Wrong, there is a lawful warrant that Apple does not want to obey. You try that sometime and see what happens.
Nope, there is no applicable warrant, hence the need for a court order.
“Wrong, there is a lawful warrant that Apple does not want to obey.”
No there isn’t. A search warrant gives the government the right to seize the phone, and to search it. A search warrant cannot order someone do it for them.
For example, you have a safe in your house. The FBI gets a warrant to search it. You cannot be forced to hand over a front door key, lock up your dogs, and give them the combo. The safe company cannot be ordered to come crack the combination.
The FBI can show up with saws, drills, cutting torches, and Vinnie the safecracker.
But no, search warrants do not compel anyone to do the work for them. A warrant allows the government to do it.
Frankly, as our government lips into authoritarianism, I am glad for a method to communicate they cannot get into.
No, Kenny, you are wrong. Apple has NOT received a warrant for any search of an iPhone.
A Search Warrant is served for something for which Apple has in its possession. Apple did have the iCloud data for the terrorists in its possession, received a warrant for that, and dutifully surrendered everything they had. This is a Court Order to render assistance but even more, it's a Court Order instructing Apple to use its resources to create NEW SOFTWARE and/or hardware that will forever break its own proprietary company secret hardware/software code that's unbreakability is a primary advantage Apple's hundred billion dollar product has in the market.
That Court Order relies on a 1789 Law called the All Writs Act which compels cooperation only when it is not an undue burden on those who are being compelled. The courts have ruled that an "undue burden" only exists when that burden is doing something they ALREADY do in the course of their ordinary business. Creating something that will damage their ordinary business is NOT something any business would do in the course of their ordinary business, ergo, it meets the test for being an "undue burden."
In addition, the All Writs Act is very constrained in that it cannot be used for anything that Congress has ever, EVER, addressed with the intent of legislating, whether they took action or not. Even if they did not finally decide to act, the very act of considering taking action, the Court may NOT substitute its wisdom for that of Congress' in determining that the proper course is to do NOTHING if Congress so determined that was the course to take. However, in this case, as the article points out, Congress actually DID SOMETHING and addressed this very thing in the Communication Accessibility for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA) and prohibited Law Enforcement or its agents from requiring a company such as Apple from doing what the FBI (which the last time I looked was defined as a Law Enforcement Agency) from requiring the decryption of any device which they have manufactured, or placing any feature or software or hardware specifically on such devices for that purpose. The FBI, by using the Court, is attempting to do exactly what FEDERAL CALEA LAW, written by Congress specifically to reign in the over reach of their power, prohibits them from doing!
Apple is doing exactly what is lawful, resisting an illegal court order.