Reply to post: Re: Absolutely Not

Why Tim Cook is wrong: A privacy advocate's view

Warm Braw

Re: Absolutely Not

Quite.

If there were an active case against the owner of the phone and its outcome depended on the contents of the phone, there might, under certain circumstances be scope for the court to require some basic, lawful, assistance in acquiring that contents.

However, as far as I can tell:

1/ There is no case, there is merely an ongoing investigation into the activities of a dead man

2/ The court is essentially requiring Apple to act as an extension of a law enforcement agency at its own considerable cost

3/ The precedent would be that onerous conditions could be placed on anyone by a court to assist in a criminal investigation - this is effectively conscripting a posse.

4/ There is a strong chance the court does not in fact have the legal authority to make the order it has made.

Apart from that, I'm sure it's just dandy.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon