Good Afternoon
Good Afternoon

Letters: Apple’s privacy argument

A protestor holds up an iPhone that reads

A protestor holds up an iPhone that reads No Entry outside of the the Apple store on Fifth Avenue on Feb. 23, 2016 in Manhattan. Credit: Getty Images / Bryan Thomas

Apple’s privacy argument is weak

Newsday’s editorial “Apple, take head out of the cloud” [Feb. 18] supports the government on having Apple help de-encrypt the iPhone used by terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook.

The phone did not belong to Farook; it belonged to San Bernardino County. As a county employee, Farook had no expectation of privacy when he used his employer’s phone.

If the issue isn’t about privacy, then what is it about? The only remaining thing is money. Obviously, to create such a means to de-encrypt this single phone would cost Apple a significant amount of money and generate competitive losses.

So Apple stonewalls and invents the sham argument about privacy. However, that argument fails when one realizes that no law or policy can be prophylactic and preventive; laws and penalties can serve only to punish after a violation. One fallacious argument on top of another doesn’t make the fallacy more valid. Reasonable people should reject Apple’s position.

Alan R. Lichtenstein, Commack


I support Apple and its chief executive, Tim Cook. Sometimes this government, or any government, should just be told no. To paraphrase the writer Dalton Trumbo, when one man says no, Rome begins to fear.

Lon Dolber, East Moriches