Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

cstanleytech

(28,432 posts)

19. Nope, you dont. You can of course secure the documents but if served a warrant you are

Reply to NutmegYankee (Reply #18)

Sat Apr 9, 2016, 06:18 PM

Apr 2016

required to obey it and unlock them.
Of course where the tricky part comes in is that it could be considered an act of self incrimination if your claim the device isnt yours and if you provide the password it then could be be used to incriminate yourself which then might be a violation of the fifth amendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Leak of Senate encryption bill prompts swift backlash [View all] WhiteTara Apr 2016 OP

Another wonderful freedom bill by Feinstein. LiberalArkie Apr 2016 #1

DiFi is the kind of "Democrat" we really don't need/want in our big tent. Scuba Apr 2016 #4

Shredding the 4th amendment.. again.. phazed0 Apr 2016 #2

No, its only a 4th amendment violation if they wouldnt have to get a court order. cstanleytech Apr 2016 #3

I see your point about the court order, but I would counter with.. phazed0 Apr 2016 #6

Thats just it though you dont have a constitutional write to encryption, you do however cstanleytech Apr 2016 #11

You're right.. it's just fundamentally wrong and short sighted, IMO phazed0 Apr 2016 #12

"it's just fundamentally wrong and short sighted" Not to mention a complete waste of time. nt cstanleytech Apr 2016 #13

Actually you do have a right to write to encryption. NutmegYankee Apr 2016 #18

Nope, you dont. You can of course secure the documents but if served a warrant you are cstanleytech Apr 2016 #19

Wrong. NutmegYankee Apr 2016 #21

Thank you for repeating the 5th amendment problems that I already mentioned. cstanleytech Apr 2016 #23

I stated the 5th Amendment issue in my first post. NutmegYankee Apr 2016 #24

No, I was pointing out the 4th amendment issues there which require the government to get a warrant cstanleytech Apr 2016 #25

Then we are in violent agreement. NutmegYankee Apr 2016 #26

Writing it and using it are two different things, writing a program is usually protected speech cstanleytech Apr 2016 #28

Honestly EdwardBernays Apr 2016 #5

I hear Ireland is a nice option! nt dorkzilla Apr 2016 #8

Sure EdwardBernays Apr 2016 #9

'zactly. Really a no-brainer dorkzilla Apr 2016 #10

So the first thing I think of when I see Fienstein's name on a bill is "I wonder how she or her PatV Apr 2016 #7

Difi shanti Apr 2016 #14

If only they had encrypted it, maybe it wouldn't have leaked. surrealAmerican Apr 2016 #15

good one! WhiteTara Apr 2016 #16

won't that help foreign companies who are not subject to US laws GreatGazoo Apr 2016 #17

Essentially, yes and its also kinda pointless as people from a foreign country are not obliged cstanleytech Apr 2016 #20

It would destroy the US tech market. Set us back a decade ChairmanAgnostic Apr 2016 #22

And third party apps would be generated with extremely strong encryption. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #27