Now director of civil liberties at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, Granick seems to be engaged as a lawyer, a scholar or an advocate with nearly every hot-button political and social issue influenced by technology.
The brief also argued that Congress specifically chose not to require certain technology companies to create “backdoors” into their encryption features to enable access for law enforcement purposes. Granick signed on to an amicus brief that defended Apple’s interest in building robust privacy and security features into its products. Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn wanted Apple to disable the encryption on a mobile device whose owner was under investigation. Librarian of Congress to adopt a rule clarifying that jailbreaking doesn’t violate federal law.īut last fall, their interests aligned. Her group successfully persuaded the U.S.
Then, Granick was civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an advocacy group focused on protecting individuals’ rights in the digital world. The company claimed the practice led to copyright infringement. Debate was raging over the practice of “jailbreaking,” which enabled iPhone users to circumvent locks Apple put on its devices so they could switch carriers or install apps not sold by Apple. In 2010, she and the company were at odds. To understand Jennifer Granick’s views on freedom and privacy, consider her interactions with Apple.
