The court in new York refused to oblige to crack Apple iPhone one of the suspects in the case of drug trafficking. In Cupertino hope that the decision will help in the confrontation with the FBI on the case of terrorist from San Bernardino.
The U.S. government can’t force Apple to hack a mobile phone belonging to the defendant in the case of drug trafficking. The lawsuit was filed in Brooklyn back in October, several months before the court in California upon request of the Federal Bureau of investigation ordered Apple to unlock the smartphone of one of the terrorists, killing people in a center for people with disabilities in the California town of San Bernardino.
In his decision, judge James Orenstein of Burkina decided that he has no right to force Apple to hack the phone, which was discovered during the investigation of drug trafficking. The judge noted that the legislation does not obligate the company to comply with the requirements of the FBI against his will. In this regard, the lawsuit was decided to reject in full.
The U.S. Department of justice stated that “disappointed” the decision and promised to appeal. Although the accused in the drugs case have already pleaded guilty, the Agency continues to believe that the phone may contain information that will help to a more complete investigation of the case.
The ruling of new York court cannot formally be considered a precedent for the consideration of the complaint by Apple on the decision of the California court. At the same time, the American media believe that the victory in new York still gives the company a definite advantage.
A senior Apple representative on condition of anonymity, said that the Brooklyn court decision could help Apple in the confrontation with the FBI, associated with the shooting, arranged by Syed Farooq in San Bernardino.
Previously, the district court of Los Angeles ordered Apple to help the FBI crack the smartphone “arrow” from San Bernardino. Later, the company announced that it will challenge the decision. In the Apple are confident that the precedent would entail a shaft of similar requirements from other departments and about the principle of privacy of user data have to forget.
