Apple needs to get better at dying

Computerworld ^ | Aug 29, 2016 5:53 AM PT | By Jonny Evans

[Swordmaker]

Credit: AppleMust

Just because the subject is challenging doesn't mean it can be ignored.

Apple and the rest of the technology industry must face up to death, it’s too important to ignore.

The lost son

To illustrate my point, Apple has refused to unlock a Mac belonging to a man’s murdered son. The victim was a painter and musician with a trove of precious creative work stashed on his machine, and his dad wants to be able to see the data there. You can see his point.

Apple has declined to open up the Mac because: "It is impossible to be certain what access the user would have wanted and we do not consider it is appropriate that Apple make the decision". You can see Apple’s point, too.

The family must now go through the stress, hassle and expense of securing a court order to secure access.

[Swordmaker]

Apple acted rightly on this.

I have been the executor of estates three times and I can tell you that absent letters testamentary establishing legal Power of Attorney for the estate of the deceased, or a copy of the deceased person's will, or powers of a trustee for a legal trust with ownership of the deceased's property, the contents of the computer must remain private until a court of appropriate jurisdiction determines who is allowed possession of those data. The father may not be the legal next of kin.

Apple legally cannot make that decision to hand over that access. Apple could be held liable for releasing it to an unauthorized third party when a court does determine who should have gotten it.

[pgyanke]

Yup.

[JamesP81]

I'm in agreement with Apple on this as well.

It's not for them to determine who should have access. That's a matter for a probate court.

I would point out to the author of the article that if Apple needs to "get better at dying" then the average person needs to get better at "dying with electronic data."

I'll tell you straight up...if I were running Apple, I would use strong encryption securing the login to a computer such that it is impossible to crack it. Then, as a company, I can't be publicly pressured into doing something that is not physically possible, but is legally precarious if it were possible.

[Swordmaker]

I would have made the head line "Apple needs to get better at handling death". This is a problem for all organizations and businesses that hold digital data when their customers die. Which of the heirs get access to the deceased's digital data? How is this access allowed? How do you transfer ownership of purchased digital property when the owner dies? All of these are a huge grey area in the law for the owners and the companies who have sold the digital rights and for the companies who hold data. — PING!

Death in the Digital Age
Ping!

The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me

[HiTech RedNeck]

The article is about far more than Apple, it is about establishing less-cumbersome means of granting permissions to others in case of demise. The author understands the status quo; he is asking for an improvement.

[Secret Agent Man]

Depending on the case, Apple should also say that they would like to help and will put their willingness to help in to their statement to the probate court, for example.

[roadcat]

I would point out to the author of the article that if Apple needs to "get better at dying" then the average person needs to get better at "dying with electronic data."

In the future, when you die maybe your computer will become aware of your death and wipe your data. Of course, because you enabled it to do so as your last wish.

In the meantime, it's not that hard to crack many computer hard drives. So that family didn't need to ask Apple. They can ask other 3rd party professionals. I have helped friends to recover data from their crashed computers. One neighbor asked me for help a couple months ago, after a professional wanted to charge them $2400 to recover data. I easily recovered the data. In that case, it included a lot of family photos of a grandfather who just died. Innocent data in that case. For others, they might want data to stay secret after their death. Apple rightly said no.

[Talisker]

I have been the executor of estates three times and I can tell you that absent letters testamentary establishing legal Power of Attorney for the estate of the deceased, or a copy of the deceased person's will, or powers of a trustee for a legal trust with ownership of the deceased's property, the contents of the computer must remain private until a court of appropriate jurisdiction determines who is allowed possession of those data. The father may not be the legal next of kin.

I love the lack of humanity on this thread. It explains so much of this world. Its like eating dust.

A man's son was murdered. He left music and art. His father wants it.

Yet all people see is corporate law.

Sodom and Gomorrah weren't about fags - they were about THIS.

Utter, socially suicidal, heartlessness.

In the name of the "law."

[sagar]

Get a freakin will! And spell it out what happens with your stuff. So simple.

[sagar]

“Yet all people see is corporate law.

Sodom and Gomorrah weren’t about fags - they were about THIS.

Utter, socially suicidal, heartlessness.

In the name of the “law.” “

Either you follow ALL laws or you don’t. Laws should be blindly applied. If you pick and choose, Hillaries of the world will be treated differently. And they are treated differently. No exception. If the law is in the books, either repeal it or apply it!

[Swordmaker]

Get a freakin will! And spell it out what happens with your stuff. So simple.

A will has to be probated in a court of law. That can delay things. A trust is better.

[sagar]

Fair enough. The point is that everybody should plan what happens with their stuff. If you don’t plan, the hyenas will be scavenging it for you.

[ifinnegan]

“Apple acted rightly on this.”

Oooh.

Apple never does wrong, of course they acted rightly.

[CopperTop]

I can see your point, but believe it or not I hafta side with Apple and Swordy on this one.

Who knows the real relationship between the deceased and his Dad?
Who gets to decide who all has access to the deceased's data?
As soon an Apple complied and it was used in an untoward way someone with the help of an ambulance chaser would seek the deep pockets.
That's a tricky thing. Prolly best established with a legal doc or precedent.

Opinions will vary. But laws should not be subject to feelings. It makes things "muddy". d:^)

[ronnietherocket3]

Fair enough. The point is that everybody should plan what happens with their stuff. If you don’t plan, the hyenas will be scavenging it for you.

I am willing to bet that most single childless people under the age of 40 do not. Why? Because the probability of dying between the ages of 18 and 40 is very low. Also, they do not have people dependent on them who need to be provided for.

[ThunderSleeps]

Is your data in your will? - ANDROID PING!
Android Ping! If you want on or off the Android Ping List, Freepmail me.

---

My take on it: with so much of our personal and professional lives on computers we need to be proactive in specifying the disposition of data.

[ronnietherocket3]

Sodom and Gomorrah weren't about fags - they were about THIS.

They were about both.

A man's son was murdered. He left music and art. His father wants it.

Does the father have a right to his son's property? What if the son wrote out a statement saying he did not want anyone in his family to get ahold of it.

[Talisker]

Either you follow ALL laws or you don’t. Laws should be blindly applied. If you pick and choose, Hillaries of the world will be treated differently. And they are treated differently. No exception. If the law is in the books, either repeal it or apply it!

We are human beings, not machines. Nothing is done perfectly. Law must have heart - it no longer does. It is a machine grinding us up and spitting us out. And and a result, we've lost any discussion of appropriateness. That's what jury nullification is about - deciding NOT to apply the law when it's an ass. Hillary is getting away with her crimes because when you allow heartlessness, people become jaded and vicious and cowardly, and from that, tyranny arises.

Whatever, don't worry about it.

[Talisker]

What if the son wrote out a statement saying he did not want anyone in his family to get ahold of it.

If you need to fantasize evidence that doesn't exist, it's because you already know you're wrong.

[Lx]

I am with Apple on this. Not to put to fine a point on this but...

Microsoft Mistakenly Leaks Secure Boot Key.