Government says Apple arguments in encryption case a 'diversion,' presents point-by-point rebuttal



  • Reply 41 of 122
    It's un-American for Apple to not help America in this world war. And if you don't think that we are at war you need to get your head out of your a$$.
    Kimchanda Sound Studio
  • Reply 42 of 122

    Everything old is new again:
    "Writs of Assistance", where the possessor of such writ could compel you to help him search.
    The hated Writs of Assistance are said to be one of the main reasons for the American Revolution
  • Reply 43 of 122
    Natewac said:
    It's un-American for Apple to not help America in this world war. And if you don't think that we are at war you need to get your head out of your a$$.
    It is unAmerican for the the US Govt to use "terrorism" as a pretext to force an US individual to so something against his will.
    baconstangration altallest skilewtheckmanchiaVisualSeed
  • Reply 44 of 122
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,922member
    Natewac said:
    It's un-American for Apple to not help America in this world war. And if you don't think that we are at war you need to get your head out of your a$$.
    It's un-American to violate our Constitutional rights in war and in peace. 
    baconstangration altallest skilewtheckmanchiadamn_its_hoticoco3VisualSeed
  • Reply 45 of 122
    jdgazjdgaz Posts: 392member
    The FBI is obviously totally incapable of conducting an investigation. If it cannot do this job itself with its annual budget of $8.347Billion then its time to quit spending money on this sham.
  • Reply 46 of 122
    As an individual who finds himself at loggerheads with the government over its salacious "war on drugs," I find that exercising my personal liberty regarding substances I and others produce and consume requires unberakable encryption. For this reason, I and others have universally adopted Apple communications equipment to maintain our privacy in this matter. As far as I'm concerned, the government can pound sand regarding snooping on my personal, private, and (according to the drug nazis at the DEA) illegal communications.
  • Reply 47 of 122
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Urei1620 said:
    volcan said:
    I think Apple screwed up in this chess match with the FBI. They should have said in the beginning, that iOS was so secure that unlocking it was beyond even their own capabilities. There is no backdoor nor is there any way to create one. End of argument.
    I would have given them an estimate for completing the work of 100 engineers, 8 months, or 288,000 man-hrs for 1 phone at the cost to the US Govt. of $1 billion USD.
    As I said before, it would be a major mistake to argue this based on time or money. Both are achievable. The issue is fundamental and constitutional.
    baconstangration alpscooter63ewtheckmanchiaicoco3
  • Reply 48 of 122
    jdgaz said:
    The FBI is obviously totally incapable of conducting an investigation. If it cannot do this job itself with its annual budget of $8.347Billion then its time to quit spending money on this sham.
    The FBI is being run like a police department, by a sh1tbag lawyer, who goes to the courts for anything he needs. This FBI is useless. Can't prevent terrorist attacks and instead, uses them to justify more government overreach. This is a criminal organization.

    It is time to fire Comey and use the annual budget to pay our national debt or start a new agency from scratch that respects the Constitution.

    edited March 2016
  • Reply 49 of 122
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,377member
    The terrorist organizations must be laughing uncontrollably. The cowardly acts of a tiny number of deviants has caused an entire nation to revoke the civil liberties of hundreds of millions of people and sacrifice the core human rights of its citizens. They've made the American government turn on its own people and all it took was a teeny tiny show of force and media amplification. If the founding fathers had known that future US government leaders would cave so easily they would have reconsidered their choices and remained loyal subjects to the King. 

    The US government leadership has collectively soiled its own diaper and succumbed to the will of the terrorists. Add another one to the loss column.

    baconstangration alpscooter63jbishop1039jamesj91384ewtheckmanchiahlee1169
  • Reply 50 of 122
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Natewac said:
    It's un-American for Apple to not help America in this world war. And if you don't think that we are at war you need to get your head out of your a$$.
    Natewac said:
    It's un-American for Apple to not help America in this world war. And if you don't think that we are at war you need to get your head out of your a$$.
    What war? Obama is certainly not at war. He's in a state of denial.

    The war can commence when we get a real man in the White House, not the current apologizer in chief. 
  • Reply 51 of 122
    This really is about the government going after an opportunity, as they did with ndaa, the Patriot act and many other countless examples. If apple wins this case, the fbi/doj can then go to Congress with a strong case for legislation for backdoors. This is often called evil genius or crazy like a fox. They have been advocating Congress take up the issue of encryption and backdoors for a long time, and just like the Patriot act being passed in secret and upon fear, this is the perfect opportunity.
  • Reply 52 of 122

    Although I am sure Apple thinks it may have a basis for this defense, I assume that their counsel has informed them that their chances are between slim and none (even in the liberal California courts).  Please consider a few basic points.  If the FBI suspects that you have committed a crime and has appropriate probable cause to believe (objective evidence demonstrating the belief), then they seek an order from the court having jurisdiction asking for access to info they believe will lead to evidence of the crime.  IF the judge determines that there is probable cause to believe that information exists, then it will order production/discovery of the information.  Just like a safe deposit box (or a traditional safe as another comment pointed out), the court can order it be opened and reviewed.  If there are innocent parties involved, the court must weigh their right to privacy and/or other protections they may be entitled to.

    The gov't properly stated that Apple put themselves in this position and can easily comply.  As a matter of fact, Apple should be aware of the law and their obligations as a company operating in this country.  If they can comply, they should.  It is that simple.  They can bill for the cost to produce and the feds have to pay if they want the info.  To say no is literally a slap in the face not only to our legal system, but to all those countries that have based their laws in the democratic methods of the common law system literally developed and refined over thousands of years.  Yes, thousands.  Although Apple and its tech is new, the issue expressed is novel.  Whether you ask a locksmith to pick a lock or Apple to unlock a phone, the court has the right to issue this order and the gov't the right to the info.

    Apple has no legs in its argument that the gov't or a third party might abuse the knowledge if it is known and that's it's best argument.  If Apple can show that compliance would threaten its business or the personal privacy rights of its customers that are not under court order, I suppose it may have a point.  That said, I seriously doubt that the court will refuse to enforce the request based upon the unsubstantiated claim that it might be possible that the method used to unlock the phone would be disclosed.  It sure seems that the court could craft an order that would allow Apple to produce the info without disclosure of how it unlocked the phone.  Regardless, there is no way a known killer should have a privacy right simply because of the device he chose to store the info on.  After all, if this was a locked diary and the gov't asked the locksmith to pick the lock, does anyone really think the locksmith could defend by stating that the lock is proprietary and he does not want to pick it for fear that the info could be used to pick locks on other diaries he sold.  Sounds ridiculous eh?  Well, that is how ridiculous Apple's argument seems to this lawyer!  If it can be done, it should be.  If there is a crazy cost, then Apple needs to assert it and, if there's merit to their assertion, the court will make the gov't pay if they want it.  If it is such a burden that it threatens the business and they can legitimately show it, then the gov't could preclude the production.  We all know that is not the case.  So, I have no idea why Apple thinks it is any more special than any other company or person that has been forced to participate in a prosecution even though they have no interest and it presents a burden.  That is the duty all of us citizens have when we choose to live in a country of people that care about each other and the safety of our system.  Buck up Apple.  You're not special simply because you make a fancy tech device that nobody can access without your permission!  What makes me laugh the most is that the average person would probably puke if they knew how much info apple takes from all of us and our phones in the name of product research!

  • Reply 53 of 122
    "... the letter says, adding that the company is to blame for being in the position it currently finds itself." No you got it wrong- if anybody then that is FBI to blame to put Apple into this position. Do not apply incorrect and political logic. Apple has point and FBI has point, but that's FBI who put Apple into this position so do not make stupid statements like that.

    What is Apple's point here?  The court, properly, found cause to believe the guy committed a crime and that the FBI can look at his phone to get info about it.  Apple said they don't want to produce it because it is locked and they shouldn't have to unlock it.  So, if the court orders my bank to unlock my safe deposit box, are you saying the bank can, and should, say no?  If you are, you're wrong (at least by current law).  Why in the world would anyone not want our police to have this power?  It is not as if they can just look when they want.  They need a judge's order (which the FBI has).  To state that, if they know how, they may abuse the power and look at other info without a warrant is just foolish.  We have laws that state that they cannot.  If the police choose to break those laws, then this issue is the least of our worries.  Regardless, give them the proper tools and they are better able to do their jobs without resorting to illegal or desperate measures such as illegal searches.  So, I would argue that more danger would result from a denial of this request by the feds than would come from enforcement of their previous order!
  • Reply 54 of 122
    @ Dave S, how much did your employer pay you to post that brilliant analysis?
  • Reply 55 of 122
    Riiight. Our rights, freedoms, and liberties which the fascist State is trying to eliminate for 380 million Americans is a "diversion." Yep! That's the FBI right there. We could fire 70% of these right wing fascist clowns and not adversely impact safety or crime, these FBI clowns are not needed.
  • Reply 56 of 122
    I started reading the governments response and I still can't believe they are still pushing the single iPhone lie. Here is a quote from the document filed in court:

    "The Court’s Order is modest. It applies to a single iPhone, and it allows Apple to decide the least burdensome means of complying. As Apple well knows, the Order does not compel it to unlock other iPhones or to give the government a universal “master key”or “back door.”

    How stupid do they think we are? The government has already admitted it has a bunch of iPhone's they are waiting to unlock. Of course this order would compel Apple to unlock other iPhone's. If Apple loses, every law enforcement agency in the country is going to cite this case in legal filings to make Apple comply with their unlock request using GovOS. 

    The government thinks you are very stupid, that's why they have manipulated the truth like telling you the unemployment rate is only 5% when there are over 90 million people out of the workforce and not looking for work. Only an idiot would believe the current unemployment numbers. All you need is this example for incontrovertible proof they don't think - but know most people never question their lies.
  • Reply 57 of 122
    This is all hogwash. There is nothing the FBI could find on that phone that they couldn't get by subpoenaing the Telco records. You want text messages? Cell towwer locations? Phone records? Contacts? Calls made and received? The Telco providers all keep that for at least one year and often up to 5 years. Go get a subpoena like you should! No backdoor easy-peasy access for a department with such a long record of sidestepping the law!

  • Reply 58 of 122
    stskstsk Posts: 22member
    So, we should trust a govt. with everyone's information when in the past decade they've compromised personal data on about 67 million employees and veterans... right. and now... this:
  • Reply 59 of 122
    The head of the FBI needs to resign. If these Terrorists were not noticed, we can only imagine if there's one - there's more. That line is usually always 100% true. Sadly the FBI doesn't have the balls to say the truth. Sorry guys - if you can't take criticism, you're worthless and weak.
  • Reply 60 of 122
    "This burden, which is not unreasonable, is the direct result of Apple's deliberate marketing decision to engineer its products so that the government cannot search them, even with a warrant," No, it is a direct result of engineering a product to keep personal data private from anyone that may try to extract it. With or without a warrant.
    Anything the FBI wants can easily be obtained from the Telco Provider... Contacts, call made when, where and to and from whom, text messages. Voice messages. They keep them for years. Go to court, get a subpoena and stop BSing about Apple.
Sign In or Register to comment.