In a piece written by The Editorial Board labeled "Why Apple Is Right to Challenge an Order to Help the F.B.I.", the author(s) reference a Supreme court case from 1977 to further their argument. The court case they are referring to is United States v. New York Telephone Co. The author(s) state that due the the case ruling "the government could not compel a third party that is not involved in a crime to assist law enforcement if doing so would place unreasonable burdens", and feel that Judge Pym's order places that burden on Apple Inc. Their argument is due to the fact that Apple Inc. has already given the FBI data that was backed up to iCloud.
The author(s) also feel that creating a backdoor for the FBI could set a "dangerous precedent" for future investigations. The current software will place a passcode lock on the iPhone if it is entered incorrectly 10 times. Once this happens, the only way to unlock it is to erase the device. This would require Apple Inc. to write software specifically for the government. In the article, the author(s) feel that if Apple is required to help the FBI, "courts could require it to use this software in future investigations or order it to create new software to fit new needs".
The Editorial Board offers no evidence that this case can set a precedent for future investigations, but makes a compelling argument that the FBI is placing an "unreasonable burden" on Apple Inc. As an iPhone owner and former AppleCare advisor, I agree with Apple and the Editorial Board at the New York Times. However, I feel the Editorial Board could have done a better job at arguing their point than using scare tactics. The piece can be accessed below.
