When Apple says it's "going to Congress" they are endorsing--thus far--the idea of a commission, not a law. There are different things.
@Susan_Hennessey FBI got AWA orders pertaining to 3 iOS8+ phones before this one we wouldn't know about if not for Orenstein.
-
-
@emptywheel I presume (but don't know) that Apple would have challenged whatever order emerged first if "won't write new code" was redline. -
@emptywheel Plus, you sort of intimate there is something improper about ex parte orders and compliance. But that's just the practice. -
@emptywheel Neither companies nor gov could manage an adversarial process for each order. Hence the need for clear rules. -
@Susan_Hennessey And FBI is still picking and choosing what Apple is permitted to say. -
@emptywheel Meh, I don't object to Apple challenging the order in CDCA (or anywhere) but ex parte not a conspiracy theory. -
@emptywheel And Apple's position in EDNY is fundamentally incompatible with Apple's current position (per Cook's statements).
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.