Apple has frequently used small variations on the same one-sentence justification when giving in to government demands that conflict with the company’s stated values: “Apple complies with the law in each of the countries in which it operates.”
However, there are occasions on which the company has instead chosen to stand up to unreasonable government demands, and we yesterday saw the latest example …
Apple stood up to the Indian government and won
The latest story began on Monday, when India ordered Apple to pre-install an undeletable state security app on iPhones. The government positioned it as a way to help users recover lost and stolen phones, but since it ensures that all phones can be tracked by the government, that has obvious implications for user privacy.
We said at the time that Apple was likely to push back on this, hoping to negotiate a compromise, but the company went further than this and outright refused to comply.
The company’s response led to India immediately backing down on one key element of its demand: that users be unable to remove the app from their devices.
The battle isn’t yet over. India is still insisting that Apple pre-install the app, but it was a notable interim victory.
Earlier examples of Apple standing firm
It’s not the first time Apple has adopted a strong stance in refusing to comply with a government demand. The most famous example was the case of the San Bernardino shooting, where the FBI insisted that Apple provide a backdoor to allow it to unlock the shooter’s iPhone, and the company refused.
The iPhone maker came under a huge amount of flak from government and law enforcement agencies, but said the issue was too important to give in. Ultimately, it won the battle and was proven right in its claims that the FBI could use alternative means to access the device.
... continue reading