SAN FRANCISCO — A wave of tech companies that include the
industry's biggest names filed court statements backing Apple in
its battle with the federal government over access to a killer's iPhone.
Twitter
was one of 17 allied tech firms filing a federal court amicus brief
Thursday, a group that includes Airbnb, LinkedIn and eBay. AT&T and
Intel each did the same, along with the Electronic Frontier Foundation
and 46 technologists, researchers and cryptographers.
A second
coalition that grouped 15 mature tech companies with younger start-ups —
including Google, Facebook, Amazon, Cisco, Microsoft, Mozilla,
Snapchat, Box, Slack and Yahoo — also filed in support of Apple, urging
the court to exercise caution in applying a legal decision from an era
when cell phones and the Internet were unheard of.
"(The
government request) is an overreach, it is asking a tech company to
undermine years of security," Mozilla chief legal officer Denelle
Dixon-Thayer told USA TODAY.
Apple is getting broad tech
world support for its refusal to comply with an order from a judge in
California who said Apple should help the FBI unlock an iPhone used by
one of the killers in the San Bernardino mass shooting in December.
Apple says writing new software to override encryption on that
particular iPhone would create an digital opening into countless other
iPhones that other governments and criminals could exploit.
Among the various groups filing briefs is an assemblage of top iPhone
hacking talent, including former National Security Agency crypto expert
Charlie Miller. They argue that if the FBI wins this case, it could
later demand that a broad spectrum of companies be forced to push
software updates out to users’ devices, from TVs to phones.
The
individual and group filings from the tech companies argue that the
FBI's request is broad overreach of the government's mandate.
"This
case isn’t simply about letting the FBI pick the lock to a dead
terrorist’s phone. It’s about whether governments can conscript private
companies to disable security features built into their devices," said
Ron Bell, general counsel at Yahoo.
And that type of action —
compelling a company to write software code it wouldn't otherwise —
raises "serious First Amendment problems", read the brief from the
Google-Facebook-Yahoo coalition.
"Those new versions would not be
the same product anymore. Snapchat would not be Snapchat; Box would not
be Box; Gmail would not Gmail; WhatsApp would not be WhatsApp; and so
on," read the brief.
Apple
set up a page on its website that
lists those supporting its position. The case is conspicuously being
played out in the public eye, which has led some observers — and even
some supporters — to suggest that the better course of action is to
broker an agreement in private.
"The rhetoric has exceeded the reality," Autodesk CEO Carl Bass
told USA TODAY last week. "They need to settle the immediate case, and then people can be more rational."
Autodesk
is part of the Business Software Alliance, which includes companies
such as Salesforce, Oracle and IBM. It filed a brief along with big
trade groups such as the Consumer Technology Association, which puts on
the annual Consumer Electronics Show, and the Information Technology
Industry Council.
PRIVACY CONCERNS 'MISPLACED'
A
coalition of top law enforcement officials in California offered its
support of the FBI, arguing that Apple’s privacy concerns are
“misplaced.’’
“Law enforcement is not asking this court to compel
the locksmith (Apple) to give them a master key to unlock all locks
built by this locksmith,’’ wrote various attorneys representing the
California Sheriffs’ Association, the California Police Chiefs’
Association and the California Peace Officers Association.
The
Association of Prosecuting Attorneys was blunt in its brief: "To be
clear: if Apple can refuse lawful court orders to reasonably assist law
enforcement, public safety
will suffer, crimes
will go unsolved and criminals
will go free."
Apple
filed its decision to not comply with the FBI request last week.
A government response is due on March 10, with an Apple reply brief due
March 15. A hearing on the matter currently is scheduled for March 22 in
federal court in Riverside, Calif., just south of where the shootings
took place.
FBI director James Comey recently testified on Capitol Hill about the need for his agency to access a killer's iPhone.
(Photo: Nicholas Kamm, AFP/Getty Images)
The
outpouring of filings, including from some telcoms — such as phone
company AT&T — that had been less vocal in their support early
on indicates Silicon Valley sees a government win in this case as a
serious threat to global trust in their products.
The case has
divided the American public. In polls, roughly half support Apple's
concerns about consumer data security, while the other half feel that
matters of public safety trump all.
That split is reflected in the
amicus filings. Some victims' relatives have filed a brief backing the
FBI request, noting that information on the phone might point to an
accomplice. But at least one such relative — Salihin Kondoker, whose
wife Anies died in the attack — filed a letter to Judge Sheri
Pym supporting Apple and opining that the risk to privacy was too great
and came at the risk of finding nothing on the iPhone 5c.
“The
FBI’s job is to investigate crimes and they see the world through that
lens, understandably," says Jennifer Granick, director of civil
liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, which was
part of the iPhone hackers filing. “But there are a wealth of other
important American interests beyond that, such as privacy,
cybersecurity, human rights violations and American companies’ ability
to do well economically on a world stage.”
The Business Software Alliance, whose members include Salesforce and IBM, filed an amicus brief in support of Apple.
(Photo: BSA)
TWITTER CALLS FBI REQUEST 'EXTRAORDINARY'
In
the amicus brief filed by the Twitter coalition, the social
media company warned that the government's demands would set a
dangerous precedent. Government's "extraordinary and unprecedented
effort to compel a private company to become the government’s
investigative arm" threatens "bedrock" principles of the Internet:
privacy, security and transparency, the companies argued.
AT&T
backed Apple's denial of an FBI request to access a phone used by one
of the killer's in the San Bernardino massacre on the grounds that the
matter is too delicate to be settled in the courts.
The telco company's amicus filing is significant in that
a week ago AT&T released a statement
asking for "legal clarity" in the matter, noting that many existing
telecommunications laws were crafted in a pre-cell phone era. Other cell
carriers also hesitated to pick a clear side, with T-Mobile CEO John
Legere telling a CNBC interviewer that he "wouldn't know how to advise"
Cook.
On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union was the first major organization to officially throw its support behind Apple.
