Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Files Official Motion to Vacate Court Order, Says FBI Seeks 'Dangerous Power'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nachos with no chips, please.The proverbial shot heard around the digital world?
Either way, here we go. The only question I have for everyone:
Buttered popcorn, or nachos? Because this is going to be good.
BL.
Yeah while the democratic process is the correct forum for these kind of decision, I don't really have much faith that the correct decision will be reached. There aren't enough people who understand the ramifications of fiddling with encryption or back doors and too many who either don't care, or believe the ends justify the means.
Why is it only 'American' corporations supporting this stance?
Apple are very much playing this as some sort of PR stunt as well to advertise they are going to make uncrackable devices, they are on a marketing stint for sales.
But I have also read they do not have the full support of the American public, some accusing them of supporting terrorism.
I am pretty certain where this will all end up, but you carry on your wave of people power.
It's meaningless in the rest of the world anyway as I believe each country has different laws, pretty sure in the UK Cook would have been out in jail by now. So it is an interesting insight into American law.
Apple are very much playing this as some sort of PR stunt as well to advertise they are going to make uncrackable devices, they are on a marketing stint for sales.
But I have also read they do not have the full support of the American public, some accusing them of supporting terrorism.
I am pretty certain where this will all end up, but you carry on your wave of people power.
It's meaningless in the rest of the world anyway as I believe each country has different laws, pretty sure in the UK Cook would have been out in jail by now. So it is an interesting insight into American law.
Last edited:
The ninth (as with many circuit courts of appeals) has a particular reputation. In this case the civil liberties aspect of the case makes it an advantage for Apple in the ninth.
I think its sad on Apple's Part. Why? All Apple needs to do is have the FBI sign a contract stating only the specific iPhone will be broke open and the Cracking Software will be removed and deleted forever. This is beyond privacy and more about marketing for future Apple products. EOM
You don't bring popcorn to a nacho fight!The proverbial shot heard around the digital world?
Either way, here we go. The only question I have for everyone:
Buttered popcorn, or nachos? Because this is going to be good.
BL.
The NFL can't even define what a "catch" is, something of as much import and complexity as the US constitution will forever be studied and interpreted.
That is not an option; if they let the court order stand it will set legal precedent and the FBI or any other law enforcement agency or government agency will be able to demand the same treatment.
You realize there are already 12 more phones they are asking for the same actions on, right? And those are only the phone we've found out about between the original ruling and Apple's filing.
The FBI has no authority to enter such a contract. What you are looking for is a "law" created by Congress.
Incidentally, that's what Apple is asking for as well.
Go Apple, GO!!!! 
Hump..... I meant [Trump] doesn't have clue as to what he's talking about..... his head is empty. I was wondering IF {Apple} could allowed a "backdoor" to that particular phone, only..........????? Maybe not.....
Hump..... I meant [Trump] doesn't have clue as to what he's talking about..... his head is empty. I was wondering IF {Apple} could allowed a "backdoor" to that particular phone, only..........????? Maybe not.....
The proverbial shot heard around the digital world?
Either way, here we go. The only question I have for everyone:
Buttered popcorn, or nachos? Because this is going to be good.
BL.
Nachos. I've had too much popcorn watching this thing unfold and evolve
also been craving Mexican ( or semi Mexican ) grub lately lolAs well they should be. Also mildly surprised some of these issues haven't been brought up sooner.
Well if nothing else the Feds have shown their prowess at doing 180s
Yep
lol yesss! *chants of Cook Cook Cook Cook in the Audience or Tim Tim Tim Tim *
Great to see this.
Have been browsing some of the articles and news reports popping up and the variation in claim, detail, and importance is astounding. Most are treating it as entertainment, not news.
Most posters here are actually far more factual and thoughtful than what is predominately being reported here in the US.
Wow
You'd be surprised. Also it's possible to be entertained, entertaining and insightful all at once
#FoodForThought 
Tim Cook is a modern-day patriot for resisting Obama's totalitarian leanings and his criminal violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Under your argument the exact opposite it true. The US govt is the one supporting terrorism, since the law allows "known terrorists" to buy all the guns they want to commit terrorist acts on American soil.
I remember the good old days when the battle was with Samsung. Boy how times have changed.
[doublepost=1456443221][/doublepost]
If you think it's just Obama you should check out the other guys?
[doublepost=1456443221][/doublepost]
If you think it's just Obama you should check out the other guys?
Well, let's list them out...
Fifth Amendment:
I'd add in there:
Ninth Amendment:
And the 10th Amendment:
First Amendment:
Compelling someone to speak is not free speech. The compelling of anyone to do anything is an abridgement of their freedom, as one of the keystones of freedom to not do something.
Fifth Amendment:
Intellectual Property is property, and transferring it takes two entities to agree to that, a buyer and a seller. If there is not a seller that is willing, then it is theft. That theft is legitimized when compelled by the State.
I'd add in there:
Ninth Amendment:
Just because it ain't in the Constitution doesn't mean you don't have that right. This also goes to the "Corporations are people" hot button that gets brought up. I can see how that applies to this case, and others. The decision to incorporate (I have had an S-Corp) shouldn't mean that corporation is now an agent of the State. Freedoms, folks.
And the 10th Amendment:
The whole Interstate Commerce issue (and International Commerce) may play in here, as Apple does do trade across state lines, but I'm more hard-core on this. I think that the Federal Government should only have jurisdiction for those transactions, and not the whole value stream. (i.e When bringing in parts from China to California, only those parts brought in need to meet US Laws, not the whole company. I need to think this more thoroughly, though. I may have made constructs in my mind that aren't true.)
They have tried that and failed. That is why the DOJ has resorted to this nonsense.
Outlawing encryption has become a non starter for legislatures
"I'm against Apple! They're mean!"
(at Apple) "I've talked with Tim Cook, and they're very nice."
(after finding out that Apple Employees support a Hillary or Cruz) "Those Apple people are insane, and I'll shut them down!"
(Later that week) "Now here's the thing... I have heard from various people at Apple that they eat babies. They fry them up in the cafeteria, and that building they're making is a giant solar baby cooker! They need to be shut down, and I'll make them pay for it!"
(On a late night show, pulling out his iPhone) "you know, this iPhone is excellent, first rate, and I think Apple is a great company, the best there is, and they need to be able to make their products and use the laws of the US to get an advantage. When I am president, there will be an Apple store in every town in China and Mexico, and I'll make them pay for it!"
If you give power to the FBI does that is going to stop any terrorist act? Not at all.
That is the excuse for another agenda. If Apple give in that would be like a broken damn because from then on, the FBI would feel entitled to hack everything else... would that resolve any war or terrorism? NO WAY!
That is the excuse for another agenda. If Apple give in that would be like a broken damn because from then on, the FBI would feel entitled to hack everything else... would that resolve any war or terrorism? NO WAY!