3 ms·
Then once that happens: they have both precedent and legal case law on their side to compel Apple, or Microsoft, or Cisco, or Google, etc. to do the same for an
by alchemism 11y ago
Then once that happens: they have both precedent and legal case law on their side to compel Apple, or Microsoft, or Cisco, or Google, etc. to do the same for another secure product.
- dragonwriter 11y ago> Then once that happens: they have both precedent and legal case law "Precedent" and "case law" are the same thing (and "legal case law" is just a silly construction), so it doesn't really add anything to say you have both of those, instead of one or the other.
- rhino369 11y agoAll this case law talk is irrelevant. If Apple actually just voluntarily did this one time it wouldn't really set a legal precedent. Fighting it will probably set a legal precedent. And they are doing it on a case that maximizes the FBI's argument that this is needed for national security. But sure, Apple will end up having to do this for a lot of phones the FBI has. But why is that a problem?