Apple feud with FBI over iPhone order heats up
Apple feud with FBI over iPhone order heats up - San Jose Mercury News
By Howard Mintz
Posted: 02/19/2016 11:59:57 AM PST
The U.S. Justice Department blasted Apple Friday for attempting to resist an order to unlock the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino County shooters, urging a federal judge to force the Silicon Valley giant to comply and accusing it of interfering with a crucial terrorism probe.
In a 30-page document, Justice Department lawyers disputed Apple CEO Tim Cook’s contention that the order raises sweeping privacy implications for Apple and the rest of the tech industry. Riverside-based U.S. Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym, who issued the order earlier this week, has given Apple additional time, until next Friday, to file its legal arguments against the government’s request. The judge has scheduled a March 22 hearing in the case.
A collection of Apple iPhones and iPads fill a table during a news conference at New York City Police Headquarters, Thursday, Feb. 18, 2016 in New York. Police and prosecutors in New York City said Thursday that the top-notch encryption technology on Apple mobile phones is now routinely hindering criminal investigations. And they predicted the problem could grow worse as more criminals figure out how well the devices keep secrets. (AP Photo/Verena Dobnik) ( Verena Dobnik )In its court filing Friday, the government stressed that it is seeking only Apple’s help in recovering the passcode on Syed Rizwan Farook’s iPhone 5, not a broader “backdoor” to enable access to a wider range of smartphones. The filing noted that the FBI believes there could be vital information gleaned from the phone in the aftermath of a terror attack that left 14 dead.“To allow Apple not to comply with the order would frustrate the execution of a valid warrant and thwart the public interest in a full and complete investigation of a horrific act of terrorism,” prosecutors wrote. “Apple’s current refusal to comply,” government lawyers added “appears to be based on its concern over its business model and public brand marketing strategy.” The government’s request, and Pym’s order earlier this week, have sent shock waves through the tech industry. To underscore the stakes and the scope of the anticipated legal battle ahead, Apple has enlisted former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson and his powerhouse law firm, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, to represent the company in the case, according to court filings Friday and one of Olson’s partners in Los Angeles.Apple did not respond to a request for public comment Friday.High-profile figures continue to take sides in the dispute. Politicians from California Sen. Dianne Feinstein to Republican presidential contenders are pressing Apple to help the government in the terror probe, with Donald Trump on Friday calling for a boycott of Apple until the company provides the information. Privacy advocates and companies such as Yahoo and Facebook, meanwhile, this week defended Apple’s stance.On Friday, bipartisan leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee invited Cook and FBI Director James Comey to appear at some unspecified point to discuss issues related to the ongoing conflict between encryption and national security needs.
Friday’s legal salvo does not have much practical importance in the court battle. Federal prosecutors did not seek any immediate action from the judge and conceded that the latest motion is “not legally necessary,” adding that the government weighed in again to provide Apple with the “adversarial testing it seeks.”
The government is relying on a 19th-century law to force Apple to help in the terror probe, saying in court papers that federal investigators have gotten cooperation under that law in similar requests around the country. A federal judge in Brooklyn has been weighing one of those cases since last fall.
Legal experts say Apple’s challenge will force the courts to balance law enforcement’s public safety and national security arguments against the tech industry’s privacy concerns. Apple, in Cook’s public letter to customers, indicated that it believes the government’s request would hand over a “master lock” to iPhone security, warning that providing such assistance to the FBI would extend well beyond the San Bernardino investigation.
Federal prosecutors refuted that contention in Friday’s court filing. Specifically, the government maintains that Apple must devise a software program to crack the security password on Farook’s iPhone 5, but would retain control of that program and would not have to even supply it to the government. The Justice Department notes that Apple has cooperated in similar cases involving iPhones run on older operating systems, and argues the company is changing course.
In addition, federal prosecutors also contradicted Cook, who in the letter indicated the government is asking for software developments Apple does not currently have and which the company considers “too dangerous to create.” In court papers, prosecutors claim Apple refused to cooperate with the FBI on the security issue “although it conceded it had the technical capability to help.”
Howard Mintz covers legal affairs. Contact him at 408-286-0236; follow him at Twitter.com/hmintz.