CNET
More than 40 top tech companies, including Amazon, Facebook, Google and Microsoft, as well as privacy and industry trade groups, weigh in on the government's demand to force Apple to change the iPhone.
The bandwagon of supporters in Apple's
fight against the FBI keeps getting bigger.
Amazon, Facebook, Google and Microsoft,
along with 11 other companies, filed on Thursday a joint amicus brief, a court
filing that throws their support behind Apple as it prepares to face off
against the US government in federal court later this month.
"The government is not just asking
companies to do what they do in the normal course of business; the government
is asking companies to change how they do business," they
said in their filing. But while they noted that they don't have any
sympathy for terrorists, the companies added that "cell phones are the way
we organize and remember the things that are important to us; they are, in a
very real way, an extension of our memories. And as a result, to access
someone's cell phone is to access their innermost thoughts and their most
private affairs."
Their show of support came after Twitter,
Airbnb, LinkedIn and 13 other companies filed a separate joint
amicus brief, and Intel and AT&T submitted their own filings. Apple
also has the support of top industry groups, including the Consumer Technology
Association, Information Technology Industry Council, TechNet and the
BSA/Software Alliance. The Electronic
Frontier Foundation was joined by 46 cryptographers, researchers and
technologists in their pro-Apple filing. Privacy International and the Human
Rights Watch jointly filed their own brief.
The American
Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday was the first to file its support for
Apple in a brief on Wednesday.
Apple is compiling a list
of all the briefs filed in its behalf on its website. The amicus briefs are
due to the court by today.
The tech world has largely sided with
Apple CEO Tim Cook, with everyone ranging from mobile executives at a conference in Barcelona,
Spain, to cybersecurity experts gathered in San Francisco
getting behind the iPhone maker.
Apple
takes on the FBI
That's because despite their differences,
they agree with Apple's argument that being forced by the US to create special
software to break into its encrypted iPhone sets a dangerous precedent that
could leave all of our devices vulnerable. This so-called security "back
door" concept can be applied to everything from a phone running on
Google's Android software to a PC running on Microsoft's
Windows 10 to personal
medical devices.
"The target of the government's
request in this case is Apple, but the government's theory would just as easily
extend to any third-party developer that has as one of its functions collecting
and storing personal information about the device's owner," the coalition
of trade groups said in a
19-page joint brief. "The authority sought by the government would
therefore extend not only to phones, laptop computers and tablets, but also to automobiles that store
information regarding location and times of use; insulin pumps that store
information about blood sugar levels; and the myriad other devices that collect
and store personal information."
The FBI argues the situation is specific
to the single iPhone 5C used by one of the terrorists involved in a December
massacre in San Bernardino, California, in which 14 people died and 20 others
were wounded.
The US has argued that having such secure
zones, which are completely off limits to authorities, create a safe haven for
criminals.
At least one amicus brief was filed
Thursday in support of the FBI. Several family members of San Bernardino
shooting victims urged that the court "not be led astray by Apple's
grandstanding."
"Recovery of information from the
iPhone in question may not lead to anything new. But, what if there is evidence
pointing to a third shooter? What if it leads to an unknown terrorist
cell?" wrote Mark Sanfeur, whose son was among those killed in the attack.
"What if others are attacked, and you
and I did nothing to prevent it?" Sanfeur wrote in a letter to Apple's CEO
included in the brief filed by attorney Stephen Larson of the Los Angeles-based
law firm of Larson O'Brien.
The tech industry, based on today's
filings, shows just how strongly they disagree.
"It would set a dangerous precedent,
creating a world in which the government could simply force companies to
create, design, and redesign their systems to allow law enforcement access to
data, instead of requiring the government to use the measures, and meet the
requirements, of legislatively enacted statutory schemes," the group
including Twitter, LinkedIn and Airbnb wrote
in its 26-page amicus brief.
"Granting the government such
extraordinary authority, without any set rules or legal protections, will not
only erode user privacy and security and defeat users' interest in
transparency, it will undermine an existing legislative framework balancing
competing interests and policy considerations," they added. "Despite
consistent advocacy from the FBI for nearly 20 years, Congress has yet to
advance, much less pass, legislation that would require companies like Apple to
ensure governmental access to data on the devices it sells to the public."
While the tech world is in alignment, the
public is not. The Pew Research Center found that 51 percent of
those surveyed believe Apple should comply with the court order, while 38
percent said the company shouldn't unlock the iPhone. A later Reuters
poll found 46 percent of respondents agreed with Apple's position and 35
percent disagreed.
A court hearing to determine whether Apple should be forced to comply with the
FBI's request is set for March 22 in federal court in Riverside, California.
Earlier this week, Apple's top lawyer, Bruce Sewell, spoke on a panel opposite
FBI Director James Comey debating personal security versus national security in
a five-hour session on Capitol Hill.
Sewell is on the executive council of
TechNet, which boasts leaders such as Cisco Chairman John Chambers, Alphabet
Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, Oracle CEO Safra Catz and other power players.
While AT&T has asked the court to
dismiss the FBI request, the Dallas telecommunications giant also made a plea
for the government to settle the debate. "Congress is the right body to
weigh the compelling, but competing, interests in privacy and security,"
the company said in its filing.
Apple already scored some legal backing
after a US District Court judge on Monday dismissed a similar request on a different case
involving a drug dealer in Queens, New York. In that situation, the
authorities had used the All Writs Act, a 227-year law enacted under President
George Washington, to compel Apple to help break into the suspect's phone. That's
the same law that the FBI is using in the San Bernardino case.
Following the ruling, an Apple executive
said the New York ruling could sway the San Bernardino case. The Department of
Justice said it was "disappointed" by the ruling and will continue to
challenge the order in the court system.
Facebook, Google, Amazon and others, in
their filing, reinforced their view that the FBI's request will affect the
entire tech industry -- and the products themselves. "With enough time and
resources, [our] engineers could possibly come up with any number of new
versions of their companies' products that circumvent or undermine their
pre-existing data-security features. But those new versions would not be the
same product anymore. Snapchat would not be Snapchat; Box would not be Box;
Gmail would not Gmail; WhatsApp would not be WhatsApp; and so on."
No comments:
Post a Comment