iPhone J.D. is the oldest and largest website for lawyers using iPhones and iPads. iPhone J.D. is published by Jeff Richardson, an attorney in New Orleans, Louisiana. This site does not provide legal advice, and any opinions expressed on this site are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of Jeff's law firm, Adams and Reese LLP. iPhone J.D. is not associated with Apple, Inc.
Contact Me
[email protected] Twitter: @jeffrichardson (occasional updates from me on iPhone topics and sometimes other items) and @iphonejd (automatic notice of every new post on iPhone J.D.)
FTC Notice
Pursuant to 16 CFR Part 255, the Federal Trade Commission's Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, please note: (1) iPhone software and hardware developers routinely send me free versions of their products to review. I sometimes keep and continue to use these products that I did not pay for after posting my review, which might be considered a form of compensation for my review, but I do not believe that I let that color my review. (2) When I post links to product pages on certain stores, including but not limited to Amazon and the iTunes App Store, my links include a referral code so that when products are purchased after clicking on the link, I often receive a very small percentage of the sale. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Again, I do not believe that I let that color my review of products. (3) Some of the ads that run on this website are selected by others such as Amazon or Google. If one of these ads comes from the seller of a product reviewed on iPhone J.D., that is a coincidence and I do not believe that it colors my review of that product. Other ads are from paid advertisers, and if I discuss a product from a company that is a current advertiser, I will note that. (4) Some of the ads that run on this website are from monthly sponsors of iPhone J.D. When I discuss products from these companies on iPhone J.D., I do so to pass along information provided to me by the sponsor. Often, I will also provide my own commentary on the product, and while my goal is to be honest, please keep in mind that I was compensated to promote the product. If you have any questions about this, just send me an e-mail or post a comment on a specific product review.
Once again, the big Apple news this week was the FBI's request that Apple be ordered to come up with a way to break its own encryption. Apple CEO Tim Cook sat down for a 30 minute interview with ABC News anchor David Muir to discuss the issues. Some of the questions and answers are repetitive, but Tim Cook does an excellent job explaining and defending Apple's position. Yesterday, Apple filed a motion to vacate the order in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and you can read a copy here. It's very well-drafted brief, authored by Ted Olson and other attorneys at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher along with the ZwillGen law firm. (My only critique is that they call the software that Apple is being asked to create GovtOS, when I think that FBiOS sounds much better.) Next week, Apple's General Counsel Bruce Sewell will testify before a congressional hearing on encryption, as reported by Dan Moren of Six Colors. The issues surrounding this continue to be fascinating. As Apple points out, if the government can use the All Writs Act to order Apple to write software to facilitate hacking into an iPhone, what is to prohibit the government from ordering Apple to create software to turn an iPhone into a remote surveillance device by turning on the microphone? And if the U.S. government can order this, so can the government of any other country. And once this software is created, what is to prevent other courts from trying to take advantage of it in non-terrorism cases, such as divorce cases, tax evasion cases, etc. And once hackers can access to this software, it can be used to invade the privacy and safety of virtually anyone — especially if a bad guy is able to use the Find Friends feature to track everyone in your family. Slippery slope arguments can sometimes be silly, but in this case I think Apple is correct that these are all natural consequences of this order. And now, the news of note from the past week:
Canadian attorney Simon Chester reflects on chairing the 1993 ABA TECHSHOW.
I often link to articles by California attorney David Sparks. This week, he reflects upon his one year anniversary of leaving a law firm after 20 years and hanging out his own shingle. I enjoy working at a large law firm, but it sounds like David made a choice that works well for him.
I'm not a big fan of iPad cases — I just use an Apple Smart Cover to protect the glass but have nothing on the back. But if you want one, Nicky Guy of The Wirecutter explains why the Apple Smart Case is the best option.
Alan of Art of the iPhone explains how to mute text message notifications for a specific contact.
Ben Lovejoy of 9to5Mac reports that a 19-year-old girl was kidnapped by her ex-boyfriend, but her mother worked with the police to locate her using the iPhone's Find My iPhone feature.
And finally, this is a few years old, but I just saw it recently: an advertisement for the law office of Lando Calrissian:
Comments
In the news
Once again, the big Apple news this week was the FBI's request that Apple be ordered to come up with a way to break its own encryption. Apple CEO Tim Cook sat down for a 30 minute interview with ABC News anchor David Muir to discuss the issues. Some of the questions and answers are repetitive, but Tim Cook does an excellent job explaining and defending Apple's position. Yesterday, Apple filed a motion to vacate the order in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and you can read a copy here. It's very well-drafted brief, authored by Ted Olson and other attorneys at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher along with the ZwillGen law firm. (My only critique is that they call the software that Apple is being asked to create GovtOS, when I think that FBiOS sounds much better.) Next week, Apple's General Counsel Bruce Sewell will testify before a congressional hearing on encryption, as reported by Dan Moren of Six Colors. The issues surrounding this continue to be fascinating. As Apple points out, if the government can use the All Writs Act to order Apple to write software to facilitate hacking into an iPhone, what is to prohibit the government from ordering Apple to create software to turn an iPhone into a remote surveillance device by turning on the microphone? And if the U.S. government can order this, so can the government of any other country. And once this software is created, what is to prevent other courts from trying to take advantage of it in non-terrorism cases, such as divorce cases, tax evasion cases, etc. And once hackers can access to this software, it can be used to invade the privacy and safety of virtually anyone — especially if a bad guy is able to use the Find Friends feature to track everyone in your family. Slippery slope arguments can sometimes be silly, but in this case I think Apple is correct that these are all natural consequences of this order. And now, the news of note from the past week:
Canadian attorney Simon Chester reflects on chairing the 1993 ABA TECHSHOW.
I often link to articles by California attorney David Sparks. This week, he reflects upon his one year anniversary of leaving a law firm after 20 years and hanging out his own shingle. I enjoy working at a large law firm, but it sounds like David made a choice that works well for him.
I'm not a big fan of iPad cases — I just use an Apple Smart Cover to protect the glass but have nothing on the back. But if you want one, Nicky Guy of The Wirecutter explains why the Apple Smart Case is the best option.
Alan of Art of the iPhone explains how to mute text message notifications for a specific contact.
Ben Lovejoy of 9to5Mac reports that a 19-year-old girl was kidnapped by her ex-boyfriend, but her mother worked with the police to locate her using the iPhone's Find My iPhone feature.
And finally, this is a few years old, but I just saw it recently: an advertisement for the law office of Lando Calrissian:
