Proposed law could ban Apple from selling iPhones in California

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by caligurl, Jan 21, 2016.

  1. caligurl macrumors 68030

    caligurl

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    socal
    #1
    OMG! So sick of this state!

    http://www.cultofmac.com/408122/proposed-law-could-ban-apple-from-selling-iphones-in-california/

    Apple could be banned from selling iPhones on its home turf of California if a new bill banning unbreakable encryption is passed.

    Called bill 1681, the proposed law was put forward by California assembly member Jim Cooper, who wants any smartphone sold in California after July 1, 2015 to be “capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its manufacturer or its operating system provider.”
     
  2. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #2
    If I were you I would be taking real good care of my old iPhone.
     
  3. ruck macrumors member

    ruck

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
  4. kupkakez macrumors 68000

    kupkakez

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    #4
    Isn't New York trying something similar? I thought I briefly read something on here somewhat related.
     
  5. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #5
    Here is how to contact Jim Cooper:

    Contact Assembly Member Jim Cooper

    Capitol Office
    P.O. Box 942849, Room 5158, Sacramento, CA 94249-0009; (916) 319-2009
    District Office

    9250 Laguna Springs Drive, Suite 220, Elk Grove, CA 95758; (916) 670-7888

    Write him or call him and tell him what you think!
     
  6. thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #6
    No surprise at all since NYS and CA always compete to be the most *progressive* - it's for your safety authoritarians.
     
  7. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #7
    Just imagine a whole country doing things this stupid!
     
  8. caligurl, Jan 21, 2016
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2016

    caligurl thread starter macrumors 68030

    caligurl

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    socal
    #8
    They are, according the the article. Which screws me cuz that's where I'd "buy" one and have it sent to me from.... but I guess not.... stupid states!
    --- Post Merged, Jan 21, 2016 ---
    I already do... but I have a need for the latest and greatest! :(
    --- Post Merged, Jan 21, 2016 ---
    OMG! Guy who answers the phone is a DONKEYHAT! (change DONKEY to another word)!
    --- Post Merged, Jan 21, 2016 ---
    That's what DONKEYhat on the phone at jim whathisnames office was trying to sell....
    --- Post Merged, Jan 21, 2016 ---
    Is this an old story? It was just posted on cult of mac this morning but I see jim whatshisname proposed they not sell the encrypted phones after July 1, 2015? Or maybe cult of mac made a typo?

    Well even if it's an old story it still pisses me off! I don't have anything illegal to hide but if they leave a door that means a bad guy can figure out how to get in that door.
     
  9. barkomatic macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Manhattan
    #9
    I wonder if Apple would simply create a backdoor only for iPhones sold in California and other states/countries where laws like this are passed. Or, if they would dig in their heels and stop selling iPhones there and let popular hate affect the politicians who put forth these violations of privacy.
     
  10. Closingracer macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #10


    In New York it won't pass... But California who knows
     
  11. caligurl thread starter macrumors 68030

    caligurl

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    socal
    #11
    Hmmmmmm part of me likes the idea of apple digging in their heels to have the hate affect the crummy politicians! But I'm not sure it would and then I'd be either without an iphone or one that hackers could eventually figure out a way to get into.
     
  12. barkomatic macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Manhattan
    #12
    Well, Apple just may stop selling iPhones to force a showdown. If they cave and release a software update that creates the hack opportunity then upon the first major breach of security those same politicians will publicly chastise Apple for allowing it--you know they would.
     
  13. caligurl thread starter macrumors 68030

    caligurl

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    socal
    #13
    Apparently this was just introduced yesterday... so it is a new story (which means when MR finally figures it out they'll close my thread and make one of their own). So the July 1, 2015 date is not when they propose this happening... it's about other features the phones had to have. They propose this happen with phones manufactured on or after 1/1/17:

    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/15-16/bill/asm/ab_1651-1700/ab_1681_bill_20160120_introduced.html

    Here's the text:

    AB 1681, as introduced, Cooper. Smartphones.
    Existing law requires that a smartphone that is manufactured on or
    after July 1, 2015, and sold in California after that date, include
    a technological solution at the time of sale, which may consist of
    software, hardware, or both software and hardware, that, once
    initiated and successfully communicated to the smartphone, can render
    inoperable the essential features, as defined, of the smartphone to
    an unauthorized user when the smartphone is not in the possession of
    an authorized user.
    This bill would require a smartphone that is manufactured on or
    after January 1, 2017, and sold in California, to be capable of being
    decrypted and unlocked by its manufacturer or its operating system
    provider. The bill would, except as provided, subject a seller or
    lessor that knowingly failed to comply with that requirement to a
    civil penalty of $2,500 for each smartphone sold or leased. The bill
    would prohibit a seller or lessor who has paid this civil penalty
    from passing any portion of the penalty on to purchasers of
    smartphones. The bill would authorize only the Attorney General or a
    district attorney to bring a civil suit to enforce these provisions.
     
  14. KdParker macrumors 601

    KdParker

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    Everywhere
    #14
    There's nothing 'progressive' about any law like the one described here.
     
  15. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #15
    I think Apple should stand it's ground and let the courts strike this down in Ca. Let the people let their "law makers" (lol) know how they feel!

    In the mean time just think of the market for selling phones for use outside Ca to the Ca users! We are talking billions!
     
  16. HEK macrumors 68030

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #16
    Watch phone sales in Nevada, Arizona, Oregon go way up. And as a side note watch Jim Cooper look for another job when he isn't re-elected. New towns spring up at border crossings, with dozens of phone stores as only businesses.
     
  17. caligurl thread starter macrumors 68030

    caligurl

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    socal
    #17
    I guess I'll be taking a day trip to AZ or NV if this thing passes! Those border towns all along cali's state border are going to have roadside iphone stands! haha!
    --- Post Merged, Jan 21, 2016 ---
    we were posting at the same time... same thought process!
     
  18. HEK macrumors 68030

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #18
    all phones sold in California will be pre-jail broken.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 21, 2016 ---
    New gold rush, but out of California instead of into it.
     
  19. thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #19
    NYS declares itself as in Heil Cuomo's own rantings * NYS is the most progressive state*. So yes, these are the policies pushed by *progressive* states.., nanny state...authoritarian to the minutia ( no large soda for you!)
     
  20. lordofthereef macrumors G5

    lordofthereef

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #20
    So the bill simply requires Apple to be able to decrypt phones they themselves manufacture?
     
  21. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #21
    And Apple is resisting this as if their is ANY backdoor there is danger of it being abused or them being forced by some court to decrypt their devices.
     
  22. lordofthereef macrumors G5

    lordofthereef

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #22
    Just wanted to be sure I understood what the bill was about. I guess I see this right in line with a search warrant. Not picking sides, but unless I am missing something, I feel like this isn't so different. Frankly I'd rather have my phone raided than my home lol.
     
  23. HEK macrumors 68030

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #23
    And I'd rather not have a backdoor that a hacker WILL figure out and compromise my privacy. I support and applaud Tim Cook for protecting my right to privacy.
     
  24. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #24
    You can bet if their is a secret backdoor given to our government, it would be a secret no more.

    They can't even keep their OWN personal information secret, imagine how hard they work to protect ours!
     
  25. lordofthereef macrumors G5

    lordofthereef

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #25
    That's perfectly fine. I'm not well versed enough with coding to understand whether this would increase the risks of being hacked, to be frank.

    Most of the discussion here seemed to be privacy concerns and government abuse, hence my original statement. They can already make your life pretty damn miserable if they want, unfortunately.
     

Share This Page