02-17-2016, 01:59 PM
(02-17-2016, 11:50 AM)Benton Wrote: I'm with both sides.
Apple did right by initially telling them to get a warrant. But after the warrant, I can't see how Apple can avoid providing access to the information. The whole forcing them to make a "key" is another argument (I don't think they can), but if Apple can access the info, I think the warrant compels them to do so.
You have a right to privacy, but if there's just cause (in this case, an act of terrorism), then you're going to be searched. That extends to digital devices.
The warrant granted them access to the phone, their inability to get access is on them. They are trying to over interpret an old law to force them to develop technology that doesn't exist. That isn't a reasonable expectation and at some point it will be overturned. Encryption isn't illegal and until a law exists that require a back door then they are within their rights to refuse to develop one.
