SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Apple Inc.
AAPL 270.37-0.4%Oct 31 9:30 AM EDT
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Pete_Y_48 who wrote (188944)3/19/2016 8:44:59 AM
From: Bill from Wisconsin   of 213172
 
You've seen my arguments on the subject

I very much support Apple's position so far. But I'm not totally onboard with this statement:

The FBI is trying very hard, in this case, to broaden their powers, nothing more.

I think the FBI purposely picked this case. That there is no remaining useful information on that phone, but, this is the most politically charged, emotionally charged case they could cite as an example. I don't see it as broadening their powers. They have a job to do to protect us and to use ALL of their powers fully. We say the same thing about Apple and tax laws. Apple should operate within the law, to their fullest advantage.

We are operating in an environment where a court in 9th circuit in California might throw out a case for the FBI for even thinking of opening a phone while a court in Alabama might allow completely unfettered access. Luck of the draw by jurisdiction and judge.

At some point there will be a time critical, national security case. Then is not the time to have this debate. The FBI and tech companies need to know where the line is. Some agents will abuse it. Some tech companies too. But the law is FAR behind the technology. What is reasonable here? What are the ramifications either way? Bad law is made in the heat of the moment.

A lot of pundits have spoken of the "harsh language" in the court filings. I don't see that. those pundits must not read many court filings. The language is quite tame and measured. So are the public statements.

I wouldn't be shocked if Cook and Comey have had recent cordial conversations. It's in both sides' interest to have real laws written. Both have a job to do and both are trying to push the line a little closer to their own biases. Nothing wrong there. But both need a line drawn. Apple shouldn't be making these decisions and neither should an FBI field agent.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News