What if the government and Apple (and/or other tech companies) have colluded on this issue, and ARE providing the FBI with the information they need, but publicly fighting what appears to be a winning battle, all so that criminals and terrorists will believe their iPhones are secure while plotting evil?
Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
151–160 of 198 posts
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although agree, ...with your position, I disagree in your reasoning. Corporations are persons because they are an organized group of people established to carry out the intentions and express the views, i.e. speech, of their members. Citizens United didn't screw campaign finance laws, it affirmed a breakdown of the intention of campaign finance laws. If a company can say, "we make our parts from recycled materials, t…
>Although agree, ...with your position, I disagree in your reasoning. Corporations are persons because they are an organized group of people established to carry out the intentions and express the views, i.e. speech, of their members. Is that why you invest in a company? So it can express your views for you? I do it because I would like to be able to retire some day, not because I support their polital efforts.
> Is that why you invest in a company?
> I personally am anoyed that, now, every purchase I make is a political statement.
[sic]
Edit:
"Buffett, of course, has long centered his investment thesis on the idea that it never pays to bet against the U.S. economy in the long run."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/warren-buffett-says-america...
"The Treasury sold $185.7 billion of securities (over $2.1 trillion in 2016) to finance the war. The public debt rose from $50 billion in 1940 to $260 billion in 1945.[2]"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_E_bond
... And definition of...
"Sometimes, a boycott can be a form of consumer activism, sometimes called moral purchasing. When a similar practice is legislated by a national government, it is known as a sanction."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycott#Notable_boycotts
Edit 2:
This is one of the startups at a pitch day I attended recently, so sinking karma on an edit/self reply...
http://the-citizenry.com/pages/about#philosophy
"We set out to build a company that celebrates the people behind our products. Our name is a reflection of the collective of individuals – artisans,"
I apologize in advance for getting a little belligerent but... Let me make you feel better about buying ridiculously marked up "craft goods" made by indiginous peoples by giving a small percentage of our profits back "to the artisans and their villages" (South America), in lieu of a competitive salary to that of a craftsmen working in the country they are sold (US). I am all for globalization and capitalism... just don't wax poetic about feel goods when I know how the sausage is made.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#153Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
The judge's point is "It's absurd to think the AWA was intended to be usable in this way, because it'll mean the first Congress was undermining the principles of the Constitution that they themselves wrote". You parent's point is "The fifth Congress did in fact undermine those principles in another case, so it's not so absurd to think that the AWA was intended as the government now claims". Granted, first vs fifth.
The judge's reasoning was explicitly based on many of the Founders being members of the first Congress, so you have granted that the argument is completely bogus. And the point of the comment you're responding to is that the quoted argument is a non sequitur, which it surely is. The fact that the fifth Congress voted for a bad, self-serving law that violated the principles of the Constitution is completely irrelevant…
How many members of the 1st were still members of the 5th?
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#155What if the government and Apple (and/or other tech companies) have colluded on this issue, and ARE providing the FBI with the information they need, but publicly fighting what appears to be a winning battle, all so that criminals and terrorists will believe their iPhones are secure while plotting evil?
Sorry, but nothing of any interest would follow from that harebrained speculation being true.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#156They can not force Apple to do anything. Period.
Yes, actually, they can. In any case, Apple has said that they will follow what the courts decide, however reluctantly.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'd likely argue that forcing them to sign non-Apple software as if it was their own is compelled speech.
However looking at Lavabit example they could do the same with Apple - ask them for the key (in digital form so Apple won't print it with font size 4) and then sign their trojan software themselves using it! If there were true rule of the law and everyone would have been treated equally in US, then either both Lavabit and Apple should give out signing keys, or none at all. Lavabit was forced and had no choice. As far…
Lavabit did it to themselves. They initially subpoenaed just the account they were interested in. Lavabit claimed it was not possible to comply, so the next request was for master keys.
At this point, Lavabit could've complied by just handing over the original data, but instead decided to get cute. "Contempt of court" is an aptly named crime.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'd likely argue that forcing them to sign non-Apple software as if it was their own is compelled speech.
>forcing them to sign non-Apple software as if it was their own is compelled speech. That may be. However, simply forcing them to hand over the key wouldn't imho.
If Apple isn't allowed to publicize that their private key is compromised, then using their private key to sign something is effectively compelled speech.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, if it's upheld and home manufacturers already have a literal backdoor for use only by themselves, a court can force the home manufacturers to allow the FBI to use them as well for specific investigations. The AWA power to compel an action only works when the party being compelled has some special ability to help on a specific case with probable cause (not future cases), as Apple does with its system update backdo…
It's a shame that you're being downvoted. This is exactly what the situation is.
It's not exactly the situation as I understand it. Apple, with their current software, do not have a way to access this phone. They'd have to build a special neutered version, update the phone with it, then allow access.
That they can do this since they control updates doesn't mean that they have already done it for their own purposes or wish to do it, or should be compelled to build a back door for the government.