SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation  ||  Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of Four Men in a 1998 Gang Rape Case  ||  Supreme Court: Privy Purse Privileges of Princely Rulers are Not Enforceable Legal Rights  ||  Delhi HC: Repeated Court Summons May Distress and Re-Traumatize Child Sexual Assault Victims  ||  Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Labeling Someone as a Terrorist Associate Amounts to Defamation  ||  Delhi HC: Setting Aside or Altering a Judge’s Order by a Higher Court Doesn’t Affect Their Integrity  ||  Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot be Faulted For Smart Replies; Interrogator Must be Sharper  ||  Supreme Court: Belated Jurisdictional Challenge Impermissible After Participation in Arbitration  ||  Supreme Court: Failure to Prove Specific Overt Acts of Each Unlawful Assembly Member Not Fatal  ||  Supreme Court: Parental Salary Alone Cannot Determine OBC Creamy Layer Status    

Apple: Welfare authority in a corporate veil? - (22 Feb 2016)

Company

Apple’s recent refusal to unlock an iDevice of persons suspected to have terrorist links by the United States government set off as much a furore as it did debate. Apple rejected, and very publicly so, a federal district court order to decrypt the iPhone of a couple who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California and are suspected by the FBI to have links to ISIS. Apple equated decrypting one device as enabling access to all other iPhones, which would domino into services provided by other tech giants. Why all of a sudden companies are being so protective of data held by them may be explained by the international exposure they face. No longer reliant on the American market, companies like Apple rely heavily on demand (and supply) from countries like China where hand-in-hand cooperation with the US government would likely spook users and incite governmental backlash.

Tags : APPLE   DECRYPT   IPHONE   TERROR LINKS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved