22 ms·
Complete clickbait headline. The meat is a ways down: >The company told Noble providing the password would contravene a U.S. law — the Electronic Communication
by xoa 6y ago
Complete clickbait headline. The meat is a ways down:
>The company told Noble providing the password would contravene a U.S. law — the Electronic Communications Privacy Act — written back in 1986.
and further
>Citizens of countries that have laws specifically addressing digital assets — including those in the European Union — don't have the same problems. For those people, the terms and conditions of Apple services grant jurisdiction to "the laws and courts of your usual place of residence."
>She[other person] got court orders, first from Ontario and later from a California court. Apple and Bell complied with the Ontario order
FFS. Do people want "Big Tech" to just blow off law, or not? It seems few have any real principles about it, they just want what they want conveniently without considering any further repercussions. The problem here apparently is (A) THEY DIDN'T SAVE THEIR PASSWORDS, (B) outdated US law, and (C) non-existent Canadian law. With A being the most important, particularly given the importance and spread of E2EE, but B & C also important.
Digital is still new enough that we haven't had full generations under our belts yet, dealing with mortality and passing things on could be a lot better organized and smoother. But concerns about people getting into other people's stuff via hacks or social engineering, or mass surveillance, are extremely serious too. Just throwing around blame at the first convenient target is not helpful.
- josefresco 6y agoThis is the "meat" that I found the most relevant: "When Noble contacted Apple in early 2017, she was told all she needed to do was prove she has the legal right to her husband's estate. She sent all the documents the company asked for, including his death certificate and the will designating her as executor. "They called me back and said, no, that's not good enough — you have to have a court order [but] having to pay to put in a court order is a huge deal," she said. Court orders can cost from about $2,000 to tens of thousands of dollars — depending on whether they're opposed."
- DanBC 6y agoApple don't always obey the law of the country they're in. This has happened frequently in the UK where apple insist on a court order and ignore probate.
- bregma 6y agoBut I have read one biased side of a story and now I am outraged!!!
- 908B64B197 6y agoI'm always surprised folks are okay with state funded media using these clickbait headlines. EDIT: I see the downvotes. Isn't CBC state funded? They also had a highly misleading article headline about Amazon returns going to the trash not long ago [0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24739746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24739746