Apple removes 'not legal' Hong Kong police monitoring app
Apple has removed the HKmap Live from the App Store over legality concerns, but it is unclear if this was a decision made solely by Apple or one forced by the Chinese government.
The removed HKmap Live was an app intended to track police activity on the streets of Hong Kong. The objective was to allow users to avoid areas where protesters and police conflicts could potentially take place.
Apple has argued that the app may be used for evading the police. The developers went public with a quote from Apple that explained why the app was removed from the App Store.
This was especially useful as increasing tensions have mounted between law enforcement officers and those protesting. The map also provides information for when police declare something an illegal assembly -- meaning that the app could theoretically provide aid to the police by helping people avoid areas deemed as unlawful protests.
Despite the fact that the app has been pulled from the App Store, there is still a live version available online.
The removed HKmap Live was an app intended to track police activity on the streets of Hong Kong. The objective was to allow users to avoid areas where protesters and police conflicts could potentially take place.
Apple has argued that the app may be used for evading the police. The developers went public with a quote from Apple that explained why the app was removed from the App Store.
"Your app contains content - or facilitates, enables, and encourages an activity - that is not legal ... Specifically, the app allowed users to evade law enforcement."@Apple assume our user are lawbreakers and therefore evading law enforcement, which is clearly not the case.
-- HKmap.live (@hkmaplive)
This was especially useful as increasing tensions have mounted between law enforcement officers and those protesting. The map also provides information for when police declare something an illegal assembly -- meaning that the app could theoretically provide aid to the police by helping people avoid areas deemed as unlawful protests.
I can't stop tweeting because I'm so angry (this should be the site motto). Another thing the map shows is when police raise a blue flag for ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY. Wandering into this puts you in legal jeopardy, a potential 5-10 year jail sentence. And the police don't want you there!
-- Pinboard (@Pinboard)
Despite the fact that the app has been pulled from the App Store, there is still a live version available online.
Comments
I wonder what Apple would do if an app like this one were developed for the U.S.? Would Apple refuse to approve it or would they give the government their middle finger and let it in the App Store?
Apple, and everyone else in a similar situation, has to perform a balancing act, often taking decisions on the spur of the moment because you can't anticipate every eventuality. Just like with everyone, mistakes will be made along the way. Stupid things will sometimes be said by executives. I think when there is no right or wrong because context is changing all the time we have to cut them some slack.
You're right that money talks and money rules but the U.S is the land of the lobby where money often overrides everything.
I'm pretty critical of Apple for varying reasons but on the face of it, this looks like a 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' situation. Again, on the face of it, Apple's stance looks understandable IMO.
If you truly believe what you said, then flip the situation: Suppose China provided a means by which immigrants could monitor the thugs of ICE. You would be screaming bloody murder and Trump would be having hissy fits. So, let's not be accusing anybody of hypocrisy.
However, it is even more concerning that the State Department has been silent on the issue. It's certainly a violation of the "one country, two systems" principal that China and the UK agreed to.
You're more than welcome to answer the same question I posed to George Mac. If the type of app Krupp mentioned were in the North American store for tracking police and other official activity so that common citizen's might avoid active accident or crime scenes, and some arm of the US government demanded it be removed would Apple do so or instead treat it as an opportunity to espouse "Values"... In your opinion of course. You do have one, correct?
A lot of apps could be used for perceived "bad things" in addition to good ones. Examples might be a "lost item" feature should Apple offer one. It could probably be used for spying on a spouse or partner or a child's travels and current location too, so should Apple avoid creating one?
Now with all that said I don't think it's being factually claimed that the Chinese demanded the HongKong app be removed. It could be Apple being proactive and not wanting to chance displeasing the Chinese Government, or even a simple mistake made by some lower level Apple employee that will be reversed today.
It's interesting that the right focuses on the "two systems" part but totally misses the "one country" part. Further, our country would never have tolerated 1/10th the violence China has -- so far -- put up with. Try throwing a Molatov cocktail at police here. It wouldn't go well for you.
If you have a valid point to make, you should make it -- rather than spinning and misquoting what others have said.
So Question 2 even if you have no intention of answering the first: Why did you bring the US President into the discussion, was it to serve as a distraction or did Mr. Trump comment on Apple's choice and we all missed what he said? Heck I thought it was LKrupp posting his own personal opinion.
I think your attempt to twist this instead into "us vs. them" in a political sense is what opens you up to a question of how Apple would address the two situations if/when they occur. You seem fond of comparisons. It does not seem to me as tho Apple is consistent with "values" and when they choose to promote them, As a result there are some who believe Apple (based on actions not words) would treat one differently than the other. That would imply some of their choices are as much or more for advantageous marketing as "commitment to core values". Yes figure you'll ignore this one too and don't really expect a direct answer, but you asked me to state my point so I have.
Yeah I know I know, Apple respects the law (!?) everywhere they *do business. That leaves out two important words: *Choose to. Yes it's a choice.
But again we don't know for certain why there's the case of the missing app to begin with. Pressure, demand, proactive, and error are all still in play.
Here's an unfunny joke:
"Why did Guyger get 10 years?"
"Because she was a trigger happy cop."
Jean could have used this app.