New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Files Official Motion to Vacate Court Order, Says FBI Seeks 'Dangerous Power'

Apple has officially filed a motion (via Re/code) to vacate the court order that would require the company to help the FBI hack into the iPhone 5c of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. "This is not a case about one isolated iPhone," reads the filing, going on to say the FBI is seeking a "dangerous power" that would undermine the security and privacy interests of hundreds of millions of people.

As expected, Apple argues that the All Writs Act, which the FBI is using in the case, does not give the government a pass to "conscript and commandeer" the company. "No law supports such unlimited and sweeping use of the judicial process," Apple writes. "And the Constitution forbids it." Apple believes setting a precedent for allowing the All Writs Act to be used in this way could lead to more insidious demands in the future, such as turning on the microphone or camera to aid in surveillance.

applefbi
Apple says FBI's demand for new code would violate its First and Fifth Amendment rights, as it is the equivalent of compelled speech and is contrary to Apple's core principles. Apple also points towards the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, using it as evidence Congress limited the assistance companies must provide to law enforcement.
In addressing the twin needs of law enforcement and privacy, Congress, through CALEA, specified when a company has an obligation to assist the government with decryption of communications, and made clear that a company has no obligation to do so where, as here, the company does not retain a copy of the decryption key.
Apple says the government "sought to cut off debate and circumvent thoughtful analysis" by taking the case to the courts and invoking terrorism instead of pursuing new legislation. Once again, Apple says the FBI's demand to create new software that would allow it to brute force the passcode on the iPhone in question is "too dangerous to build" because it could fall into the hands of criminals and foreign agents.
In short, the government wants to compel Apple to create a crippled and insecure product. Once the process is created, it provides an avenue for criminals and foreign agents to access millions of iPhones. And once developed for our government, it is only a matter of time before foreign governments demand the same tool.
While the government insists the software would be used for a single phone, Apple points out that there are already multiple applications for similar orders. Assisting the FBI could quickly lead to additional orders using the case as a precedent should Apple be ordered to comply.

According to Apple, creating the software the FBI wants would necessitate between six and 10 Apple engineers dedicating a "substantial portion of their time" for a minimum of two weeks and up to four weeks.

It would require new code, detailed documentation, the development of encryption procedures, and rigorous quality assurance testing with the entire development process carefully logged. If the need should arise to respond to multiple demands, Apple would need to create "full-time positions" in a new "hacking" department.

Apple ends its motion by calling for the decision on security to be made by American citizens through the democratic process rather than through a court order.
Society is still debating the important privacy and security issues posed by this case. The government's desire to leave no stone unturned, however well intentioned, does not authorize it to cut off debate and impose its views on society.
Now that Apple has filed its official opposition, it will need to wait for a response from the courts. Should the motion to vacate be denied by the district court, Apple has pledged to take its fight all the way to the Supreme Court.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Tag: Apple-FBI


Top Rated Comments

(View all)

21 weeks ago
MacRumors has done a great job keeping up with this. Thanks.
Rating: 55 Votes
21 weeks ago
I Stand With Apple!
Rating: 32 Votes
21 weeks ago
I just read the entire filing.

In my opinion, Apple has an extremely strong legal footing to defend their position. They attack the misuse of the All Writs Act on multiple fronts, with compelling precedents and examples. If anyone wants to skim the filling, the strongest arguments are made on page 25-34, with page 26 being my personal favorite:




Link to the full filing:
https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/300524297?access_key=key-PxKT72gK0SepgrXiRuIt&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll

Rating: 25 Votes
21 weeks ago
Not too long ago, the public and law-makers around the country urged Apple to secure its phones so they can't be used anymore in case they get stolen.
Now, some of the same law-makers somehow want a way around the protections erected specifically at their behest...

Not sure what Steve Jobs would do - he stayed out of politics as much as he could.
But one thing is sure - if somebody could sway a court or a jury, he could.

Though, to be fair, Tim also did very well in front of that Senate committee a while ago.
Rating: 22 Votes
21 weeks ago
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. :p

BL.
Rating: 18 Votes
21 weeks ago

DAMN! Apple is serious about this.


As well they should be. Extremely important case. An epic and watershed moment in our history.
Rating: 18 Votes
21 weeks ago
Tim drops the mic and walks off the stage.
Rating: 14 Votes
21 weeks ago

Thankfully courts can and will ignore Apples PR stunt/******** and side with sanity.

I love that so many people can just carelessly label their Constitutional privacy as a "PR stunt" ... very encouraging to see so many people just plain not care what this whole ordeal could mean to them ... to the world.
Rating: 12 Votes
21 weeks ago
DAMN! Apple is serious about this.
Rating: 11 Votes
21 weeks ago

Please elaborate on this 'Constitutional' right to privacy.

Do you have a right to privacy in a safety deposit box?
Do you have an absolute right to privacy for your banking records?

No you say? Why are any of these scenarios different?
Banks help law enforcement with safety deposit boxes and bank record requests all the time with a court order.

Well then. The right to privacy is irrelevant here because

A) There is a court order
B) The actor is dead

No one is arguing that a dead terrorist has the right to privacy. :rolleyes: This is about the rights of the rest of us.
Rating: 10 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]