SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
iCensor: Apple Patents Remote 'Kill Switch' for iPhone Cameras
Technology could allow police and government forces to stop citizens from recording abuses of force
Jun 30, 2016
Owning an iPhone could someday mean being blocked from recording anything that someone in power doesn't want you to record.
"Corporations aren't friends of the people, corporations are friends of money."
-- Edward SnowdenThat's the potential ramification of a patent granted to Apple earlier this week for technology that remotely disables iPhone cameras by infrared sensors.
While Apple's patent application uses the example of a rock band preventing audience members from recording a concert, since the application was first submitted back in 2009 observers have noted that the technology could also be used by police, repressive governments, and anyone in power to stop citizens from recording abuses of power and other injustices.
The patent was approved despite thousands of signatures on a petition seeking to block the technology from being developed.
"Here's the rub. The First Amendment and Article 19 of the U.N.'s Declaration on Human Rights don't really apply to the corporations that build these cellphones and run these social networks. Free speech rules don't apply to Silicon Valley," wrote the civil liberties group Free Press back in 2011, and Apple's "cellphone camera kill switch can be used as a pre-emptive strike against free speech. "
Approval for the patent was also granted amid increasing use of smartphone technology to record abuses of power, whether that is everyday citizens recording police brutality, House Democrats recording their sit-in for gun control after Speaker Paul Ryan shut off C-SPAN cameras, or peaceful protesters recording assaults by police.
Critics note that it's not hard to imagine police officers disabling all iPhone cameras in the vicinity before taking any action--whether legal or illegal--against people.
Technology website Engadget illustrated the argument with a potential situation: "Picture this: You're out for a stroll on the streets of Vancouver when suddenly you find yourself caught up in a depressed mob of hockey fans. Riot police are striking a young man with their batons near a squad car. You pull out your iPhone to capture a video of this seeming abuse of force--only to see a flashing message on the screen that says 'Recording Disabled.'
It's also not hard to imagine Ryan having disabled all iPhone cameras in the House to subdue media coverage of the sit-in: "If the Speaker of the House's office controls when C-SPAN's cameras are live, it's not a stretch to assume it would control when iPhones can work," as the Guardian writes.
And critics observe that it's much more difficult to pursue justice when no record exists of an injustice happening in the first place.
While Apple garnered praise from privacy activists for its stance against the FBI when the government agency sought its help in unlocking a phone owned by one of the San Bernardino shooters, it's also been pointed out that technology companies don't have a spotless record on civil liberties.
Indeed, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden "is skeptical of the motives of tech companies," according to a recent profile in New York Magazine.
"Corporations aren't friends of the people, corporations are friends of money," he told the magazine.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Owning an iPhone could someday mean being blocked from recording anything that someone in power doesn't want you to record.
"Corporations aren't friends of the people, corporations are friends of money."
-- Edward SnowdenThat's the potential ramification of a patent granted to Apple earlier this week for technology that remotely disables iPhone cameras by infrared sensors.
While Apple's patent application uses the example of a rock band preventing audience members from recording a concert, since the application was first submitted back in 2009 observers have noted that the technology could also be used by police, repressive governments, and anyone in power to stop citizens from recording abuses of power and other injustices.
The patent was approved despite thousands of signatures on a petition seeking to block the technology from being developed.
"Here's the rub. The First Amendment and Article 19 of the U.N.'s Declaration on Human Rights don't really apply to the corporations that build these cellphones and run these social networks. Free speech rules don't apply to Silicon Valley," wrote the civil liberties group Free Press back in 2011, and Apple's "cellphone camera kill switch can be used as a pre-emptive strike against free speech. "
Approval for the patent was also granted amid increasing use of smartphone technology to record abuses of power, whether that is everyday citizens recording police brutality, House Democrats recording their sit-in for gun control after Speaker Paul Ryan shut off C-SPAN cameras, or peaceful protesters recording assaults by police.
Critics note that it's not hard to imagine police officers disabling all iPhone cameras in the vicinity before taking any action--whether legal or illegal--against people.
Technology website Engadget illustrated the argument with a potential situation: "Picture this: You're out for a stroll on the streets of Vancouver when suddenly you find yourself caught up in a depressed mob of hockey fans. Riot police are striking a young man with their batons near a squad car. You pull out your iPhone to capture a video of this seeming abuse of force--only to see a flashing message on the screen that says 'Recording Disabled.'
It's also not hard to imagine Ryan having disabled all iPhone cameras in the House to subdue media coverage of the sit-in: "If the Speaker of the House's office controls when C-SPAN's cameras are live, it's not a stretch to assume it would control when iPhones can work," as the Guardian writes.
And critics observe that it's much more difficult to pursue justice when no record exists of an injustice happening in the first place.
While Apple garnered praise from privacy activists for its stance against the FBI when the government agency sought its help in unlocking a phone owned by one of the San Bernardino shooters, it's also been pointed out that technology companies don't have a spotless record on civil liberties.
Indeed, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden "is skeptical of the motives of tech companies," according to a recent profile in New York Magazine.
"Corporations aren't friends of the people, corporations are friends of money," he told the magazine.
Owning an iPhone could someday mean being blocked from recording anything that someone in power doesn't want you to record.
"Corporations aren't friends of the people, corporations are friends of money."
-- Edward SnowdenThat's the potential ramification of a patent granted to Apple earlier this week for technology that remotely disables iPhone cameras by infrared sensors.
While Apple's patent application uses the example of a rock band preventing audience members from recording a concert, since the application was first submitted back in 2009 observers have noted that the technology could also be used by police, repressive governments, and anyone in power to stop citizens from recording abuses of power and other injustices.
The patent was approved despite thousands of signatures on a petition seeking to block the technology from being developed.
"Here's the rub. The First Amendment and Article 19 of the U.N.'s Declaration on Human Rights don't really apply to the corporations that build these cellphones and run these social networks. Free speech rules don't apply to Silicon Valley," wrote the civil liberties group Free Press back in 2011, and Apple's "cellphone camera kill switch can be used as a pre-emptive strike against free speech. "
Approval for the patent was also granted amid increasing use of smartphone technology to record abuses of power, whether that is everyday citizens recording police brutality, House Democrats recording their sit-in for gun control after Speaker Paul Ryan shut off C-SPAN cameras, or peaceful protesters recording assaults by police.
Critics note that it's not hard to imagine police officers disabling all iPhone cameras in the vicinity before taking any action--whether legal or illegal--against people.
Technology website Engadget illustrated the argument with a potential situation: "Picture this: You're out for a stroll on the streets of Vancouver when suddenly you find yourself caught up in a depressed mob of hockey fans. Riot police are striking a young man with their batons near a squad car. You pull out your iPhone to capture a video of this seeming abuse of force--only to see a flashing message on the screen that says 'Recording Disabled.'
It's also not hard to imagine Ryan having disabled all iPhone cameras in the House to subdue media coverage of the sit-in: "If the Speaker of the House's office controls when C-SPAN's cameras are live, it's not a stretch to assume it would control when iPhones can work," as the Guardian writes.
And critics observe that it's much more difficult to pursue justice when no record exists of an injustice happening in the first place.
While Apple garnered praise from privacy activists for its stance against the FBI when the government agency sought its help in unlocking a phone owned by one of the San Bernardino shooters, it's also been pointed out that technology companies don't have a spotless record on civil liberties.
Indeed, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden "is skeptical of the motives of tech companies," according to a recent profile in New York Magazine.
"Corporations aren't friends of the people, corporations are friends of money," he told the magazine.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.