1. Our rate for this service is $10,000 / hour and we cannot provide an accurate estimate of how long it will take to do this or if it is even possible.
2. We will require each potential month of work to be paid in advance.
3. Bank a lot of money and wait a few years for a budgetary hearing to decide to stop paying for it.
> The legal question "is not whether the government should be able to force Apple to help it unlock a specific device; it is instead whether the All Writs Act resolves that issue and many others like it to come," Orenstein wrote.
That's the whole issue, and also the best way I've been able to explain the magnitude of these decisions to people who haven't read as much about these cases. The news thinks the case is about encryption, but in the courts, it's about whether or not the government _already_ has the power to compel an uninterested 3rd-party to act against its will.
The government has always had the power to compel an uninterested third party to act against its will. I can serve someone with a subpoena in a civil suit and they have to show up and answer my questions. Nobody wants to do this, but the government compels them to.
The issue isn't whether the government has the power to compel assistance with the judicial process. It's about what sorts of things the government can compel people to do.
Apple should just announce it will move to Canada and no longer sell the iPhone in the US. Bam problem solved. The government would fold. As a long time Linux user, seeing apple seemingly stand up for privacy has given me a new found respect for them, won't be switching though.
1. Our rate for this service is $10,000 / hour and we cannot provide an accurate estimate of how long it will take to do this or if it is even possible.
2. We will require each potential month of work to be paid in advance.
3. Bank a lot of money and wait a few years for a budgetary hearing to decide to stop paying for it.