Building a Backdoor to the iPhone an Ethical Dilemma

CASE OUTLINE:

I. Major Problem Identified: The problem is…

Was Tim Cook justified in denying the FBI from building a “backdoor” to access information in an iPhone during an investigation?

A. Justifications for problem statement

1. why is this the problem? what in the case suggests that this is the problem?

2. This was clearly outlined as the issue in the third paragraph of the case. The author asks several questions including “Was Cook justified?” and “Was Apple’s obligation to protect customer privacy greater than protecting national security?”

B. Justifications for problem statement

1. why is this the problem? what in the case suggests that this is the problem?

2. Details the situation by including Apple’s backstory and privacy policy, then details the situation in San Bernardino, and details different stances on the issue

II. Alternatives (possible solutions to the problem identified)

A. Alternative 1: Only allow FBI to access information in one-off cases

1. Advantages to alternative 1

a. It would help to secure national safety in the cases of planned terrorism

b. Apple’s reputation may be boosted for some people who stand on the FBI’s side of this argument

2. Disadvantages to alternative 1

a. Barack Obama tried to make a law allowing the FBI access to people’s information, but was not passed because people viewed this as a threat to their privacy

b. Apple’s reputation would be damaged because people were promised privacy and entrusted the company to keep this promise

B. Alternative 2: Do not allow FBI any access to tapping into phones

1. Advantages to alternative 2

a. Apple’s reputation would be salvaged and customer trust would rise

b. The country as a whole would feel like privacy has been upheld

2. Disadvantages to alternative 2

a. Acts of terrorism or conspiracy may not be fully investigated

b. The FBI may be set back in investigations

III. Recommendation: Allow FBI to access information in one-off cases

A. Major Justifications

1. It would be the middle-ground of the two arguments– FBI would be able to conduct successful investigations and the majority of apple users would preserve their privacy

2. National security / safety would be maintained

3. As opposed to completely not allowing the FBI to tap into phones, they would compromise to allow the officials to gather helpful information

.

B. Minor Justifications

1. If terrorists discovered that Apple was not allowing the FBI to investigate their devises, they might conspire to store information / commit more acts of terrorism

IV. Implementation

A. List issues that are important for the implementation of your chosen alternative (i.e.,

what will the company actually have to do to make your recommendation happen?)

1. Apple would have to find a way of allowing one-off cases of access into devises, rather than needing a completely new IOS update that would affect other consumers

2. The FBI and Apple would need to write up a contract outlining the specifics of one-off cases, so that loopholes could not be found and taken advantage of

B. List other problems that your recommendation does not remedy

1. Apple would need to issue a public statement regarding the new policy

2. Apple would have to conduct damage control in order to ensure that their consumer complaints are listened to/taken into consideration

———————————

Case analyses are a page long with 1” margins, single spaced

consist of:

Problem statment

Alternative 1

Altrenative 2

Recommendation

Implementation