Apple has no choice but to follow the laws in the countries where they operate. They have a choice about which countries they operate in, but realistically they cannot easily leave a large market.
Also, the primary source of accountability for elected leaders is — quite properly! — the electorate. If UK voters support this kind of thing then it’s hard for apple to argue they are wrong and the government should do what Apple thinks is best instead.
If people in the EU and US don’t like the idea of Apple giving their data to the UK, then they need to tell their leaders to pass laws preventing Apple from doing that. Then Apple will have to pick which countries they want to operate in.
Apple could also just pull out of the UK entirely, fire all their UK employees, and stop buying UK goods and services. I know they won't, but feck all fascist governments.
By that logic, they need to pull out of the USA immediately.
Because Apple is in the US that means they should prop up fascism and a police state?
Not directed at you personally, but people need to learn what fascism is. Fascism is a type of authoritarianism but not authoritarianism is fascism.
Fascism is a far-right system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
The U.K. is capitalist, and we can certainly argue that this would be a stringent movement control the rest of the definition doesn't fit at all. There U.K. isn't governed by the far-right, it isn't a dictatorship, there isn't violent suppression of opposition and the list goes on. So, yeah, not fascism at all
Apple could also just pull out of the UK entirely, fire all their UK employees, and stop buying UK goods and services. I know they won't, but feck all fascist governments.
Even though I am a shareholder of Apple stock I would agree, let Apple pull out of the UK market 100%. Let those British iPhone users go out and have to buy new non iPhone phones. Let's see how that goes over. It's time for Apple to put their foot down. If they do it for UK, the rest of the world will soon follow. Apple, grow a pair!
Apple could also just pull out of the UK entirely, fire all their UK employees, and stop buying UK goods and services. I know they won't, but feck all fascist governments.
Even though I am a shareholder of Apple stock I would agree, let Apple pull out of the UK market 100%. Let those British iPhone users go out and have to buy new non iPhone phones. Let's see how that goes over. It's time for Apple to put their foot down. If they do it for UK, the rest of the world will soon follow. Apple, grow a pair!
My first reaction to this was that someone mistook an Onion piece to be real. But these days, Onion pieces seem to not age well.
I am not actually sure how to take this report literally. I could understand a national government passing a law that forbids persons for acting is some manner they deem not desirable. Thus, something as broad as "iPhones in the UK shall be seized and searched" is plausible (but perhaps unwise) or even "Persons in the UK and all UK citizens must provide all their passwords to any computer system they have access to by uploading to this site [url]." Fine, but also rather unwise. The part that gets me here though, is i don't understand what the UK law is demanding Apple actually *do*. Make a system that doesn't exist? I do get that national governments can impose laws on their citizens and people in their borders. They can make laws that affect activity beyond their borders, but enforcing that becomes problematic, as beyond those borders require either the cooperation of another government, or (tragically) doing so without their cooperation - and that goes by a different name ("war" "invasion" "special police action") that has...bad outcomes. Usually they just wait until such persons appear within their borders, then it is off to the gaol (or similar.)
Did the UK really order Apple to make...something? I agree they can make what Apple *has made* subject to control where they can reach. I also agree *if you don't make this for us, we will seize your assets where we can reach." Does this law really contemplate that?
Expect to see this happen here in USA with SCOTUS being right wing and having expressed doubts about the right to privacy, starting with abortion and saying the same for sexual acts. They will likely use that reasoning to force Apple to provide a "backdoor".
The right to privacy simply does not exist with conservatives where they believe in imposing structure and control over people and their behaviors to their whims.
In this "brave new world", I hope Apple can still hold to their commitment to customer privacy and security. So far, they've been robust enough to tell the FBI, "We literally can't access private user information." If Apple has to design technologies that would allow governments to access user data directly off of their devices, then that would make them government contractors, not consumer product manufacturers. Apple has built their brand on prioritizing customer privacy and security, and that's been part of their core branding for more than 10 years, I think.
Yes, Apple devices HAVE been cracked by third party companies, but that is despite Apple's protections, not with Apple's assistance. I mean, it's fine to provide whatever data they have access to when given a court order to do so. I think they've been pretty cooperative with law enforcement in that area. But to build a back door—perhaps in the form of a law enforcement keycode—into all their devices and/or OSes would be a fundamentaldesign change. It would be a fundamental rebranding. And it would kill the company... Because if you build a back door, anyonecan exploit it. Not just law enforcement. That is the problem that Apple faces. And it's why Apple has to refuse.
It's like when you're building a house, and you have one entrance at the front, so that you have full control over who enters and exits your house. Along comes a tyrannical government saying, "We want you to build a back door to your house, that only we can enter, and we super-serious pinky-promise that we won't abuse that access. Oh, also, don't tell your guests that there's a back door where we can enter at will and peak in on them anytime we like—which we totally won't do, as per our aforementioned super-serious pinky-promise. Also, we REALLY don't appreciate the commenter calling us tyrannical. That hurts our feelings! We're not tyrants! We just want to protect the children!"
The part where Apple can't tell customers is the most disturbing part. What is the UK government hiding?
It is but it is in no way unique to the U.K. The U.S. does this as well.
Though targeted on individuals, iirc with a warrant. Not this global fishing expedition.
You must be unaware of PRISM the data collected was not targeted at individuals. It was also most certainly global and while it did involve a FISA court warrant those warrants are secretive so the subjects of them don't know and cannot legally challenge them. So, the U.S. does global fishing expeditions and the companies involved are not allowed to inform people.
Apple could also just pull out of the UK entirely, fire all their UK employees, and stop buying UK goods and services. I know they won't, but feck all fascist governments.
By that logic, they need to pull out of the USA immediately.
Because Apple is in the US that means they should prop up fascism and a police state?
Not directed at you personally, but people need to learn what fascism is. Fascism is a type of authoritarianism but not authoritarianism is fascism.
Fascism is a far-right system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
The U.K. is capitalist, and we can certainly argue that this would be a stringent movement control the rest of the definition doesn't fit at all. There U.K. isn't governed by the far-right, it isn't a dictatorship, there isn't violent suppression of opposition and the list goes on. So, yeah, not fascism at all
Agreed, the UK isn’t there. The US however…
Yeah, we are barreling down that road. It's that we need to not toss around the word until it loses all meaning. If we call everything fascism then no one is going to care when the real thing shows up.
Perhaps a discussion would be beneficial to explain how quickly such back doors would be exploited to collect compromising information and photos from MP’s iPhones to be used for blackmail.
Apple could also just pull out of the UK entirely, fire all their UK employees, and stop buying UK goods and services. I know they won't, but feck all fascist governments.
By that logic, they need to pull out of the USA immediately.
Because Apple is in the US that means they should prop up fascism and a police state?
Not directed at you personally, but people need to learn what fascism is. Fascism is a type of authoritarianism but not authoritarianism is fascism.
Fascism is a far-right system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
The U.K. is capitalist, and we can certainly argue that this would be a stringent movement control the rest of the definition doesn't fit at all. There U.K. isn't governed by the far-right, it isn't a dictatorship, there isn't violent suppression of opposition and the list goes on. So, yeah, not fascism at all
your quickly-googled Wikipedia version of what fascism is is wrong. It’s obviously written by a leftist and is nowhere near the actual definition. See merriam Webster.
A company that has consistently for decades pushed itself to build the best products and services ices in the world, who’s even altered course when it became apparent that things weren’t quite fair (see Taylor swift royalty letter), who’s taken its footprint seriously and fought like no other to be environmentally responsible, human rights centered, and stayed at the top in spite of heavy competition from the worlds big guns, interference from not only world governments, but even its own, and come out in top, while maintaining integrity and legality along the way, when the goalposts move, it’s time to recognize it’s the hand that moved the goalpost is at fault. Not the kicker who placed the ball perfectly. I’m rooting for apple.
Sorry, again, deleting the original comment because you've gone out of your way to incite anger via false claims. But the rest was good and can be seen in the quoted post. And for everyone's consideration, I've pasted the Merriam Webster definition of fascism at the bottom. While there can be a left or right extreme that rules with a fascist government, they have historically been right extreme, which is why there is an association.
I find that it's important to read this definition, then read it again, and think about who it fits.
often Fascism: a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition
A leader that places his rule above law, avoiding all government oversight, regimenting severe economic control over its citizens, and heavily regulating social standards via their rule of law? Seeking to punish all that oppose their world view? Sounds familiar actually. Saw a lot of this on the news today.
Note my edit of the quoted post. That would be allowed here. The parts I trimmed out, no, not so much. They presented debunked conspiracies as fact. We're not going to house such things here.
Absolutely not, under any circumstances, generally. There might be circumstances under which a court order could request information but only with exceptionally good and strong reasons.
This is a direct assault on Democracy, Freedom and Individual Privacy. In essence, it's a direct assault on the values that they claim to be protecting. George Orwell must be turning in his grave.
And don't forget, in England you can be jailed for misgendering someone. Now that's scary stuff.
This is a direct assault on Democracy, Freedom and Individual Privacy. In essence, it's a direct assault on the values that they claim to be protecting. George Orwell must be turning in his grave.
And don't forget, in England you can be jailed for misgendering someone. Now that's scary stuff.
Expect to see this happen here in USA with SCOTUS being right wing and having expressed doubts about the right to privacy, starting with abortion and saying the same for sexual acts. They will likely use that reasoning to force Apple to provide a "backdoor".
The right to privacy simply does not exist with conservatives where they believe in imposing structure and control over people and their behaviors to their whims.
Similar things were already happening under Obama. Hence Snowden. Barking up the wrong tree.
Comments
If people in the EU and US don’t like the idea of Apple giving their data to the UK, then they need to tell their leaders to pass laws preventing Apple from doing that. Then Apple will have to pick which countries they want to operate in.
I am not actually sure how to take this report literally. I could understand a national government passing a law that forbids persons for acting is some manner they deem not desirable. Thus, something as broad as "iPhones in the UK shall be seized and searched" is plausible (but perhaps unwise) or even "Persons in the UK and all UK citizens must provide all their passwords to any computer system they have access to by uploading to this site [url]." Fine, but also rather unwise. The part that gets me here though, is i don't understand what the UK law is demanding Apple actually *do*. Make a system that doesn't exist? I do get that national governments can impose laws on their citizens and people in their borders. They can make laws that affect activity beyond their borders, but enforcing that becomes problematic, as beyond those borders require either the cooperation of another government, or (tragically) doing so without their cooperation - and that goes by a different name ("war" "invasion" "special police action") that has...bad outcomes. Usually they just wait until such persons appear within their borders, then it is off to the gaol (or similar.)
Did the UK really order Apple to make...something? I agree they can make what Apple *has made* subject to control where they can reach. I also agree *if you don't make this for us, we will seize your assets where we can reach." Does this law really contemplate that?
The right to privacy simply does not exist with conservatives where they believe in imposing structure and control over people and their behaviors to their whims.
A leader that places his rule above law, avoiding all government oversight, regimenting severe economic control over its citizens, and heavily regulating social standards via their rule of law? Seeking to punish all that oppose their world view? Sounds familiar actually. Saw a lot of this on the news today.
Note my edit of the quoted post. That would be allowed here. The parts I trimmed out, no, not so much. They presented debunked conspiracies as fact. We're not going to house such things here.
https://theferret.scot/claim-scottish-law-jail-misgendering-false/