this, 

    “I don’t think it is Silicon Valley’s decision to make about whether encryption is the right thing to do. I understand Tim Cook’s decision, but I don’t think it’s his decision to make”… I personally think that this is an issue that should be decided by the American people and Congress, not by companies,”

    Now that it is Apple's legal position, everyone is on-board.  I'm digging on the irony.
     You have reading comprehension issue then. Encryption is a good and right thing. No question asked. It secures our privacy. But if government want companies to crack their own software, or make back door, this serious issue need to be made into law by Congress, not decided on a whim by government.
    http://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/191496/at-t-ceo-says-us-encryption-policy-is-up-to-congress-not-apple/p1

    My comprehension is just fine.  AI clipped the part about him saying "American people and Congress".  Perhaps it's time to re-up on your A.D.D. meds?
  • Reply 10 of 14
    matrix077matrix077 Posts: 602member
    matrix077 said:
     You have reading comprehension issue then. Encryption is a good and right thing. No question asked. It secures our privacy. But if government want companies to crack their own software, or make back door, this serious issue need to be made into law by Congress, not decided on a whim by government.
    http://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/191496/at-t-ceo-says-us-encryption-policy-is-up-to-congress-not-apple/p1

    My comprehension is just fine.  AI clipped the part about him saying "American people and Congress".  Perhaps it's time to re-up on your A.D.D. meds?
    Not sure who's having meds. :rolleyes:
    Here's the important quote:
    "I don't think it is Silicon Valley's decision to make about whether encryption is the right thing to do," Stephenson commented to the Wall Street Journal. I understand [Apple CEO] Tim Cook's decision, but I don't think it's his decision to make."
    Again, as I said "Encryption is a good and right thing. No question asked." So no, we still disagree with AT&T CEO (and thinks he's a jerk) because Congress doesn't have to decide that.
    Your reading comprehension is worse than my son. 

    edited March 2016
  • Reply 11 of 14
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,452member
    matrix077 said:
    http://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/191496/at-t-ceo-says-us-encryption-policy-is-up-to-congress-not-apple/p1

    My comprehension is just fine.  AI clipped the part about him saying "American people and Congress".  Perhaps it's time to re-up on your A.D.D. meds?
    Not sure who's having meds. :rolleyes:
    Here's the important quote:
    Again, as I said "Encryption is a good and right thing. No question asked." So no, we still disagree with AT&T CEO (and thinks he's a jerk) because Congress doesn't have to decide that.
    Your reading comprehension is worse than my son. 

    Read the context of the question asked of him and his conclusion.  Read the responses of the AI people in that thread that DID NOT agree with his conclusion.  Read now that people, including Apple agree with his conclusion.  Maybe I should be talking to your son about teaching you critical thinking.  What's his AI ID?
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 12 of 14
    BG01VBG01V Posts: 2member

    I am a hard-core and loyal Apple consumer and was firmly on Apple's side in this case until I learned Apple hired Ted Olson. It's true that Olson did one good thing by joining David Boies in the fight to support gay marriage. But Olson also fought for Citizen's United in 2010 - a Supreme Court decision that resulted in the ridiculous assertion, made by Mitt Romney in 2012, that "corporations are people too, my friend." Olson has a maniacal hatred of the Clintons and has been operating behind the scenes in almost every so-called "criminal" investigation of them for over 20 years. Olson assisted his good friend, Kenneth Starr, in the years long, incessant investigations of the Clintons in the 1990s. An investigation that cost taxpayers $70 million and eventually resulted in nothing except lurid details about Bill's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Yet Congress impeached Bill for lying under oath to a Federal Grand Jury. But Olson, himself, lied to Congress about his involvement in the Arkansas Project and not one thing happened to him. Look it up! Olson is currently representing Citizen's United again in an attempt to gain access to Hillary Clinton's emails. His hatred knows no bounds. And let's not forget the most egregious of all - Olson represented Bush in Bush v Gore - a decision that resulted in the Supreme Court overruling the will of the people in the 2000 Presidential election! We all know the consequences of that one! One can argue - rightfully - that everyone is entitled to the best defense one's money can buy. But surely Apple could have found a less partisan and polarizing attorney. Whether Apple wins or not, Olson's $1,800 per hour fee will - ultimately - be paid by Apple Consumers. If that's how you want your money to be spent then that's also your right. But as of now I'm boycotting Apple for hiring Olson. Oh - yeah - and also because their products really started sucking BIG TIME after Steve Jobs died!

  • Reply 13 of 14
    matrix077matrix077 Posts: 602member
    matrix077 said:
    Not sure who's having meds. :rolleyes:
    Here's the important quote:
    Again, as I said "Encryption is a good and right thing. No question asked." So no, we still disagree with AT&T CEO (and thinks he's a jerk) because Congress doesn't have to decide that.
    Your reading comprehension is worse than my son. 

    Read the context of the question asked of him and his conclusion.  
    Oh.. I've read that before I first reply to you actually. What is the context of "I don't think it is Silicon Valley's decision to make about whether encryption is the right thing to do," you don't understand?
    I'll re-cap for you because you seem dumber than I thought. Congress doesn't have to decide 
    whether encryption is right. But if govt. want to force companies to weaken their products, hell yeah.. that should be made into law by Congress, not doing judge-by-judge.
    I suggest YOU read my first reply to you here again and again.
    edited March 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.