[Cryptography] EFF amicus brief in support of Apple
Allen
allenpmd at gmail.com
Sat Mar 5 14:12:11 EST 2016
>
> There is quite a bit of existing law — both common and statutory — around
> signatures, both digital and analog.
...
> The principal criterion for being a legal signature is that it is the
> intent of the signer that it be a legal signature.
You just proved my point. Apple is being asked to provide a numerical code
that unlocks the device, not to provide a legal signature that is intended
to be a legal signature. You can call a pig a dog, but it is still just a
pig. And you can call a numerical unlock code a signature, but it is still
just a numerical unlock code.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20160305/f299a88d/attachment.html>
More information about the cryptography
mailing list