4 ms·
Yes, this sets the precedent that the govt may request, with a valid court order, to compel Apple to help grab information from a specific phone. The point I'm
by einarvollset 11y ago
Yes, this sets the precedent that the govt may request, with a valid court order, to compel Apple to help grab information from a specific phone.
The point I'm trying to make (repeatedly through this thread, which everyone seems to ignore) is that this is a pretty reasonable request.
Notice that it becoming a burden for the govt to request this through Apple every time is in no way a reason why the govt would legally be allowed to "demand the software to do it themselves". In fact, as every single case would require a court order, the hassle of the court order is likely a magnitude greater than asking Apple to comply.
For the govt to "demand the software to do it themselves" would be an entirely new court case. In fact, it is this very case that I do not want to see.
- matwood 11y ago> The point I'm trying to make (repeatedly through this thread, which everyone seems to ignore) is that this is a pretty reasonable request. So when Apple makes the iPhone 7 such that even Apple cannot unlock the phone what happens?
- einarvollset 11y agoI don't know. The point I'm trying to make relates to the facts as they are before us.
- matwood 11y agoTo not think this is where it is headed is naive. Just like the original claim of only one phone was laughable. The FBI wants to get a precedence now so that they can prevent Apple from ever making a phone that cannot be broken into. That is what this case is about and has always been about since the beginning. It is also why Apple took a stand here.