Fedgov vs Apple : In re Iphone "backdoor"

[g5000]

i can see the ads now...

Apple iphone preferred communication device for terrorists worldwide.

Do you think terrorists are the only ones who value their privacy?

 

[g5000]

Valerie I think Apple wants this to go all the way up to the Supreme Court, which is it's right. I can't imagine they'd violate the order of the Court.

yeah, where's scalia when you need him..

Scalia would be on Apple's side.

 

[Valerie]

i use a droid. hello fbi let me know if i can be of assistance!

 

[Valerie]

Scalia would be on Apple's side.

nope, he wrote the decision i was referring to...

 

[g5000]

so how is anyone harmed by the government having the key that apple holds?

I've answered this question, as has the topic starter.

 

[Valerie]

okay so i disagree...

 

[g5000]

Scalia would be on Apple's side.

nope, he wrote the decision i was referring to...

Link?

I will bet you dollars to donuts it had to do with spying on conversations and not about searching personal effects.

And it had nothing to do with compelling a corporation to create a key which does not exist.

 

[Valerie]

i won't even have time to read the posts in this thread 'til later on...


i'm just posting thoughts off the top of my head.

 

[g5000]

One astute law student said something, however, that may make Scalia reconsider his initial thinking on the constitutionality of the NSA's domestic surveillance. That student asked if data in a computer were considered "effects" under the Fourth Amendment, in an apparent reference to the NSA capturing communications over the Internet.

Scalia, visibly impressed by the question, said, "I better not answer that. That is something that may well come up [before the Supreme Court]."

Scalia Comes To Brooklyn, Drops Huge Hint About NSA Surveillance And The Supreme Court

 

[IsaacNewton]

Apple should be able to gain access to a phone and retrieve the info on one phone. Like tapping a phone line, once proper legalities have been met it is legal.

I think Apple is saying they'd have to show the government how to tap everyone's phone, and that is what they don't want to do. I haven't read their whole complaint by if that is it I would side with Apple. The government cannot be given the right, as shown in the NSA leaks, to tap information from every person and know everything. Even if it compromises SOME security.

A fine line to walk but it has to be walked.

 

[Valerie]

yeah i told you it's the nsa surveillance case where he addresses the issue...

 

[g5000]

How Justice Scalia Defended Your Digital Privacy—and Also Held It Back

 

[g5000]

yeah i told you it's the nsa surveillance case where he addresses the issue...

You'll need to quote where he said anything relevant to this situation.

 

[Valerie]

One astute law student said something, however, that may make Scalia reconsider his initial thinking on the constitutionality of the NSA's domestic surveillance. That student asked if data in a computer were considered "effects" under the Fourth Amendment, in an apparent reference to the NSA capturing communications over the Internet.

Scalia, visibly impressed by the question, said, "I better not answer that. That is something that may well come up [before the Supreme Court]."

Scalia Comes To Brooklyn, Drops Huge Hint About NSA Surveillance And The Supreme Court

scalia said something like well i better not answer that right now, etc...

 

[Valerie]

yeah i told you it's the nsa surveillance case where he addresses the issue...

You'll need to quote where he said anything relevant to this situation.

i've quoted it elsewhere on this forum in snowden threads... i'll find it later.

 

[bendog]

To be specific, there currently does not exist any software which can penetrate the terrorist's Apple phone.

Being the owners of the source code, Apple might be able to write such software, but then it would be able to not just hack into the terrorist's phone, it would be able to open EVERY Apple phone.

Apple does not want that kind of software created. It would be like creating a supervirus, and the government claiming, "We're just gonna kill this one bad guy with it."

i get it.. see my first post in this thread regarding scotus precedent on nsa surveillance.

you can't claim harm based solely on paranoia.

It's the government that is paranoid. They cannot violate our privacy without due process.

You are seriously, seriously confused. You seem to think the government is allowed to read my mail as long as I am not harmed!

Well, there's the question. Assuming Apple build the code to unlock the phone, and unlocked it, and gave it to the FBI, would the FBI then have the code to unlock all phones?

Apple would have the code. And the whole world would know it.

Confidence in the privacy of Apple's products would evaporate. Their business would suffer.

So there's the harm, by the way, Valerie .

No, Apple would not be harmed because the same law applied to Apple would apply to manftrs of any phone for sale in the US.

Except, Apple would be harmed if the govt could then open any Apple phone without Apple's assistance.

 

[g5000]

Without linking to a specific case, Valerie, you argument is invalid.

If you are talking about Clapper v. Amnesty International, you are way off base. In that case, the Supreme Court said the respondents did not have standing because they could not show they had been subjected to NSA surveillance.

Apple clearly does have standing.

 

[Timmy]

Progressive career politicians and their federal government are to blame... They have zero credibility on the issue

Wow! You conservatives can't even take credit for your own bullshit .

This is patriot act type bullshit in action . And we know the conservatives are the driving force .

 

[Valerie]

the gist is just as i said in my first post in this thread...

you can't claim the nsa program is harmful based solely on what harm might possibly occur..(paranoia)

 

[Valerie]

the question of whether a phone is a personal effect is beside the point..

a warrant was issued for search and seizure of the phone.