You might have heard: The U.S. government wants Apple to unlock an iPhone 5C that belonged to San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. The order, handed down by a U.S. magistrate judge, demands Apple (AAPL) write new software that would help the FBI get around the passcode so it can search the phone for evidence. And Apple isn’t playing ball.
The FBI was successful in getting the order issued thanks to a law from 1789 for just this kind of situation: A federal court asking a third party to help a different government entity. But that doesn’t matter — this fight has quickly become an ethical one, and both prominent individuals and corporations are making it clear where they fall based on such lines.
So: On which side of the dividing line do the power players in and around Corporate America stand?
ACLU: The civil rights group released a statement calling the order “an unprecedented, unwise, and unlawful move by the government.”
Amnesty International: In a similar statement, Amnesty said that Apple is, “right to fight back in this case: the FBI’s request… would set a very dangerous precedent. Such backdoors undermine everyone’s security and threaten our right to privacy.”
Anonymous: On its official Twitter feed, the hacker group has been retweeting Edward Snowden and others sharing concerns about the FBI’s request. Anonymous also said the White House, “willfully misrepresents what govt is asking Apple to do in order to expand surveillance powers.”
Edward Snowden: The privacy crusader said on Twitter that the FBI is “creating a world where citizens rely on Apple to defend their rights, rather than the other way around.” He added: “This is the most important tech case in a decade.”
Information Technology Industry Council, a Washington advocacy group that represents the interests of the likes of Google, Facebook (FB), Microsoft (MSFT), and others, said in a statement that the fight against terrorism, “is actually strengthened by the security tools and technologies created by the technology sector, so we must tread carefully.”
Mozilla, the maker of Firefox: The company tweeted that it stands with Apple, because “we should not set a dangerous precedent.”
WhatsApp: CEO Jan Koum wrote on Facebook, “I have always admired Tim Cook for his stance on privacy… We must not allow this dangerous precedent to be set. Today our freedom and our liberty is at stake.”
China: Apple CEO Tim Cook writes in his open letter that, “in the wrong hands,” software that could bypass the iPhone’s passcode would be dangerous. As the New York Times writes, Apple and other tech companies have argued in the past that, “creating an opening in their products for government investigators would also create a vulnerability that Chinese, Iranian, Russian or North Korean hackers could exploit.” Indeed, China, as a nation, is likely on the side of the U.S. in this case because it has proven, time and again, that its government does not place a premium on privacy rights and that it often takes its cues from what the U.S. does. If the FBI’s order sets the precedent that even the U.S. believes there are moments when it can intervene and force technology companies to sacrifice privacy, China and other nations may follow.
So the U.S. government is going up against Apple. And the government’s associated arms and entities are, understandably, on the side of the order. But technology companies, and civil rights groups, are almost across the board staunchly siding with Apple.
Yahoo Finance will continue to update this post as more executives and companies make clear where they stand.
- Information Technology
- Technology & Electronics