14 DAY TRIAL // Apple is reportedly working on its legal response in the case against the FBI government over the iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino terrorists, and according to sources close to the matter, cited by Bloomberg, the company is planning a very surprising strategy.
It appears that Apple’s lawyers, who will be headed by Bruce Sewell, the company’s general counsel, will claim that code needs to be covered by the same laws as free speech, thus trying to demonstrate that the government is actually going behind its powers granted by the All Writs Act.
Specifically, Apple claims to argue in federal court that the code used in iOS must be protected as a form of free speech is, which means that the company cannot be forced to write code in any way.
According to the source, Cupertino might be looking into comparisons that could show why developing code under a court ruling isn’t legal. “Just as the government can’t make a journalist write a story on its behalf, according to this view, it can’t force Apple to write an operating system with weaker security,” Bloomberg explains, citing the same people who wanted to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.
Setting a new precedent
This might be a long shot, but it could guarantee Apple and other tech companies involved in similar disputes with the US government that the FBI or any other agency can’t force them to create backdoors.
Given the recent discussions on backdoors in the United States, the court is expected to treat this very carefully, especially because it could set a precedent that could be used by any other tech company in the future should the government seek access to specific user content.
Several politicians, including the director of the FBI himself, pushed for backdoors on phones sold in the United States, but tech companies such as Apple and Microsoft have already opposed such a proposal.
In recent statements, Apple CEO Tim Cook warned that a backdoor would do more harm than good because it could be ultimately used by terrorists against the United States, as it would allow for easy monitoring of unencrypted conversation should such software fall in the wrong hands.