|
|
|
|
|
by MCRed
3776 days ago
|
|
Also, the court isn't asking, its' demanding, and its demanding Apple create a vulnerability in a system designed to thwart such vulnerabilities. I'm not sure it's even possible. What if Apple didn't fight this yet failed to create a working vulnerability? After all the phone has protections against its firmware being replaced without the passcode! IF Apple were to fail would they be held in contempt of court? This is why I have contempt for our courts-- way too many judges who are never punished for their tyranny. |
|
There has to be a violation of the Constitution in there somewhere. The government cannot compel private companies or individuals to surrender private property (in this case, intellectual property), it cannot restrict freedom of speech (in this case, software is an expression of speech), and perhaps there is also a tie-in to the Commerce Clause.
In other words, at a certain point the U.S. government's power should be and must be limited. Unlimited power is dangerous and surely would violate the vision and foundational philosophy behind the Constitution. In this case, unlimited power means that a law enforcement agency can justify nearly any kind of forcible action with the vague reasons of "national security" or "criminal justice".