4 ms·

It's too specific to be fake. My money is on Amazon and Apple being under a gag order. Why would they be under such order? Maybe it's CHYNA, or maybe it's PRISM

It's too specific to be fake. My money is on Amazon and Apple being under a gag order. Why would they be under such order? Maybe it's CHYNA, or maybe it's PRISM's big brother ;)

longerthoughts 8y ago
People are pitching the gag order theory a lot but would they be legally able to not only flat out deny the events but also that they’re under any gag order?
- ethbro 8y ago
  The only gag order version that makes sense is "An incredibly small number of people at the companies were aware of this, and they've been lying to their own company." It's possible... but that starts to be fairly chilling and I can't see them being employed after this shakes out if it's true.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - taviso 8y ago
    As far as I'm aware, legal experts agree there is no way to compel you to lie. Apple's general counsel has said on the record he doesn't know what Bloomberg are talking about, so how would they even verify this gag order was proper? https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1048283980913684480 https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1048283980913684480 Note that he volunteered to be on the record, he could have said that off the record or made no comment at all.
    - ummonk 8y ago
      Additionally, it probably wouldn't protect you from lying either when the SEC subsequently investigates.
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago
  Both companies are heavily reliant on a supply chain through China. Why is the assumption that a gag order is from the US and not them?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
geofft 8y ago
If it were a gag order why would they respond with specific denials instead of just saying "We take our customers' privacy seriously, your data is safe, we cannot comment on rumors" or something?
- smokeyj 8y ago
  This is like believing undercover agents have to admit they're cops if asked. Who even spreads these rumors.. No, Apple would not admit being under gag order. The publicist wouldn't even know, so they wouldn't be lying. Like the PR dude would even have the clearance for that type of info..
  - cwyers 8y ago
    The thing about a gag order is it _gags_ you. You can't talk when you're under a gag order. You're not compelled to lie by a gag order.
- HillaryBriss 8y ago
  IMHO, if a company said "We take our customers' privacy seriously, your data is safe, we cannot comment on rumors" many people would interpret that as a confirmation of the original story. That kind of lingo doesn't sound specific enough or convincing nowadays. Maybe we're just too used to that. It seems like today's technical audience demands something that sounds very specific, airtight, watertight, germ-proof, shock-proof, etc
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

It's too specific to be fake. My money is on Amazon and Apple being under a gag order. Why would they be under such order? Maybe it's CHYNA, or maybe it's PRISM's big brother ;)

longerthoughts 8y ago

People are pitching the gag order theory a lot but would they be legally able to not only flat out deny the events but also that they’re under any gag order?

ethbro 8y ago
The only gag order version that makes sense is "An incredibly small number of people at the companies were aware of this, and they've been lying to their own company." It's possible... but that starts to be fairly chilling and I can't see them being employed after this shakes out if it's true.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- taviso 8y ago
  As far as I'm aware, legal experts agree there is no way to compel you to lie. Apple's general counsel has said on the record he doesn't know what Bloomberg are talking about, so how would they even verify this gag order was proper? https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1048283980913684480 https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1048283980913684480 Note that he volunteered to be on the record, he could have said that off the record or made no comment at all.
  - ummonk 8y ago
    Additionally, it probably wouldn't protect you from lying either when the SEC subsequently investigates.
AnthonyMouse 8y ago
Both companies are heavily reliant on a supply chain through China. Why is the assumption that a gag order is from the US and not them?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

geofft 8y ago

If it were a gag order why would they respond with specific denials instead of just saying "We take our customers' privacy seriously, your data is safe, we cannot comment on rumors" or something?

smokeyj 8y ago
This is like believing undercover agents have to admit they're cops if asked. Who even spreads these rumors.. No, Apple would not admit being under gag order. The publicist wouldn't even know, so they wouldn't be lying. Like the PR dude would even have the clearance for that type of info..
- cwyers 8y ago
  The thing about a gag order is it _gags_ you. You can't talk when you're under a gag order. You're not compelled to lie by a gag order.
HillaryBriss 8y ago
IMHO, if a company said "We take our customers' privacy seriously, your data is safe, we cannot comment on rumors" many people would interpret that as a confirmation of the original story. That kind of lingo doesn't sound specific enough or convincing nowadays. Maybe we're just too used to that. It seems like today's technical audience demands something that sounds very specific, airtight, watertight, germ-proof, shock-proof, etc
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]