Read the Apple case in the PDF file (Legal Ethical Challenge/Apple). For your initial posting, support one of the four statements from the "Solving the Challenge" (found at the end of the article).Be sure to specifically identify which of the statements
you
are discussing. For your second post, find another student's post that youdo not completely agree with, and(politely)explain why.
Apple Case Page 237 Kinicki 8th Edition(PDF file of the Case)
Assignment Directions (complete each step)
- Provide an initial response of 300 words by Wednesday by 11:30 PM
- Provide one response to another student of 100 words by Friday by 11:30 PM
- Use formal writing. Grading will only consider content relating to management concepts.
- Respond by extending the discussion by adding new insights, different examples from your experience, or from other sources.Apply critical thinking. Agreement, quoting other learners, or repeating the case content will count as zero words and zero points.
- Cite the source of your discussion post and add the reference within the discussion.
Apple Case – Kinicki, Page 237, 8th Edition 8/9/2020 Legal/Ethical Challenge Should Apple Comply with the U.S. Government’s Requests to Unlock iPhones? This case involves the long-term implications of Apple’s decision to deny the U.S. Justice Department’s request to unlock an iPhone. It all started with the terrorist attack perpetrated by Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife. They killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, in 2016. The FBI wanted to see the contents of Farook’s phone in order to gain information about others who may have been involved with the terrorist attack. It wanted Apple to “create a special version of the iPhone’s software that only works on the recovered device. Apple has to sign it with its secret keys in order to install it on the subject’s iPhone. This custom version will ‘bypass or disable the auto-erase function’ so it will not wipe the phone after a number of failed passcode guesses.”211 Although Apple had already provided the government “what it has that fits the usual kind of document demands, including information the terrorists had stored in Apple’s cloud service,” it was not enough. The terrorists quit backing up their phone, leading the FBI to find a way to bypass Apple’s security features. Apple had no way of doing this.212 Apple refused to comply with the request, which led to a court order demanding that Apple create the software needed to bypass the phone’s security features. In an interview with ABC, Apple CEO Tim Cook said “the government shouldn’t be able to force Apple to compromise the privacy of hundreds of millions of iPhone users in order to unlock a terrorist’s iPhone.” He added that it would “force Apple to create ‘the software equivalent of cancer.’” The company further contends that “coding a ‘back door’ in the iPhone would compromise the security of hundreds of millions of its customers.”213 Page 238 When pressed about the fact that Apple’s cooperation might prevent other terrorist attacks, Cook replied, “Some things are hard, and some things are right, and some things are both. This is one of those things.” CEOs Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook and Sundar Pichai of Google supported Cook’s decision.214 As a court showdown mounted in early 2016, the FBI sought the help of hackers to break into the device. Companies in both the U.S. and Israel participated in the effort and one of them came up with a solution.215 The government then dropped its legal case against Apple. Although the immediate case involving Farook’s phone is over, there are still long- term implications about encryption-protected technology. According to U.S. Justice Department spokesperson Melanie Newman, “It remains a priority for the government to ensure that law enforcement can obtain crucial digital information to protect national security and public safety, either with cooperation from relevant parties, or through the https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-211 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-212 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-213 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-214 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-215 Apple Case – Kinicki, Page 237, 8th Edition 8/9/2020 court system when cooperation fails.” In response, “Apple believes deeply that people in the United States and around the world deserve data protection, security and privacy. Sacrificing one for the other only puts people and countries at greater risk.”216 The government’s interest in this issue is unlikely to go away because “state and local authorities are confronted with more than 1,000 locked smartphones and other devices, blocking access to potential evidence.”217 A case in point involves the Justice Department’s decision to seek a court order in April 2016 that would force Apple to unlock an iPhone taken during a drug investigation in Brooklyn. According to The Wall Street Journal, “The technical issues in the Brooklyn case are somewhat different than in San Bernardino because they involve different iPhone hardware and software. Apple has a technique for pulling data from the Brooklyn phone but is resisting applying it, saying compelling it to do so would amount to government overreach and an invasion of customers’ privacy.”218 Tim Cook is adamant in his resolve. He said, “We will not shrink from this responsibility. . . . We need to decide as a nation how much power the government should have over our data and over our privacy.”219 Where do you stand on this issue? SOLVING THE CHALLENGE 1. I think national security is more important than privacy. After all, we are talking about unlocking the phones of criminals. Technology firms need to be forced to comply with government officials’ requests to unblock encrypted devices. 2. Although our data and privacy need to be protected, I think Apple and other technology companies should be forced to comply only when the case involves terrorism. Encrypted devices should not be unlocked for other criminal activities. 3. The privacy of our data and phone contents needs to be protected. I am not in favor of forcing Apple or any technology firm to unblock encrypted devices. 4. Invent other options. https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-216 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-217 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-218 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781259899065/epub/OPS/s9ml/chapter_notes/chapter_notes.xhtml#ch07-219