Apple needs to get better at dying

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

[Talisker]

The LAW is being set aside by men, who choose to ignore what the law says. When MEN can say the law is what they say it is, not what is written, then anarchy prevails.

You are advocating the rule of men with your desire for a company to set aside policy merely because you have sympathy for the father who has lost his son.

Your equating of corporate policy with law proves my point - we are now all living under corporate law. But the law of MEN has historically recognized it's own limitations, and so has included provisions - legal provisions - for its suspension when MEN decide it is inappropriate. That's a fact. Its also a fact that few even recognize it anymore, or when told of it, even see its value.

Apple has the money and corporate power and will prevail. The father will be crushed. Sales will increase, flacks will smooth over the disturbance, all will be well.

No one will even notice - and many will cheer.

Hail the machine. Death to emotions.

As Nomad said: "Sterilize!"

[DesertRhino]

Maybe he wouldn’t want his parents to see the porn he looked at. Ever think of THAT?

[Larry Lucido]

I have no idea where that Mac is located or where the owner resided when he died.

But if the Mac is located in anywhere in Michigan, and if the owner resided in Michigan when he died, and if the Mac was not property of a trust, then the county probate court of his residence has absolute jurisdiction of the Mac until a personal representative (executor) is appointed. Spouses normally get priority for this, then children. That person would then be able to get an order for Apple to assist in retrieving the data.

Only the data and intellectual property owned by the decedent (or rights owned by the decedent) are property of the estate. Other data and intellectual property on the Mac remain property of the original owner.

The decedent’s interest in the data and intellectual property get distributed to the heirs according to the will or by the laws of intestacy. The father of the decedent may or may not be in line to inherit.

If Apple acts without a court order, someone else can sue and win.

[Larry Lucido]

You can think of the data on the Mac like the contents of a safe deposit box. The bank isn’t giving anybody the key without a court order.

[Swordmaker]

In America, probate law IS corporate law, as parties are all presumed to consent to corporate status. There are no rights, only privileges. No common law challenges to jurisdiction or procedure are heard.

Are you trying to say that probate law, which predated any concept of corporations, is somehow in your mind related to the joint efforts of people forming together to accomplish something in concert by creating a fictitious person? BAH! You are creating things in your own mind that don't exist. The laws of inheritance have been around for millennia, intended to assure that property went to whom it is supposed to go to, not to who merely steps forward to claim it.

YOU can give away other people's property as much as YOU like. I refuse to do it. Are you sure you are on the right website?

[Swordmaker]

Funny, I thought this whole thing was about the intersection of human emotions and the law.

No, it's about how does one who owns digital property properly arrange for it to be transferred to one's selected heirs in the event of one's untimely passing WITHOUT involving complications such as these and raising emotions.

[Swordmaker]

Apple has the money and corporate power and will prevail. The father will be crushed. Sales will increase, flacks will smooth over the disturbance, all will be well.

This has NOTHING to do with Apple sales, Talisker, or "corporate power." Or "crushing" the father. It has to do with what is right to do for the heirs of the son. YOU don't know who the proper heirs for the son are, do you? Admit it. You are crying for the father who lost his son. That is NOT enough to set aside the law.

You are like the child who killed his parents pleading for mercy because he's an orphan. "Please, set aside the law, weep for me, I am an orphan." If we did not know the facts of the case, some weak kneed panty-waists might listen to his pleas for mercy. As several of us have noted, neither we, nor Apple, know the facts of this case. Therefore Apple is not the one to make the decision. That is WHY we have procedures called PROBATE in place for this kind of situation. When it is decided who is entitled to the digital property, THEN, and only then, Apple will assist unlocking of the data. Otherwise, Talisker, it is theft from the estate of the son.

[Swordmaker]

If Apple acts without a court order, someone else can sue and win.

Exactly what I have been trying to get through to Talisker, who seems to think it is OK to give away someone else's property merely because Talisker feels sorry for them.

[ifinnegan]

My comment was only in response to Swordmaker’s unintentionally funny smarmy pomposity in the statement.

[Cementjungle]

This is stupid of Apple.

The father is now the owner of the computer, and Apple should be willing to help someone recover stuff from their own computer.

If they refuse, the world may never see the son's artwork.

[Swordmaker]

The father is now the owner of the computer, and Apple should be willing to help someone recover stuff from their own computer.

Please tell us how you KNOW that the father is the owner of that computer? You don't know that at all. Apple doesn't know that. What PROOF has this father provided that he owns it? Who is the son's heir? Does he have a wife? Kids? A will? Trust? Those are facts not in evidence. Absent those, there is none, just the father's claim. Apple needs much more than that to unlock that computer.

[glorgau]

I gotta agree with Apple on this one.

[Swordmaker]

The story from the BBC:

Morgan Heir murder: MPs' help sought in Apple laptop fight— BBC — 28 August 2016

Colin Hehir said his son's artwork, seen behind him, was stored on the laptop

A father has called on MPs to help force computer giant Apple to unlock his murdered son's laptop.

Morgan Hehir, 20, from Nuneaton, Warwickshire, was stabbed with a steak knife in the street on 31 October last year. Three men were jailed in June.

His father Colin said last month that Apple told him he must obtain a court order to access his son's artwork.

He said he wants Parliament to discuss Apple's terms and conditions.

"I do want to push this to Parliament because I believe the terms and conditions are unfair," he said.

Morgan Heir was an artist and a musician

Mr Heir said he had been contacted by other bereaved families who have encountered the same problem, not just with Apple.

"If we have probate, you should be allowed access. Simple as that."

He said his son was a painter and a musician, who stored his work on the laptop, which he wanted to see.

He described his son as a "contributor to the community" and said he and the family would not have been able to cope following the killing had it not been for the help of friends within that community.

A music and arts festival, organized by friends and family, was held in Nuneaton on Saturday in Morgan's memory.

Apple has said that due to the absence of permission for third party access to the account, "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". It advised the family to obtain a court order, adding that the company recognized the "extremely difficult" situation.

The probate court should issue Letters Testamentary which give the Executor the power of attorney to have Apple unlock the laptop. If they did not present those, which are the orders Apple is looking to see, their hands are tied.

When I was an executor, I was given such letters, signed by the Probate Court Judge, which I could copy as necessary to give to various fiducially responsible companies so they could release data, money, access to accounts, etc. The companies usually wanted to see the original with the Court Embossed Seal, but they were happy to file the copies. They were like magic keys that unlocked doors for me. Without those letters, I couldn't get squat done, with them, it was as if I were the deceased doing what the deceased could do with his property.

[Cementjungle]

Please tell us how you KNOW that the father is the owner of that computer?

I don't know... the article fails to mention any of those useful details. The man did say something to the effect of "we have probate, so we don't understand why Apple wont...". They're in the UK, so their terms on that may mean something to the effect of "we've been through probate, and I have the computer now".

[Swordmaker]

I don't know... the article fails to mention any of those useful details. The man did say something to the effect of "we have probate, so we don't understand why Apple wont...". They're in the UK, so their terms on that may mean something to the effect of "we've been through probate, and I have the computer now".

The context of the article puts that in someone else's mouth, others who have had similar problems. I think they just don't know how probate works. Just possession of the locked device isn't enough without the proof of ownership when they show up asking for it to be unlocked when it's registered to someone else. They've got to dot the i's and cross the t's of the proof of ownership before any serious company with fiduciary responsibility can unlock it.

[roadcat]

My concern....if my wife sees whats on my computer after my death... she might disinherat me and the money thats goes with it..../s

That's the troubling thing about death; you don't know when it's coming and you might not have had time to "clean up" after yourself. We all have secrets hidden away. If physical, they will be found. If on a computer, they may be hidden and lost forever. That's the nice thing about computers, if you lock away the data very securely. If the data is something that could be treasured by other family members, by all means share it with them while alive and don't lock them out. My instructions to my family will be to destroy anything that is securely locked and can't be accessed. Even in death, you should be able to enjoy privacy. (When I speak of locking data, I mean secure encryption. Anyone can get past boot passwords, login passwords, etc. You need to encrypt the data files, not just have a password to gain access to unencrypted files.)

[BullDog108]

I concur. Apple is the only corporation that takes privacy rights seriously.

[JamesP81]

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 future, when I die, I'm going to have a list of passwords in my will for my executor so he doesn't have to do any of this. We would all be well advised to do something like this.

[Talisker]

Are you trying to say that probate law, which predated any concept of corporations, is somehow in your mind related to the joint efforts of people forming together to accomplish something in concert by creating a fictitious person? BAH! You are creating things in your own mind that don't exist. The laws of inheritance have been around for millennia, intended to assure that property went to whom it is supposed to go to, not to who merely steps forward to claim it.

My point has been long lost on this thread, and I'm done belaboring it. Suffice it to say that your ridiculous caricatures of me tossing probate law in the trash were not it, though I know it pleased you. I will also add that not only probate law predates corporations, but also common law - and they've both been incorporated in America, through devious means. So if you believe probate law stands inviolate, then where's common law?

What you don't comprehend is that under American statutory law - which includes probate law now - the very word "person" MEANS fictitious person. EVERYONE in an American legal proceeding is acting in their corporate capacities, because that's all our laws now address. As a result, in each statutory section there are statements or limits of applicability which refer, in some way, to that limited corporate status.

Apple, being a corporation, has no choice in how it acts. My posts didn't "grieve for the father" - they grieved for ALL OF US being cut out of the law by our very humanity, by the definitions of what now pass for law. And I especially grieved for those smart enough to think they know what the law means, when they don't. As the saying goes, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

We have been tricked out of our rights - traded for privileges wholly owned by the government, through the dehumanization of our very personhood. That is a fact.

In any event, my points were a passing interest - these insights on the real sabotage of laws and their effects on society and politics have no place here. I will try not to bring up the subject again. Pointing out that the inmates are wearing the keys to their cells gets them ferociously angry, and I've got better things to do with my time.

[zeugma]

THis is why it is important to create a document that your loved ones have access to that will allow them to access anything that is important to you. When my beloved passed a year ago, we had everything together that we could think of and still managed to miss some stuff. Fortunately I had her phone and the primary email address she used to create accounts. It made dealing with closing down accounts, and accessing data on her computer(s) pretty straightforward, if somewhat time consuming.