"Authenticated" copies of legal documents (and a will and death certificate are legal documents) are considered to have the same... how we say in english? Legal Power?... whatever... as the originals.
Send them by snail mail (together with any legal document copy that states you have right over the matter), with proof of delivery (so you can prove they received it).and they *SHOULD* grant you the access you requested - otherwise, they're stalling you and are subject to legal penalties.
Of course, this is applicable to "normal", "real life" things. By some reason, people things that anything "virtual" is beyond the present legislation - even when present legislation money and contracts are involved. Go figure it out.
Hard to comply and selectively enforced laws are the basement of half baked dictatorships - that ones where the political leaders cannot assume the dictatorship alone, needing support from a bunch of little wannabe dictators from some feudal social niche.
I live in one of these countries (Brazil). Believe me, for your own sake, get rid of hard to comply and selectively enforced laws. They allows the government to do things that normally they couldn't - as to persecute people at its own arbitrary criteria by not enforcing some laws, except on the selected ones.
Being a jerk, you even didn't wasted you precious time doing minimal research on the matter, did you?:-)
Here, inform youself:
Giving unauthorised access to someone other than the account holder, the company [Facebook] said, was against its privacy policy.
The Rashes, who live in Virginia, tried to fight their case in court, but soon found there just wasn't any legislation that covered the management of "digital assets".
The family's tragic battle is just one of many examples in which the internet has been shown to be woefully unprepared for dealing with death.
UK Laws doesn't apply to USA companies. Apple Computer is a USA company.
I don't know if Apple Cloud Services has offices on UK (the only situation I know that UK Laws would be enforceable), but as it appears, they have not.
Your responsibility for an export doesn't end once it leaves your hands if you didn't do due diligence to ensure that the ultimate recipient wasn't a denied party.
And exactly how the Law expects that the exporter manages that? That's impossible! It's the USA Government that have armed troops to enforce policies, not the civilian exporters!
How is it not feasible? It exactly what I did when my dad died. Yes, it was a pain in the ass, but it was my responsibility as executor to make it happen. You can list everything on one order, so if you do it right it really only takes one court order.
What you call "not feasible" is the correct legal way to handle things. The solicitor here shouldn't be paid for all the extra time this is taking.
Well... At least here, when someone dies and his/her heirs get their hands on the properties, there's no court order needed - just the paperwork issued by the legal register office stating what belongs to who and that's it. A court order is needed when there's dispute between the heirs.
I don't remember how bank accounts are managed - the only case I remember where a bank acount was involved was a dispute. Messy business, I say.
The papers show who are the rightful inheritors of the estate, including the iPad hardware. That much is certain.
The question of where that leaves information that is held on iCloud and/or encrypted on a device with a password is unclear. It appears she left neither the password nor specific instructions. She might have wanted the family to have access to this data after her death, but then again she might not.
After all, if you wanted your secrets to die with you, you'd probably keep them on a device in an encrypted/password protected form.
Seems like Apple wants a court to make that decision. Which doesn't seem like a bad thing.
I see your point. However, I don't see how law would enforce this.
The individual has died, and all his/her possessions now belongs to his/her heirs - it's their property now.
There's something in the will that states that such data must be destroyed? If yes, it's ok to me. If not, Apple is just stalling and preventing the righteous owners of the data to access it.
What is not a problem with a vast, unexplored and willing market share exists.
Someday the market will be saturated with Pads (as it's with PCs nowadays), but until there, Apple can do whatever they wants with no serious consequences.
Presumably because it would not be possible for such a contribution to be made without the import ban first being broken.
So don't export to them. Export to someone's else, and then they export to them.
A huge part of the code isn't made in USA anyway. Worst case scenario is these guys making contributions on non-USA code on some other country's SVN server to be merged to Fedora later.
The only locksmithing company that can open the lock, won't do it without a court order to do so, so that the mothers' belongings end up going to the actual heirs instead of a klepto who managed to arrive at the locksmith first by virtue of not having to stop at the local magistrate on the way..
This is not who things works in real life.
Do you homework. Ask a lawyer friend of yours how to you would gain access to your parent's bank account when the last of them became to pass away.
Of course you must *prove* you have the right to do so, but it's not feasible to have a court order for each property/right/whatever they leave to you by will (or by default).
Apple has not received the legal papers, ergo they can't do anything about this.
From the TFA: "Since her death, they have been unable to unlock the device, despite providing Apple with copies of her will, death certificate and solicitor's letter."
Legal papers was sent. Apple then requested for a court order.
it can also puts your mind on a train of thought such that you can not break out of it unless someone is monitoring you, picks up on that and says, "dude, snap out of it." Somehow death and and LSD are a bad idea.
Being that, perhaps, the reason the thing works with terminal patients.
I had read that traumas can be overcome by carefully reviving it - slowly and shortly at first, and then slowly increasing the exposure until the anxiety drops to a manageable level, when then the patient can face the trauma and put it behind.
Perhaps that exact "train of thought" manages to do something like that.
Well you can't just remain a Windows XP user unless you want to be hacked,
Being that the exact problem that ReactOS aims to solve.
and all the new computers have Windows 8 with Metro, so just "remaining a Windows user" is becoming less and less viable.
Windows 7 will be lingering for a lot of time yet. I don't see anybody on my job paying MSDN and installing Windows 8 - au contraire, 95% of them are installing Windows 7 over and over again.
Well, Bill Gates is back. Things will probably go back to the tracks on Windows 8.2. For the Microsoft's future sake.:-)
The S.O. is ok (it's even lighter and faster than Windows 7 sometimes), it's that awful GUI the problem. Solve that, and corporate people will leave Windows 7.
Except that it's not that hard to configure KDE to be a lot like Gnome2. Or, you could switch to MATE or Cinnamon. MacOS isn't anything like Gnome2.
I think you don't remember, but it's already about 3 years since Gnome 2's demise. At that time, Mate and Cinnamon wasn't yet available on every distro. At least, not on my distro, anyway. I had tried KDE, but yet, I just can't cut it. It's weird, as I respect QT very much - but all workflow was already stablished around Gnome Desktop 2 (and Evolution).
I installed Debian. Nice, but awkward to maintain (I was using YAST2 - I got a bit spoiled, I admit...).
Fedora? It sucks as a development machine.
Ubuntu? Common... =D
And then I remembered the times I used to work using MacOS X and thought "what a hell - if I'm going to change again, I'll do it to something that at least will be consistent on the next few years".
Well, except by Mission Control (what a piece of crap - I miss Exposé very much!), MacOS X worked exactly the way I remembered. It was an easy and (almost) painless switch. MacPorts saved the day more than once.
KDE still works just fine, and is an easy transition for Windows users.
I agree.
But, speaking frankly, if I were satisfied with the Windows way of things, I would remain a Windows user instead.
I was pretty happy with Gnome 2. When it died, my choices where go back to Windows, use KDE (what is almost the same to go back to Windows) or buying a MacOS box.
Well, I bought a MacOS box. And I guess a lot of previously Linux users did the same.
That makes him sound like a pretty ineffectual CEO. Seriously, shouldn't he be taking charge and reading the law to his reports? There is so much going on at MS, that I'd expect there to be a constant flurry of activity around the CEO. It sounds more like he was just "phoning in" the performance.
There's a difference on being the CEO of a company, and owning it.
Take by example... Nokia. Do you really think that Ellop managed to do all that mess alone? The board put him there, at first place.
When the board decides that they will make more money sinking the company, it's exactly that what they will do.
Slashdot Mirror
"Authenticated" copies of legal documents (and a will and death certificate are legal documents) are considered to have the same... how we say in english? Legal Power? ... whatever... as the originals.
Send them by snail mail (together with any legal document copy that states you have right over the matter), with proof of delivery (so you can prove they received it).and they *SHOULD* grant you the access you requested - otherwise, they're stalling you and are subject to legal penalties.
Of course, this is applicable to "normal", "real life" things. By some reason, people things that anything "virtual" is beyond the present legislation - even when present legislation money and contracts are involved. Go figure it out.
I know it.
But in this business model, the one that pays the money is not necessarily the one that receives the benefit.
Consider the following scenario:
1) Fedora gets contributions from A, B and C.
2) Person A lives on a restricted exports country, but does not receives money from anyone.
3) Person B lives on another restricted country, but receives it's money from a local enterprise that uses Fedora in his systems.
4) Person C lives in any "politically correct" country - doesn't matter if he/she gets paid or not.
How we can call "business" the relationship between Fedora and persons A and B?
Hard to comply and selectively enforced laws are the basement of half baked dictatorships - that ones where the political leaders cannot assume the dictatorship alone, needing support from a bunch of little wannabe dictators from some feudal social niche.
I live in one of these countries (Brazil). Believe me, for your own sake, get rid of hard to comply and selectively enforced laws. They allows the government to do things that normally they couldn't - as to persecute people at its own arbitrary criteria by not enforcing some laws, except on the selected ones.
Don't ask, don't tell passed legal muster for the U.S. armed forces...
They have guns. Fedora guys have not. :-)
for you, stupidity just comes naturally.
You're right, as you insist in replying to me. Naturally. :-)
Being a jerk, you even didn't wasted you precious time doing minimal research on the matter, did you? :-)
Here, inform youself:
Giving unauthorised access to someone other than the account holder, the company [Facebook] said, was against its privacy policy.
The Rashes, who live in Virginia, tried to fight their case in court, but soon found there just wasn't any legislation that covered the management of "digital assets".
The family's tragic battle is just one of many examples in which the internet has been shown to be woefully unprepared for dealing with death.
Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24380211
UK Laws doesn't apply to USA companies. Apple Computer is a USA company.
I don't know if Apple Cloud Services has offices on UK (the only situation I know that UK Laws would be enforceable), but as it appears, they have not.
Does it take effort to be that stupid?
You tell me. It's you the trolling jerk around here. :-)
Your responsibility for an export doesn't end once it leaves your hands if you didn't do due diligence to ensure that the ultimate recipient wasn't a denied party.
And exactly how the Law expects that the exporter manages that? That's impossible! It's the USA Government that have armed troops to enforce policies, not the civilian exporters!
How is it not feasible? It exactly what I did when my dad died. Yes, it was a pain in the ass, but it was my responsibility as executor to make it happen. You can list everything on one order, so if you do it right it really only takes one court order.
What you call "not feasible" is the correct legal way to handle things. The solicitor here shouldn't be paid for all the extra time this is taking.
Well... At least here, when someone dies and his/her heirs get their hands on the properties, there's no court order needed - just the paperwork issued by the legal register office stating what belongs to who and that's it. A court order is needed when there's dispute between the heirs.
I don't remember how bank accounts are managed - the only case I remember where a bank acount was involved was a dispute. Messy business, I say.
The papers show who are the rightful inheritors of the estate, including the iPad hardware. That much is certain.
The question of where that leaves information that is held on iCloud and/or encrypted on a device with a password is unclear. It appears she left neither the password nor specific instructions. She might have wanted the family to have access to this data after her death, but then again she might not.
After all, if you wanted your secrets to die with you, you'd probably keep them on a device in an encrypted/password protected form.
Seems like Apple wants a court to make that decision. Which doesn't seem like a bad thing.
I see your point. However, I don't see how law would enforce this.
The individual has died, and all his/her possessions now belongs to his/her heirs - it's their property now.
There's something in the will that states that such data must be destroyed? If yes, it's ok to me. If not, Apple is just stalling and preventing the righteous owners of the data to access it.
What is not a problem with a vast, unexplored and willing market share exists.
Someday the market will be saturated with Pads (as it's with PCs nowadays), but until there, Apple can do whatever they wants with no serious consequences.
Because I do NOT trust code from Russia, China, anywhere in the Middle East, and a few other places.
You are free to audit the code. ;-)
Presumably because it would not be possible for such a contribution to be made without the import ban first being broken.
So don't export to them. Export to someone's else, and then they export to them.
A huge part of the code isn't made in USA anyway. Worst case scenario is these guys making contributions on non-USA code on some other country's SVN server to be merged to Fedora later.
I think the point here is more like: should a North Carolina-based company be doing business with countries that the U.S. government is sanctioning?
Exactly what do you define a "business"?
It's a business if no money changes hands?
"Noble cause" isn't a defense in itself.
If you won the battle, it is.
Funny he develops stuff for government, curious!
[ConspirationMode:ON]
You see, perhaps he's working *with* the government to erode the banking system influence on politics.
Create an enemy to control your allies.
The only locksmithing company that can open the lock, won't do it without a court order to do so, so that the mothers' belongings end up going to the actual heirs instead of a klepto who managed to arrive at the locksmith first by virtue of not having to stop at the local magistrate on the way..
This is not who things works in real life.
Do you homework. Ask a lawyer friend of yours how to you would gain access to your parent's bank account when the last of them became to pass away.
Of course you must *prove* you have the right to do so, but it's not feasible to have a court order for each property/right/whatever they leave to you by will (or by default).
Apple has not received the legal papers, ergo they can't do anything about this.
From the TFA: "Since her death, they have been unable to unlock the device, despite providing Apple with copies of her will, death certificate and solicitor's letter."
Legal papers was sent. Apple then requested for a court order.
Apple will do whatever it will takes to demove the family from getting the account access for the following reaons:
1) They want *new* account to inflate the user base.
2) By stalling the request increases the chance that the family decides it's not worth the pain.
3) They don't want to deal with similar cases in the future - there's no money on it. So it's important to them to avoid precedences.
Welcome to this brave new world, where companies decides what you own and the rights you have on it.
it can also puts your mind on a train of thought such that you can not break out of it unless someone is monitoring you, picks up on that and says, "dude, snap out of it." Somehow death and and LSD are a bad idea.
Being that, perhaps, the reason the thing works with terminal patients.
I had read that traumas can be overcome by carefully reviving it - slowly and shortly at first, and then slowly increasing the exposure until the anxiety drops to a manageable level, when then the patient can face the trauma and put it behind.
Perhaps that exact "train of thought" manages to do something like that.
Well you can't just remain a Windows XP user unless you want to be hacked,
Being that the exact problem that ReactOS aims to solve.
and all the new computers have Windows 8 with Metro, so just "remaining a Windows user" is becoming less and less viable.
Windows 7 will be lingering for a lot of time yet. I don't see anybody on my job paying MSDN and installing Windows 8 - au contraire, 95% of them are installing Windows 7 over and over again.
Well, Bill Gates is back. Things will probably go back to the tracks on Windows 8.2. For the Microsoft's future sake. :-)
The S.O. is ok (it's even lighter and faster than Windows 7 sometimes), it's that awful GUI the problem. Solve that, and corporate people will leave Windows 7.
Except that it's not that hard to configure KDE to be a lot like Gnome2. Or, you could switch to MATE or Cinnamon. MacOS isn't anything like Gnome2.
I think you don't remember, but it's already about 3 years since Gnome 2's demise. At that time, Mate and Cinnamon wasn't yet available on every distro. At least, not on my distro, anyway. I had tried KDE, but yet, I just can't cut it. It's weird, as I respect QT very much - but all workflow was already stablished around Gnome Desktop 2 (and Evolution).
I installed Debian. Nice, but awkward to maintain (I was using YAST2 - I got a bit spoiled, I admit...).
Fedora? It sucks as a development machine.
Ubuntu? Common... =D
And then I remembered the times I used to work using MacOS X and thought "what a hell - if I'm going to change again, I'll do it to something that at least will be consistent on the next few years".
Well, except by Mission Control (what a piece of crap - I miss Exposé very much!), MacOS X worked exactly the way I remembered. It was an easy and (almost) painless switch. MacPorts saved the day more than once.
Unfortunately, the XP applications will not run on Android-x86 - so this is not an option.
I already bought them. They're still working fine. Make the Android versions a free migration, and perhaps I would consider the hassle of migration.
KDE still works just fine, and is an easy transition for Windows users.
I agree.
But, speaking frankly, if I were satisfied with the Windows way of things, I would remain a Windows user instead.
I was pretty happy with Gnome 2. When it died, my choices where go back to Windows, use KDE (what is almost the same to go back to Windows) or buying a MacOS box.
Well, I bought a MacOS box. And I guess a lot of previously Linux users did the same.
That makes him sound like a pretty ineffectual CEO. Seriously, shouldn't he be taking charge and reading the law to his reports? There is so much going on at MS, that I'd expect there to be a constant flurry of activity around the CEO. It sounds more like he was just "phoning in" the performance.
There's a difference on being the CEO of a company, and owning it.
Take by example... Nokia. Do you really think that Ellop managed to do all that mess alone? The board put him there, at first place.
When the board decides that they will make more money sinking the company, it's exactly that what they will do.