U.S.A. 1 Apple 0

Apple will lose its National Security lawsuit with the United States government. Apple is a corporation. Apple has software which is not protected by Constitutional provisions other than the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution (“the taking provision”). At best Apple can say it has trade secrets to protect.

To my delight and without my knowledge Apple discovers and fixes problems, issues and patches in its software. It gives away for free those updates. In order to make those improvements, Apple must enter a software program, change the code and test its compatibility with the remainder of the software, the apps and the machine itself. There is no backdoor created.

Complaining that Apple is being asked to write a backdoor key to enter an iPhone (and all the iPhones in the world) may not be a solid argument.

There is no right to privacy enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. It is inferred from the Fourth Amendment (Search & Seizure plus warrants). The Government has a warrant. The Fourth Amendment is satisfied. The Right to Privacy is certainly part of the Ninth Amendment, which neither courts want to cite nor humans want to ponder. So the Ninth Amendment has been forgotten.

In the Apple matter does the corporation have a right to assert a right to privacy for individuals who are dead, who committed murder, and who likely are aligned with terrorists, domestically and overseas? The right to privacy belongs to the two dead perpetrators. They are dead; they have no right to privacy. Can Apple resurrect their right to privacy to stop the government’s getting the information from the phone? Note that the information on the iPhone is owned by the perpetrators, not Apple.

One legal issue: Does Apple have standing to assert the right to privacy on behalf of the dead, especially in this case?

This case is a loser for Apple. I don’t know which set of attorneys (big fees, bad result) convinced Tim Cook to oppose. If the case goes forward, Apple and the whole software business will be saddled with a poor, unrepresentative legal precedent which will forever be like law enforcement that now obtains a warrant for a safety deposit box rented to a criminal, getting the key and retrieving the contents.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s