Supreme Court: Rape Conviction Possible Without S.376 Charge if POCSO Case Fails on Age Proof  ||  SC: Mere Long Possession Can't Establish Adverse Possession; Hostile Intent is Required  ||  Supreme Court Finds Gaps in FSSAI’s Proposed Warning Labels for Foods High in Fat, Sugar and Salt  ||  Supreme Court Quashes ITS Officer's 'Deadwood' Retirement, Orders Rs. 15 Lakh Payment  ||  Uttarakhand HC: District Magistrate to Establish Public Helpline within 24 Hrs amid Water Pollution  ||  Allahabad HC: Custodial Violence and Molestation Are Crimes, Not Police Duty  ||  Gujarat High Court: Bombay Public Trust Registration is Covered by Section 43 of the Waqf Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Advocates not Above Law, No Immunity from Lawful Police Inquiry  ||  Gauhati HC: Talaq-e-Hasan Valid, Requires Registration under Assam Marriage Act  ||  NCLAT: NCLT President Empowered to Transfer Cases from One Bench to Another    

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