Skip to main content

Twitter, Airbnb, Square, plus many more officially file joint brief supporting Apple in FBI case [Updated]

Update #2: A second coalition of tech companies including Google, Microsoft Facebook, Snapchat, Mozilla, and Dropbox have also filed a joint brief this evening in support of Apple. These companies also argue that the All Writs Act does not give the government legal basis for forcing Apple to unlock the gunman’s iPhone (via Reuters). Google detailed its reasoning in a blog post:

Today, Google joined a variety of technology companies to file an amicus brief in US federal court. Together, we are voicing concern about the use of a broad statute from the 18th century, the All Writs Act, to require companies to re-engineer important security features that protect people and their data.

Update: 5 families of the San Bernardino victims have filed an amicus brief with the court asking for Apple to unlock the iPhone in question. More below.

On a new webpage dedicated to highlighting companies and organizations supporting it in its fight against the FBI, Apple today has shared a joint amicus brief from a variety of tech companies that has been filed with the court. Twitter, Airbnb, LinkedIn, Square, Reddit, and many others have signed the brief expressing support for Apple.

It was reported earlier today that over 40 companies are expected to file in support for Apple, and this joint filing makes up for a good portion of those. In the filing, 16 companies say that the FBI’s claim that Apple must unlock the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino gunmen under the All Writs Act carries no legal basis.

Like the filing from the ACLU stated yesterday, the companies today reiterate that it is not Apple’s duty, as a private company, to create software to break into its own devices. The 26 page brief, which can be read in full here, is cosigned by all 16 companies and argues that Apple should not be forced to unlock the iPhone:

“The government’s efforts in this case—to force a private company to affirmatively develop software that does not currently exist in order to break its own security systems—would erode the privacy and protection of user data, and transparency as to how such data may be used or shared.

The government’s demand here, at its core, is unbound by any legal limits. It would set a dangerous precedent, in which the government could sidestep established legal procedures authorized by thorough, nuanced statutes to obtain users’ data in ways not contemplated by lawmakers.”

The full list of companies who have signed this filing is: Airbnb, Atlassian, Automattic, CloudFlare, eBay, GitHub, Kickstarter, LinkedIn, Mapbox, Medium, Meetup, Reddit, Square, Squarespace, Twilio, Twitter and Wickr.

Furthermore, AT&T today has shared its own amicus brief submitted to the court in support of Apple. While in the past AT&T has wavered on whether companies should be forced to retrieve user data, it sides with Apple in this case and says the case should be decided by Congress:

Today, AT&T filed a “friend of the court” brief with the magistrate judge for the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, urging the court to vacate its order requiring Apple to take some fairly extraordinary steps to assist the FBI in unlocking the iPhone used by one of the perpetrators of the San Bernardino shootings.

Technology has changed dramatically since Congress last addressed these issues in 1994.  Then, Congress focused on what telecommunications carriers like AT&T may be required to do to assist law enforcement and national security officials.  Now, the government seeks data stored by many other types of companies, from device manufacturers to social media, search, and applications companies, among others.  But our laws have not kept pace with technology.

The solution is for Congress to pass new legislation that provides real clarity for citizens and companies alike.

Yesterday, Apple received support from the ACLU, Wickr, Access Now, and a United Nations free speech group. Many more are expected to support Apple, as well.

Furthermore, 5 families of the San Bernardino victims have filed an amicus brief with the court asking for Apple to unlock the iPhone in question. In the filing, obtained by Re/code, the families argued that unlocking the device could answer questions such as if there’s another attack coming and if anyone else was involved in the original attack. The families say that the court should focus on this specific case now, and push the larger debate about user privacy versus national security to “another day and another form.”

“No one knows with certainty that unique data resides on the phone,” wrote attorney Stephen G. Larson, adding, “It may, if nothing else, give some measure of closure to the survivors and families of loved ones who have suffered every day since this terrible crime. [The families] are eager that no stone be left unturned in investigating this horrible act.”

“Recovery of information from that iPhone in question may not lead to anything new,” another wrote. “But, what if there is evidence pointing to a third shooter? What if it leads to an unknown terrorist cell? What if others are attacked and you did nothing to prevent it?”

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. Doug Aalseth - 8 years ago

    “The families say that the court should focus on this specific case now, and push the larger debate about user privacy versus national security to “another day and another form.””
    Unfortunately that is as utterly impossible as being partially pregnant. It’s open or closed, publuic or private, secure or insecure. There is no middle ground.

  2. William Reid - 8 years ago

    So Apple is so concerned about privacy, but when the chinese government tells Apple to weaken the security they do it.

    • Doug Aalseth - 8 years ago

      Proof?

    • Aldrin Tauro - 8 years ago

      Some sources/articles?

    • I won’t ask for proof like these other kind people. I’ll just call you out: BULLSHIT. This has never happened.

      • William Reid - 8 years ago

        Here you go. it’s in chinese but you can use google translate. Apple has not answered any request for comment on what the security checks entail. It’s not hard to educate yourself once you take the blinders off. http://www.bjnews.com.cn/news/2015/01/21/350845.html

      • Mike Knopp (@mknopp) - 8 years ago

        William, you are certainly correct. It is not hard to educate yourself once you take the blinders off. Where you are incorrect is in who is wearing the blinders here. You are the one with the blinders on. Did you actually even read the article you linked to? It flat out states that Apple didn’t put in backdoors. From other articles China wasn’t wanting a backdoor to spy on its citizens, it has that underhand just fine. They wanted to make sure that there were no backdoors for the US to spy on their country.

        So. Still no proof supporting your statement.

      • William Reid - 8 years ago

        C’mon you can not be that naive. Apple may have not put in a backdoor, but the Chinese government is notorious for spying on its citizens. Do you really believe that once they have seen the code they won’t put a backdoor in themselves. If Apple truly cares about user security they would not have let a repressive government like the Chinese see the code at all.

    • JBDragon - 8 years ago

      That’s a complete LIE! Apple allowed them to look at the source code with Apple there in a locked room to make sure there was NO BACK DOORS where the U.S. Government could spy on Chinese citizens!!! There is no weakened Security!!!

      While I feel sorry for these family’s, they’re on the wrong side! Really short sited views on the matter. The FBI already has iCloud Data from Apple other then for the last few weeks and they have Phone Call Records of that phone already from the phone company so they know who they called using that phone and when they called. There’s nothing on this phone of any value otherwise these Terrorists would have destroyed it just they like did with their own personal phones a HDD before they went out on their attack.

      There’s nothing on this phone of any value. It’s sure not about that if there was. This is all about the FBI trying to get BackDoor access NOW so in the future they can get access when they want with something more important to them this this worthless phone.

      I’m sure you’re all for the FBI and anyone else hearing and seeing from any Amazon Echo’s, Xbox Kinects, PS4 Eye, Security Room Devices. Wifi Camera’s, Samesung TV’s that have Camera’s and/or Voice control and so forth!!! The Government has it easier then ever to snoop on people because most of these devices have weak security.

    • viciosodiego - 8 years ago

      Lol, tell that to microsoft and BB.
      trolling equals failed.

  3. To the 5 families: What if the FBI had done their jobs better and prevented this tragedy in the first place? What if the USA stopped screwing around in other countries and murdering thousands in their wars? Maybe these wack-jobs wouldn’t have done what they did in the first place.

    Ask a farmer about harvesting a crop. He’ll tell you that there’s nothing to harvest without first preparing the soil and planting the seeds. In other words, you reap what you sow. I know so many heinous acts have happened, but seriously, the US is getting back only a tiny fraction of the destruction and devastation it is causing elsewhere.

    • JBDragon - 8 years ago

      Starting with letting these Terrorists into the country in the first place because of crap security checking!!!!

  4. pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

    The poor families are wanting closure and protection from future attacks… but they are more or less being told to “man up, take one for the team, stop being selfish and think about the greater good and to protect the privacy of ALL people (including those who killed your loved ones)”…

    Their views get shoved down at the bottom showing that they matter the least.

    Furthermore, the article suggests that Apple, or any company, should not ‘hack’ their own software… given that apple servers are not secure, that products etc are easily leaked…i’m sure if the FBI had the time they would put a dedicate team to accessing the phone — it would just take them much longer than if Apple gave them access.

    I would like to see how this would play out in other countries.

    • viciosodiego - 8 years ago

      The family should be pissed at the FBI for acting first and asking questions Second.

      • pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

        But they are not… and it is the families that have been affected and are dealing with the FBI first hand…
        we are just reading from a distant, in the safety of our homes, having not lost anyone in such a tragic way…

        how the families feel should be acknowledged and they should be shoved down to the bottom and have people tell them they are wrong for how they feel.

      • PhilBoogie - 8 years ago

        Fully agree. I also don’t understand why they shot Farook dead before having him unlock his company phone in the first place.

    • flaviosuave - 8 years ago

      “Their views get shoved down at the bottom showing that they matter the least.”

      Not correct at all. In every single public statement, and in most all of the briefs that have been formally filed, Apple and other companies have expressed sympathy for the victims, their families, and stated a willingness to do whatever is lawful in assisting the FBI and other investigative authorities.

      Everyone has sympathy for the families. That doesn’t require us to change the law in a way that will negatively affect millions of people now and in the future.

      To quote Walter from the Big Lebowski “Just because we’re bereaved doesn’t make us saps!”

      • pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

        But it’s not breaking the law to access the phone — the case is about “is it right to”
        Apple are not doing everything they legally can — they have been asked to assist legally, but are refusing because of what they believe in…
        After all, if it was illegal then other companies wouldnt have back doors, master keys etc etc.

        Everyone is mentioning the families cos they feel they should and to look good — but if anyone actually cared enough and took a step back, then they would realise we give away so much more privacy than what this case is about…

        America should be focusing their efforts on their other issues…

        at this point, i would really laugh if another terrorist attack happened on america and it was revealed that the information was in that phone all this time… but i guess no-one really wants to find out… their privacy is so much more important — after all they werent shot, or lost someone, or experienced an attack, and it probably wont happen to them, they are safe — all they want is their privacy at the cost of a nation and criminals to exploit that…

        In other countries this would have been laughed out of courts, Tim in prison, and pressure applied to the next CEO.

        But i guess a lot of americans arent too bothered considering they are looking at moving to canada (according to a recent article)

  5. aztecskater - 8 years ago

    I know this is out of context but what happen to 9/11? The iPhone wasn’t even out that time and yet, the U.S has failed to protect their citizens.

  6. ninjadude99 - 8 years ago

    If the courts side with the FBI (in spite having (pretty much) the ENTIRETY of Silicon Valley (whether officially or un-officially) siding with Apple (as well as ACTUAL degree-holding professors that KNOW about this subject))…

    … then you know we have a very ridiculous government in our hands.

    • PhilBoogie - 8 years ago

      Ho ho, Samsung hasn’t made an official response. Which is awkward; they usually copy Apple.

  7. b9bot - 8 years ago

    Interesting how suddenly all of these companies figured out that it is not just about 1 iPhone. It is about everyones products and services and privacy. Now they are all singing a different tune. Good thing Tim Cook and Apple knew the consequences and stood there ground.

Author

Avatar for Chance Miller Chance Miller

Chance is an editor for the entire 9to5 network and covers the latest Apple news for 9to5Mac.

Tips, questions, typos to chance@9to5mac.com