Elsewhere in the United States, demonstrators in more than 40 cities across the U.S. rallied in front of Apple stores to protest the Department of Justice demand that Apple help hack an iPhone used by one of the San Bernadino shooters.
Advertisement
“Moreover, the government has not made any showing that it sought or received technical assistance from other federal agencies with expertise in digital forensics, which assistance might obviate the need to conscript Apple to create the back door it now seeks”.
In his first interview since the controversy erupted last week, Cook told ABC News that it was a hard decision to resist a court order directing Apple to override security features on an iPhone used by Syed Farook, one of two extremists who killed 14 people in the Southern California city in December.
The FTSE 100 company said the court had over-stepped its jurisdiction and should throw out the order. Last week, it obtained a court order from a California magistrate asking Apple to comply. So they’ve asked Apple to develop software they could load on the phone to let them hook up a computer program that would guess the password without the risk of deletion. But law enforcement pressed on, with a federal court ordering Apple to weaken security so that the FBI could break into the device. Apple is staking a claim to the high moral ground: this is not just about one phone, it says, but about the security and privacy of millions of citizens everywhere. “This is about how do we protect or civil liberties and chase bad guys at the same time”. He said Apple’s stance hasn’t changed – instead, it’s the government’s request that has changed and become more expansive than ever.
– Also on constitutional grounds, Apple said writing software is protected free expression and that forcing it to create new software would be “compelled speech and viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment”.
The company’s argument that lawmakers failed to give prosecutors the power they are seeking reveals a gambit that the Supreme Court will side with it on privacy and block an attempt to make it a “hacking” department for the government.
While stressing that Apple has no intention of aiding terrorists, CEO Tim Cook firmly rejected the request, arguing that creating such an OS would ultimately harm the country.
Advertisement
Apple’s attorney, Bruce Sewell will testify before Congress on 1 March about the encryption case.
