I'd love to see a transcript [2], or list of participants [4] and find out which representatives present lean towards Apple or towards the FBI.
I skipped around the video. I mostly saw support for Apple, with a few exceptions, one being Mr. Sensenbrenner.
Mr. Sensenbrenner, a House republican of Wisconsin, asked Apple what legislation they would support, and Mr. Sewell, Apple's general counsel, said they support debate on the subject [1]
The congressman was clearly bullying Mr. Sewell here and using his position as congressman to make it appear as though Apple is not being agreeable. Well, encouraging debate before writing one-sided legislation sounds like great teamwork to me.
The congressman should have been reminded that not supporting new legislation is a valid position, and that every problem we face need not be solved with new laws.
Perhaps Mr. Sewell is trying to be respectful to the congressman. But I think he should not shy from responding in kind. Treat others as they treat you. No one will judge you for it. I think Apple missed an opportunity here to say they do not feel new legislation is needed, since guaranteeing back doors into devices would be an abridgement of consumers' right to privacy, and Apple's right to create safe products for consumers as it sees fit.
Overall though this seemed like a productive session.
Mr. Gowdy, a House republican of South Carolina, also bullies Sewell in the same manner [3], literally asking Apple to lobby for legislation.
In other words he is saying, get some lobbyists, do my work for me, pay for my next election campaign and solve your own problem. I don't know how you could be more blatantly obvious about being a corrupt, useless politician.
I skipped around the video. I mostly saw support for Apple, with a few exceptions, one being Mr. Sensenbrenner.
Mr. Sensenbrenner, a House republican of Wisconsin, asked Apple what legislation they would support, and Mr. Sewell, Apple's general counsel, said they support debate on the subject [1]
The congressman was clearly bullying Mr. Sewell here and using his position as congressman to make it appear as though Apple is not being agreeable. Well, encouraging debate before writing one-sided legislation sounds like great teamwork to me.
The congressman should have been reminded that not supporting new legislation is a valid position, and that every problem we face need not be solved with new laws.
Perhaps Mr. Sewell is trying to be respectful to the congressman. But I think he should not shy from responding in kind. Treat others as they treat you. No one will judge you for it. I think Apple missed an opportunity here to say they do not feel new legislation is needed, since guaranteeing back doors into devices would be an abridgement of consumers' right to privacy, and Apple's right to create safe products for consumers as it sees fit.
Overall though this seemed like a productive session.
Mr. Gowdy, a House republican of South Carolina, also bullies Sewell in the same manner [3], literally asking Apple to lobby for legislation.
In other words he is saying, get some lobbyists, do my work for me, pay for my next election campaign and solve your own problem. I don't know how you could be more blatantly obvious about being a corrupt, useless politician.
[1] https://youtu.be/g1GgnbN9oNw?t=3h59m30s
EDIT transcript here, though no speaker names are given and quotes are cut short
[2] http://www.c-span.org/video/?405442-1/hearing-encryption-fed...
[3] https://youtu.be/g1GgnbN9oNw?t=4h36m35s
EDIT list of participants:
[4] http://pastebin.com/raw/rHqYpv3g