A story, true but hard to believe.

Apples vs the FBI

I am the most ardent defender of all democratic rights.

I am in favour of the right to a citizen's privacy, a right to free speech, a free press, and all the other rights which go along with the ideal of Democracy.

I believe also that these rights bring with them certain responsibilities.

Assume that from the window of my bed room I observe the commission of a heinous crime, say, a multiple murder, and I am the only witness to this deed. It is my information only which can assist the police in solving this crime.

Do I then have the right to refuse to supply this information to the investigators ? Do I have the right to insist that this might be an infringement of my own right to privacy? Or do I have a moral obligation, a responsibility to assist the investigating services ?

I most certainly feel the weight of an obligation to act in common with my society's protectors.

I shall be obliged to give them as good a description of the criminal or criminals as I am capable of giving.

Now to the Case:

Two terrorists attacked the Inland Regional Centre in San Bernardino, California, and in the process they killed 14 persons and injured 22 more.

Regional police forces apprehended the killers, who in turn were killed in a shoot-out.

During further investigations, the Federal Buro of Investigations, (FBI) came into possession of an I-Phone, in which they suspected to find electronic data helpful in solving this and/ preventing other, similar crimes.

The FBI could, however, not crack the security codes of this I-Phone.

They turned to Apple, the manufacturer of this phone, for help in cracking these codes.

Apple, however, refused to assist the FBI by claiming that it was their policy to never undermine the security of their products.

What have we here ?

First we have a Federal Police attempting to prevent further killings of innocent citizens, on hand of information possibly stored in this telephone.

Secondly we have a privately owned company, Apple, who is prepared to tolerate more terrorist attacks and to tolerate further killings of innocent citizens, simply to protect the inviolability of its product.

This is more than I, a sworn defender of all Democratic Rights, can accept.

There must be legislation which makes the refusal of assisting the Police in their efforts to solve an already perpetrated crime and/or the forestalling of future criminal activities, itself a crime.

Bertstravels