Apple Joins Digital Due Process Coalition

[DroidRules]

I find it funny that the very companies that are data mining every one that buys/uses their product wants to "change" the way the law is written/interpreted. Nothing to see here folks.... except where you went, what you did, what you bought, what you......

Name a U.S. politician who has "extreme left" views? By world standards, your "left-leaning" party is centre-right at best. Which is one of the reasons that the U.S. economy is in so much trouble. There needs to be balance between the interests of the elites and the middle class. In the U.S. you have one party (the Republicans) that does nothing but cater to the rich, corporations and religious nutjobs. Then you have another party that is sort of centrist, centre-right. Where is your left? Really, where is it? Who's standing up for the middle class in the U.S., and who's going to get you out of this economic mess? (*Crickets*)

Amen brother. They love to call Obama and the other dems in congress Left....... Far from it. Of course they need a boogey man and a black president and female X speaker fit the bill. Get rid of the Fed and that will be a start to helping out the "middle class".

 

[malexandria]

How about DDP for CONSUMERS?

How about a bill that gives recourse to consumers who get banned from their Digital Content? I got into a tiff with Amazon - won't give specifics, end result my account was banned and due to this I can no longer access any of my digital content over a $1,000 worth of Kindle Books, Audible materials, etc... Add insult to injury I had to close my bank account to stop Audible from automatically billing my CC every month.

 

[SlowX]

Seeing AT&T join worries me...

I think companies like Apple, Amazon, and Google have some history of supporting worthy causes (as long as it doesn't mess with their bottom line TOO much), but seeing Intel & AT&T in there makes me worry that there's a catch. Maybe I'm cynical, but AT&T especially is out for profit. Will they be able to charge for this or find loopholes to charge additional fees?

Hope I'm wrong.

 

[dankly]

Of course if Google, Apple, and/or Facebook are collecting this information for business purposes

Isnt google just another branch on the CIA. Smoke and mirrors is the way our society operates.

We all know it..it seems its common knowledge but no one seems to care.

Pawns in a digital age.

 

[mrbrown]

If you believe any of the information law enforcement can get (in most cases) is remotely useful, you'd be surprised.

I subpoena crap all of the time from various Internet provides, social networking websites, cell phone providers, etc. for the numerous criminal cases I prosecute. 99.9% of the time, their records are either a) incomplete b) not retained for longer than a very short set period of time or c) otherwise completely useless.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

It still had to go through Congress (which is currently in Republican control) before being re-signed. It's always puzzled me as to why Republicans so strongly support the patriot act when they try to reduce to role of government in everything else.

(fwiw, I'm a registered independent. I hate how the only way for a politician to get elected is for him/her to have either extreme left or extreme right views. IMO the ideal balance would be somewhere in the middle)

1) It going through Congress is moot to the point that Obama signed it. The President has veto power and could have let the Act die by not signing it b/c doubtful Congress would be able to override the veto.

2) If you are going to make a big deal of it going through Congress keep in mind half of the U.S. Congress is the Senate, controlled by Democrats. So Democrats actually had two chances to kill the Act and declined.

3) Republicans, at least on paper, are against "Big Goverment," but they are not anarchists. Don't confuse "reducing the role of government" to no government. Republicans are not inconsistent in stating national defense is a vital role of government because it's one the individual cannot accomplish.

4) Neither the Congress nor the President is above the Constitution. Congress can pass laws all day and the President can sign them but if they conflict with the Constitution the Third Branch will strike it down.

5) Most candidates campaign in the middle -- that is how they win. It's only after they win that they veer left or right. Then when campaign season is upon us they wander back to the middle. Look at any General Election campaign ad, GOP or DEM. They go after the "independent" voter because they already have the base sewn up.

 

[Trudy]

Says the company that can decrypt your uploaded files without your permission..

That's only when they encrypt the files. Go ahead and encrypt them yourself, and see how well they can decrypt them.

 

[AgRacer]

Name a U.S. politician who has "extreme left" views? By world standards, your "left-leaning" party is centre-right at best. Which is one of the reasons that the U.S. economy is in so much trouble. There needs to be balance between the interests of the elites and the middle class. In the U.S. you have one party (the Republicans) that does nothing but cater to the rich, corporations and religious nutjobs. Then you have another party that is sort of centrist, centre-right. Where is your left? Really, where is it? Who's standing up for the middle class in the U.S., and who's going to get you out of this economic mess? (*Crickets*)

This is the funniest thing I've read all week.....

Obama, Pelosi, Reed, Frank, SJ Lee, nearly every member of the CBC, Watters (want's fed control of oil companies)....it took me all of 3s to name extreme left politicians. Anyone who thinks these characters are "center right" is lying to themselves.

FTR: I think almost all of them are bad (one way or the other). Very few want to give American's back their liberty and freedoms and get the fed. gov. OUT of our lives. R & D alike only want one thing, more of our money and more power and control.

 

[nylonsteel]

re original article

1986 was eons ago in the digital world

 

[thetexan]

This request is in the best interest of major tech companies. Right now they are flooded with requests from all over the country and it's a legal mess. Texas may have different requirements for obtaining data than New Mexico and if Apple doesn't follow the Texas way they leave themselves open to lawsuit. Not to mention they have to hire an entire workforce to process these requests from every ******* with a badge.

This process would create an uniform process and ensure Apple and other tech companies are covered from lawsuits for wrongly giving out information.

 

[fsck-y dingo]

I don't really understand what's going on. Anyone care to break it down K-5 style for me? Lol.

I'll try and do that for you. Don't worry about the noise cause my classroom is noisy right now. Our homeroom teacher went to make copies and everyone is going crazy.

Some companies are trying to earn customer loyalty by siding with a group of people who are against government agencies (I had to look that one up cause Mrs. Donaldson is still not back) getting personal information without asking.

Many people think that this [hey, give me back my crayon! It's the last cyan since you ate the other two], sorry, david gave up glue paste and now eats our Crayolas. Anyway, some people think this is not going to do any real good. It may help the companies joining the Digital Due Process Coalition because people will think "oh, they care about my privacy so I like them" but in reality the government security people do what they want without having to ask. Kind of like how I think we should be able to go to the bathroom without asking. Some kids get to be free like that but mainly in private schools. That stinks.

So, I hope I helped you learn something new today. Mrs. Donaldson is back so I have to get off my new school issued Apple iPad 2. Principal Strickland (not the one from that old movie by dad watches, but he's bald too) says we get a free dessert in the cafeteria when we say that we use iPads. He says it makes us look pagessive or something like that. I haven't learned that word yet. Free dessert, so I that's what it means to me.

 

[milbournosphere]

1986?

First ARPANET IMP log: the first message ever sent via the ARPANET, 10:30 PM, October 29, 1969.

The 'world wide web' was being created far before 1986. It may have been shut down in 1990, but the program formed the backbone of what came to be www infrastructure in the US.

It was the first, and being first, was best,
but now we lay it down to ever rest.
Now pause with me a moment, shed some tears.
For auld lang syne, for love, for years and years
of faithful service, duty done, I weep.
Lay down thy packet, now, O friend, and sleep.

-Vinton Cerf

 

[mcmlxix]

+1 for Apple etc., but what’s the point.

The spook agencies do whatever they want. And there is nothing private companies can do about it.

The spook agencies do whatever they want. And there is nothing the government can do about it.

And who just re-signed that act?
Thank you.
Carry on.

Not only that, but (my) Senator Al “Patriot Act” Franken, who had that gall to blast Apple over a red herring of a privacy issue.

 

[Swift]

Gotta say

It's hard to listen to the conspiracy theory mentality among young people, especially, today. Conspiracy "theories" are stories that make us passive and compliant. Zombie paranoids.

Isn't this change of the law just making it explicit that the cloud companies that are forming want to have the law come up with a warrant when it wants to search your stuff? I mean, not that real, cynical politics isn't being practiced every day in D.C., so if anybody has the text of the proposed law, then please correct me. This would clear up one of the many legal questions that need to be answered in the networked world. Yes, I think you should need a warrant to search my records.

I think, on the other hand, that I don't mind the police being able to see your GPS and pen data, which is in the cell and billing records. Where was this guy at 4:00 yesterday? That might relieve you of suspicion as easily as implicate you. After you question somebody, you might want to see if they were there -- or their phone was -- at some time, or that you said you didn't call x but you did. It's the kind of info you need to suspect someone and go forward with an investigation. But, say, to hack your voice messages? That would need a warrant.

Society has changed technologically. But the cloud is the very definition of a place where we have our "persons, houses, papers, and effects."

 

[huntson]

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Image


the DDP is supporting amendments to ensure the government can't track your cell phone or obtain online content such as emails, photos, documents and backup files without first going to court to get a search warrant.

What about the companies that are part of it - they can track anytime they want?

 

[theBB]

I don't really understand what's going on. Anyone care to break it down K-5 style for me? Lol.

As the relevant laws were written a long time ago, any government law enforcement agency, without judicial oversight, can ask for any of your emails that are older than 180 days if they are still stored at a third party server. They are assumed "abandoned". Any emails that are read, but not removed are also assumed "abandoned", so again no permission from a judge is required. Only emails that require judicial oversight, probable cause findings etc. are unread emails that are less than 180 days. That was the law about a year ago, I don't think it has changed since then, but I cannot say I followed up on it recently.

----------

3) Republicans, at least on paper, are against "Big Goverment," but they are not anarchists. Don't confuse "reducing the role of government" to no government. Republicans are not inconsistent in stating national defense is a vital role of government because it's one the individual cannot accomplish.

And because there are defense contractors strategically located in every state that lobby and contribute to the politicians to keep the money flow going without much public oversight to check effectiveness or to keep costs under control, of course all in the name of security.

 

[accessoriesguy]

I didn't even know about this, I guess it isn't right for them to have free access to our information. I believe they should have a way to get it, but just not easy access. Like in donny darko, if your innocent you have nothing to worry about...but at the same time I don't want the government to have the ability to stock us and go all big brother. That is why we should have protection from the government accessing our virtual stuff without proper consent.

 

[jayman99]

Good to see Apple, a big player, is supporting this movement. Privacy and security are so huge today that everyone needs to have their rights. Protect our rights! I'm glad Apple is taking a part in this.

 

[onigami]

Wow, there be crazies here.

That said, I wish Apple actually respected Due Process by having the police present a search warrant to Sergio Calderon, rather than searching his house themselves and threatening him throughout the search process. I'm sorry, but the iPhone 5 does not entitle you to being above the law.

The EFF should not have allowed them this. It really compromises their position.

 

[Optheduim]

glad i read this. I'm glad to see that these companies are looking out for their customers' privacy.

 

[idunn]

Sign of the times

'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
- U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment


I believe the U.S. Constitution is already quite clear on this matter.

It really does not matter whether our government has repeatedly violated its mandate in this regard, and continually seeks to abrogate our Constitutional rights all the more -- all of it is illegal. It should not take another law, and reminder, of why this is so.

But if it will serve to put them of their place, then fine.

 

[Tiggs]

Nice to see Apple protect people's rights. Of course, seems like things such as the Patriot Act will ultimately work around such things

 

[pmjoe]

Specifically, the DDP is supporting amendments to ensure the government can't track your cell phone or obtain online content such as emails, photos, documents and backup files without first going to court to get a search warrant.

Great to know that these bastions of personal privacy are protecting me from big government. I am greatly reassured knowing Apple, AT&T, Google, etc. would never want to track my cell phone, or obtain my personal emails, photos, documents, backup files, etc.