5 ms·
The document is fairly easy to parse, even for us non-lawyers. The filing reiterates the government's position, that Apple has unlocked phones in other cases,
by jrapdx3 11y ago
The document is fairly easy to parse, even for us non-lawyers. The filing reiterates the government's position, that Apple has unlocked phones in other cases, has the ability to comply with the court order, and Apple's marketing or business concerns or effect on shareholders are irrelevant to the matter.
In reading the document it seemed to me that the outcome may hinge on whether compliance would be considered "burdensome" to Apple. The government asserts that modifying the software (for this one instance and no other) is more or less trivial, therefore Apple really has no grounds for refusal.
Some comments on HN have suggested the software isn't so simple to produce, but not something I know enough about to speculate. Perhaps Apple's reply to the court will shed some light on this aspect. Fascinating to watch this chess match play out.
I'm guessing in the end the court order will stand and Apple will need to comply. Maybe Apple surmises the same. It's reasonable to believe their protests will garner ongoing public sympathy while cooperating with the FBI under compulsion of the court.
- rogerthatt 11y agoFor those of us that aren't aware, do you know much about the instances where apple has unlocked phones in the past? I was not aware of this!
- osolo 11y agoIt's been reported that Apple unlocked phones 70 times in the past. But all those instances were for phones with older versions of iOS that were pre-encryption.
- MaysonL 11y agoIt's been falsely reported that Apple unlocked phones 70 times in the past. See Matthew Panzarino's article in TechCrunch: http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/18/no-apple-has-not-unlocked-70-iphones-for-law-enforcement/ http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/18/no-apple-has-not-unlocked-7...
- kevin_thibedeau 11y ago> that Apple has unlocked phones in other cases With or without whole system encryption?
- makecheck 11y agoNo matter what kind of program I write, there seems to be some way for unexpected delays to occur. If Apple were somehow forced to perform this “burdensome” activity, they should take their sweet time and claim one unexpected software/hardware issue after another. Why not? It is entirely plausible (lots of precedence) and since they are by definition building something they did not have before, they could even say they have no experience with what they are trying to build so they can’t know how long it would take. :)
- cmurf 11y agoGiven how hard both parties are hitting this particular punching bag, it's reasonable it ends up at the Supreme Court. While a 4-4 tie at the Court isn't certain, it makes estimation of how the court of appeals will decide the case more important since that decision would stand if SCOTUS splits.