I feel apprehensive about some of these things… well, not the specific instance here, more generally: There's an implication (in this story and others like it)

I feel apprehensive about some of these things… well, not the specific instance here, more generally: There's an implication (in this story and others like it) that Apple, Google et cetera should turn away distasteful customers, or if they don't, then A/G/… can be blamed for whatever those customers do. But it's not clear to me that a very big company should even be permitted to choose its customers. That a smallish company with 0.1% worldwide market share is choosy, okay, in that case would-be customers have other suppliers and service providers. But if a monopolist or oligopolist turns away customers, IMO that encroaches on the legislature, which ought to have the sole right to forbid things. Expecting Apple or Google to ban things that the relevant legislature will not ban is, in a way, to step away from the rule of law. Expecting that is to want a world where we're ruled by corporations rather than by legislatures. Or…?