Posted on Mar 1, 2016
Judge rules in favor of Apple in key case involving a locked iPhone
966
8
7
5
5
0
"A federal judge in New York ruled in favor of Apple on Monday, saying that an obscure Colonial-era law did not authorize him to force the firm to lift data from an iPhone at the government’s request.
The ruling is not binding in any other court, but it takes on an outsize importance as the U.S. government battles Apple in a separate case in California over whether the tech firm should help unlock a phone used by one of the shooters in the San Bernardino terrorist attack in December."
The ruling is not binding in any other court, but it takes on an outsize importance as the U.S. government battles Apple in a separate case in California over whether the tech firm should help unlock a phone used by one of the shooters in the San Bernardino terrorist attack in December."
Judge rules in favor of Apple in key case involving a locked iPhone
Posted from washingtonpost.comPosted in these groups: 
Active Shooter
Law
Active Shooter Law
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 3
1
1
0
0
0
0
i understand the issue but an exception needs to be made regarding a terrorist event.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
MAJ Jim Woods I think the problem is the FBI is asking for the "tool" information technology that will allow them to open the phone. In providing this information "tool" Apple will have given them the ability to open any iPhone w/the same configuration. Even though this looks like it is a stand alone case, it is not. Apple has received from the FBI phones before, which they "unlocked" and returned to the FBI so they could retrieve information on the phone. So the issue is not would Apple "unlock" this particular phone but in giving the FBI the ability to unlock any phone containing the same configuration.
I propose that the FBI turns the phone in question over to Apple, Apple unlocks it and returns it to the FBI. Problem solved for this event.
This would be a moot issue if the FBI's own employee or a LEO (no clear picture on which) who created this problem in the first place by attempting to access this information on the phone instead of handing it over to the IT guys wouldn't have made such a blundering mistake as to try to change the access code on the phone in the first place.
I propose that the FBI turns the phone in question over to Apple, Apple unlocks it and returns it to the FBI. Problem solved for this event.
This would be a moot issue if the FBI's own employee or a LEO (no clear picture on which) who created this problem in the first place by attempting to access this information on the phone instead of handing it over to the IT guys wouldn't have made such a blundering mistake as to try to change the access code on the phone in the first place.
(1)
(0)
MAJ Jim Woods
I guess what I am saying is that under certain situations, with a proper court order, on a case by case basis, it should be allowed. It doesn't give "blanket privilege" as I suspect the FBI would like. This has become an amazing administration with privileges granted far beyond what I feel they were designed for or coming close to being Constitutional.
In my second career, we had to have court orders just to seize a phone and could look only at call/picture/text logs. If we couldn't see it, we couldn't look at it. But.... lots of information was gained by those meager abilities.
In my second career, we had to have court orders just to seize a phone and could look only at call/picture/text logs. If we couldn't see it, we couldn't look at it. But.... lots of information was gained by those meager abilities.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
On the fence on this one. I understand the need for privacy but I also worry about safety. Wonder how Apple will feel if there is something on that phone that could have prevented another attack that's planned and they could have saved peoples lives but didn't.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
PO2 Mark Saffell I think the problem is the FBI is asking for the "tool" information technology that will allow them to open the phone. In providing this information "tool" Apple will have given them the ability to open any iPhone w/the same configuration. Even though this looks like it is a stand alone case, it is not. Apple has received from the FBI phones before, which they "unlocked" and returned to the FBI so they could retrieve information on the phone. So the issue is not would Apple "unlock" this particular phone but in giving the FBI the ability to unlock any phone containing the same configuration.
I propose that the FBI turns the phone in question over to Apple, Apple unlocks it and returns it to the FBI. Problem solved for this event.
This would be a moot issue if the FBI's own employee or a LEO (no clear picture on which) who created this problem in the first place by attempting to access this information on the phone instead of handing it over to the IT guys wouldn't have made such a blundering mistake as to try to change the access code on the phone in the first place.
I propose that the FBI turns the phone in question over to Apple, Apple unlocks it and returns it to the FBI. Problem solved for this event.
This would be a moot issue if the FBI's own employee or a LEO (no clear picture on which) who created this problem in the first place by attempting to access this information on the phone instead of handing it over to the IT guys wouldn't have made such a blundering mistake as to try to change the access code on the phone in the first place.
(0)
(0)
PO2 Mark Saffell
CPT (Join to see) Thanks for explaining that. The news never explained that the FBI wants the tool.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google