The Department of Justice is trying to get Apple to unlock a defendant's iPhone. While Apple has stated that it can technically bypass the phone's passcode security, it has so far refused to do so for various reasons. So the DOJ has come up with a new strategy, force Apple to comply because it licenses the software on the phone. Because of that, the DOJ contends that the iPhone maker actually has a relationship with the phone that's currently evidence in a case. In a reply to Apple's response to the court order to unlock the phone, the government states, "Apple cannot reap the legal benefits of licensing its software in this manner and then later disclaim any ownership or obligation to assist law enforcement when that same software plays a critical role in thwarting execution of a search warrant." In other words, it's your software Apple, not the defendant's, unlock it.
The government's strategy is a reaction to Apple's refusal to comply with a court order to unlock an iPhone 5s. In its response to the order Apple lawyers stated, "forcing Apple to extract data in this case, absent clear legal authority to do so, could threaten the trust between Apple and its customers and substantially tarnish the Apple brand." It also noted that unlocking the phone would eat up resources and might not even yield any information. Plus, just for good measure, it would be impossible to circumvent the passcode of any iPhone running iOS 8 and later. The phone in question is running iOS 7.
As expected, the government isn't too happy about not having access to the phones of defendants. Apple CEO Tim Cook has been on a privacy crusade recently. He recently said that people have a, "fundamental right to privacy." Cook has also insisted that the government does not have a backdoor into Apple's servers.
Ooh! Pass the popcorn! This is going to be fun to watch!
Apple says I'm just borrowing their software, and now the DOJ is saying, “fine, it's your software, you let us see this data generated by your software! Fork it over! It's not while-collar resort prison you'll be seeing … ” And now Apple is in a bind, between “selling” its code (and thus, making it fall under the first sale doctrine—something most software companies try to avoid to make as much money as they can) or continue to “license” it and thus, be forced by our beloved government to hand over private information (thus making them hypocrites to their customers and potentially losing money).
I’ve had this argument with friends so many times; some think as I do, others remain convinced that Luke ended the original trilogy as a Good Guy.
I say he, in fact, had turned to the dark side and we watched it happen in blissful ignorance, choosing to believe that he would always be The Good Guy. Lucas wanted it this way so he could sell more toys. But there’s way more to this story.
Seeing these previews I think my theory might be correct: Luke gave in to the dark side to save his friends and defeat Vader and the emperor. We don’t know what will happen after that, and hopefully we’ll find out in December and we’ll see if I’m right.
Here are my arguments, in no particular order…
Read the article, and then think back to Luke's actions in “Return of the Jedi.” Given the original storyline outlined in the article, it's quite believable that Mark Hamill played Luke as a Jedi falling to the Dark Side. Did Darth Vader take pity on his son and kill the Emperor? Did Luke subtly influence his father to kill the Emperor? Did Luke outright manipulate Vader to kill the Emperor?
I'm trying hard not to have high hopes on “The Force Awakens” because Lord knows how disappointing “The Phantom Menace” was, but George isn't heading this movie, and the last time that happened we got the best Star Wars movie made.