7 ms·

> "Discrimination. Racially profiled. He didn't have any business asking me what country I was from" Actually, if it would be illegal to sell the technology to

> "Discrimination. Racially profiled. He didn't have any business asking me what country I was from" Actually, if it would be illegal to sell the technology to an Iranian, and you're speaking the official language of Iran, then it would make a lot of sense for them to ask you if you're an Iranian citizen. Clearly the manager misunderstood and misapplied the policy, but this is not "racial profiling". It's linguistic profiling, and it's the only reasonable way to enforce the export law.

MartinCron 14y ago
the only reasonable way to enforce the export law That's sort of stretching the bounds of the word "reasonable" :) The law here seems to be over-broad. Retailers should be able to sell to anyone in their stores and not be held responsible for what someone may or may not do with it once it leaves their store. Alternatively, I guess they could do ID and background checks, handgun-shopping style.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- lutorm 14y ago
  What they do with it once it leaves is not the concern. The mere sale of export-controlled material to a foreign person is prohibited. It doesn't matter what they would do with it, because it's the transfer of technology to them that is prohibited. You should think of this law in the same way as the fact that you can't offer someone a job without verifying their legal work status. It's not "profiling", because it is your responsibility to ascertain that you are not breaking the law. You should positively verify this with everyone. The problem is that the law is being applied to completely mainstream consumer items, not ballistic missile technology or something.
  - JumpCrisscross 14y ago
    I can build a crude missile guidance system using PS3s. I'm not sure about iPads, but I'd wager one is looking at a similar situation. Still think this is ridiculous, however - a check of residency should have been between observing someone speaking Farsi and denying the sale.
    - jcromartie 14y ago
      You could do better than a "crude" guidance system with a lot of computers less sophisticated than a PS3. I'd imagine netbooks and barebones Atom PCs are way more practical in terms of running code and more than powerful enough to do the job. But either way, Iran doesn't need to buy technology from the US, considering they can just buy anything they want from China.
      - lutorm 14y ago
        I think that is the key weirdness: the fact that the US apparently assumes that it is the sole provider of computing technology to the world.
        excuse-me 14y ago
        It's stupider than that. As a european company want to launch our satellite on a Chinese rocket. It will leave here sealed in an environmental shroud and go up on their rocket without ever leaving our sight. But because it contains made in USA components = denied export of restricted technology. Ok so we will design and build the satellite in China allowing them full access to all the technology and giving them a leg up in the production of this kind of payload = no problem. And Chinasat 6B is now happily broadcasting crap to the people of china
  - lukejduncan 14y ago
    Agreed, or it would be much harder to buy a laptop with encryption on it at your local Best Buy.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - kitsune_ 14y ago
    The woman who tried to buy the iPad is a US citizen. The guy should have asked for an ID. Now it's just an embarrassment for Apple.
    - lutorm 14y ago
      The article is confusing, they seem to be talking about several cases: Jafarzadeh said he was helping a friend buy an iPhone. That friend was from Iran, living and studying in the Atlanta area on a visa. In this case, the "friend" clearly is subject to export control.
      - dedward 14y ago
        Why is the friend subject to export control? he's not in Iran - he's a person in the US. If he tries to take the prohibited items baack to Iran that's US Customs problem - not Apple's
  - marshray 14y ago
    > The mere sale of export-controlled material to a foreign person is prohibited. Let me get this straight.. you're saying if an Iranian, a Cuban, or a Libyan person walks into Walmart and buys a $300 Windows PC with Bitlocker on it, that Walmart has committed a Federal crime? That's insane.
    - lutorm 14y ago
      I think that's correct, and yes, pretty much.
    - MartinCron 14y ago
      Not only that, but it appears to be a federal crime that the individual teller is guilty of, and possibly subject to jail time. Makes me glad I don't work in retail.
      - beedogs 14y ago
        Makes me glad I don't live in the US anymore.
droithomme 14y ago
<strike>Selling to any customer at a store in Alpharetta, Georgia, USA is NOT "exporting to Iran", which is the actual prohibition, nor is it a reasonable interpretation of that.</strike> edit: Guess I'm wrong, see post mentioning § 734.2(2)(ii) below.
mkaltenecker 14y ago
Racial profiling is wrong even if it is effective. That is the opinion of many who are opposed to it. Just because something is effective doesn’t mean it should be done (e.g. killing every criminal is extremely effective in pushing the relapse rate all the way down). That’s what those who respond with “But it’s effective!” to racial profiling just do not get.
- jcromartie 14y ago
  This isn't racial profiling, though. To clarify: racial profiling means using someone's race in place of legitimate evidence. In the case of this export rule, though, speaking the official language of an embargoed country sure sounds like legitimate reason to take further action. Most Farsi speakers are from Iran. Most people from Iran speak Farsi. It's completely legitimate to assume that someone speaking Farsi is at least from Iran, and may reasonably be a visiting Iranian national. The mistake in this situation was that the manager applied the rule to anybody from Iran, and ignored the person's US residence and citizenship.
  - mkaltenecker 14y ago
    It is at least very similar. Also, from the point of view of those who are opposed to it, racial profiling would still be wrong if it were effective (i.e. if race could actually provide evidence).
    - eridius 14y ago
      There's a number of reasons why racial profiling is considered wrong. Two of the biggest ones are that a) race is something that cannot be controlled, it is not a choice, and discrimination based on innate characteristics is wrong; and b) it's not effective. However, language is a choice. Language is something that can be controlled. If you're being discriminated against because your language is a very strong indicator that you are a foreign national from an embargoed country, then it's really hard to say that linguistic profiling is wrong, because the two biggest objections to racial profiling don't apply.
lukejduncan 14y ago
> It's linguistic profiling, and it's the only reasonable way to enforce the export law. BS. I'd say it's more reasonable to check a billing address. Speaking the language of a country that we have export restrictions on is not a reasonable filter. The responsibility is to not sell merchandise in Iran, not to refuse sale of merchandise in America based on nationality. Apple isn't playing the role of an exporter here.
- taligent 14y ago
  But you can pay by cash at an Apple Store so not sure how checking the billing address would work.
  - jmj42 14y ago
    That's not relevant. Th U.S. export restriction does not apply to language, ethnicity, country of origin, etc. It applies to _sending_ export restricted items to (in this case) Iran. Any sale at a brick-and-mortar store in the U.S. does not constitute export. Apple, and the store are safe from legal liability. edit - hmm, as pointed out elsewhere, there does seem to be some cases where selling to an individual is still restricted.
  - lukejduncan 14y ago
    Sounds like everyone who has ever sold a computer needs a new way of moving their wares if this is really a concern. ;) That or, every sales rep needs to be trained to recognize Farsi and distinguish the Iranian dialects from the other places we don't have trade restrictions on.
    - davidw 14y ago
      A guide to the distinguishing characteristics of the Spanish spoken in Cuba should also be de rigueur for sales staff as well, lest an iPad slip into the hands of the Castros. I suppose that might be problematic in parts of Miami, but I guess you have to be willing to throw these kinds of freedoms under the bus to ensure that Cuban agents have absolutely no way to get their hands on our precious technology.
ktizo 14y ago
It's linguistic profiling, and it's the only reasonable way to enforce the export law. Only if you are being a completely stupid and bigoted bastard. Otherwise the only sane way to enforce an export law if you are a company, is to not deliver items to that country. Everything outside that is up to governmental customs and border control and no court would enforce not selling IPads to Americans who are born in Iran and speak Farsi. Otherwise it is nothing less than apartheid. The policy quoted states: the exportation, sale or supply from the U.S. to Iran of any Apple goods is strictly prohibited without authorization by the U.S. government. It does not say you are not allowed to sell them to people who speak Farsi, even if they were born in Iran. It just says that Apple is not allowed to send them out of the country. You could possibly also claim that you are not allowed to sell directly to current Iranian citizens, as they could be said to represent Iran, although this would still be reasonably open to question, especially if they have a green card, which are available to current Iranian citizens.
- excuse-me 14y ago
  No the law says you are guilty of a federal crime if you SUSPECT that the sale would violate an export restriction. If two white guys with snow on their boots ask "how much for the nucular wessels" you aren't to sell to them.
  - ktizo 14y ago
    Selling something to someone in a shop who can speak in a language other than english and who was born somewhere else doesn't qualify as suspicion of violating an export restriction, unless you have such appallingly lousy pattern recognition that you really shouldn't be working in a shop in the first place, or in extreme cases, even be allowed out without supervision just in case you get run over while talking to a tree because you thought it was the local dentist as the leaves were the same shade of green as his favourite hat. [edit] also, ipads, while shiny, are not of the same export class as 'nucular wessels'. I think this might be that pattern recognition problem we've been talking about. Have you been remembering to take your pills at the right time?
    - 14y ago
DrMfloss 14y ago
yes if you speak Farsi and you are from Iran it is safe to say that you are an Iranian. I must also add that this girl probably speaks better English than Farsi. However to conclude that this person is buying this item to go to Iran is not a good assumption. that is like saying every Spanish speaking person that is from Cuba is going to go to Cuba in the next year or two.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
chives 14y ago
But Farsi is spoken by millions of people who are not from Iran, many of whom are United States citizens. So no, it wouldn't make any sense. None.
dedward 14y ago
Selling something in a retail outlet in the US to a person physically there does not qualify as "exporting.". it's a nont-starter. It is not a salesperson's job to interrogate customers to ensure their intentions are not to export things. That would be stupid. Apple must ensure they don't export things to Iran, like other retailers....... but that means, you know, shipping stuff to iran.

MartinCron 14y ago

the only reasonable way to enforce the export law That's sort of stretching the bounds of the word "reasonable" :) The law here seems to be over-broad. Retailers should be able to sell to anyone in their stores and not be held responsible for what someone may or may not do with it once it leaves their store. Alternatively, I guess they could do ID and background checks, handgun-shopping style.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
lutorm 14y ago
What they do with it once it leaves is not the concern. The mere sale of export-controlled material to a foreign person is prohibited. It doesn't matter what they would do with it, because it's the transfer of technology to them that is prohibited. You should think of this law in the same way as the fact that you can't offer someone a job without verifying their legal work status. It's not "profiling", because it is your responsibility to ascertain that you are not breaking the law. You should positively verify this with everyone. The problem is that the law is being applied to completely mainstream consumer items, not ballistic missile technology or something.
- JumpCrisscross 14y ago
  I can build a crude missile guidance system using PS3s. I'm not sure about iPads, but I'd wager one is looking at a similar situation. Still think this is ridiculous, however - a check of residency should have been between observing someone speaking Farsi and denying the sale.
  - jcromartie 14y ago
    You could do better than a "crude" guidance system with a lot of computers less sophisticated than a PS3. I'd imagine netbooks and barebones Atom PCs are way more practical in terms of running code and more than powerful enough to do the job. But either way, Iran doesn't need to buy technology from the US, considering they can just buy anything they want from China.
    - lutorm 14y ago
      I think that is the key weirdness: the fact that the US apparently assumes that it is the sole provider of computing technology to the world.
      - excuse-me 14y ago
        It's stupider than that. As a european company want to launch our satellite on a Chinese rocket. It will leave here sealed in an environmental shroud and go up on their rocket without ever leaving our sight. But because it contains made in USA components = denied export of restricted technology. Ok so we will design and build the satellite in China allowing them full access to all the technology and giving them a leg up in the production of this kind of payload = no problem. And Chinasat 6B is now happily broadcasting crap to the people of china
- lukejduncan 14y ago
  Agreed, or it would be much harder to buy a laptop with encryption on it at your local Best Buy.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- kitsune_ 14y ago
  The woman who tried to buy the iPad is a US citizen. The guy should have asked for an ID. Now it's just an embarrassment for Apple.
  - lutorm 14y ago
    The article is confusing, they seem to be talking about several cases: Jafarzadeh said he was helping a friend buy an iPhone. That friend was from Iran, living and studying in the Atlanta area on a visa. In this case, the "friend" clearly is subject to export control.
    - dedward 14y ago
      Why is the friend subject to export control? he's not in Iran - he's a person in the US. If he tries to take the prohibited items baack to Iran that's US Customs problem - not Apple's
- marshray 14y ago
  > The mere sale of export-controlled material to a foreign person is prohibited. Let me get this straight.. you're saying if an Iranian, a Cuban, or a Libyan person walks into Walmart and buys a $300 Windows PC with Bitlocker on it, that Walmart has committed a Federal crime? That's insane.
  - lutorm 14y ago
    I think that's correct, and yes, pretty much.
  - MartinCron 14y ago
    Not only that, but it appears to be a federal crime that the individual teller is guilty of, and possibly subject to jail time. Makes me glad I don't work in retail.
    - beedogs 14y ago
      Makes me glad I don't live in the US anymore.

droithomme 14y ago

<strike>Selling to any customer at a store in Alpharetta, Georgia, USA is NOT "exporting to Iran", which is the actual prohibition, nor is it a reasonable interpretation of that.</strike> edit: Guess I'm wrong, see post mentioning § 734.2(2)(ii) below.

mkaltenecker 14y ago

Racial profiling is wrong even if it is effective. That is the opinion of many who are opposed to it. Just because something is effective doesn’t mean it should be done (e.g. killing every criminal is extremely effective in pushing the relapse rate all the way down). That’s what those who respond with “But it’s effective!” to racial profiling just do not get.

jcromartie 14y ago
This isn't racial profiling, though. To clarify: racial profiling means using someone's race in place of legitimate evidence. In the case of this export rule, though, speaking the official language of an embargoed country sure sounds like legitimate reason to take further action. Most Farsi speakers are from Iran. Most people from Iran speak Farsi. It's completely legitimate to assume that someone speaking Farsi is at least from Iran, and may reasonably be a visiting Iranian national. The mistake in this situation was that the manager applied the rule to anybody from Iran, and ignored the person's US residence and citizenship.
- mkaltenecker 14y ago
  It is at least very similar. Also, from the point of view of those who are opposed to it, racial profiling would still be wrong if it were effective (i.e. if race could actually provide evidence).
  - eridius 14y ago
    There's a number of reasons why racial profiling is considered wrong. Two of the biggest ones are that a) race is something that cannot be controlled, it is not a choice, and discrimination based on innate characteristics is wrong; and b) it's not effective. However, language is a choice. Language is something that can be controlled. If you're being discriminated against because your language is a very strong indicator that you are a foreign national from an embargoed country, then it's really hard to say that linguistic profiling is wrong, because the two biggest objections to racial profiling don't apply.

lukejduncan 14y ago

> It's linguistic profiling, and it's the only reasonable way to enforce the export law. BS. I'd say it's more reasonable to check a billing address. Speaking the language of a country that we have export restrictions on is not a reasonable filter. The responsibility is to not sell merchandise in Iran, not to refuse sale of merchandise in America based on nationality. Apple isn't playing the role of an exporter here.

taligent 14y ago
But you can pay by cash at an Apple Store so not sure how checking the billing address would work.
- jmj42 14y ago
  That's not relevant. Th U.S. export restriction does not apply to language, ethnicity, country of origin, etc. It applies to _sending_ export restricted items to (in this case) Iran. Any sale at a brick-and-mortar store in the U.S. does not constitute export. Apple, and the store are safe from legal liability. edit - hmm, as pointed out elsewhere, there does seem to be some cases where selling to an individual is still restricted.
- lukejduncan 14y ago
  Sounds like everyone who has ever sold a computer needs a new way of moving their wares if this is really a concern. ;) That or, every sales rep needs to be trained to recognize Farsi and distinguish the Iranian dialects from the other places we don't have trade restrictions on.
  - davidw 14y ago
    A guide to the distinguishing characteristics of the Spanish spoken in Cuba should also be de rigueur for sales staff as well, lest an iPad slip into the hands of the Castros. I suppose that might be problematic in parts of Miami, but I guess you have to be willing to throw these kinds of freedoms under the bus to ensure that Cuban agents have absolutely no way to get their hands on our precious technology.

ktizo 14y ago

It's linguistic profiling, and it's the only reasonable way to enforce the export law. Only if you are being a completely stupid and bigoted bastard. Otherwise the only sane way to enforce an export law if you are a company, is to not deliver items to that country. Everything outside that is up to governmental customs and border control and no court would enforce not selling IPads to Americans who are born in Iran and speak Farsi. Otherwise it is nothing less than apartheid. The policy quoted states: the exportation, sale or supply from the U.S. to Iran of any Apple goods is strictly prohibited without authorization by the U.S. government. It does not say you are not allowed to sell them to people who speak Farsi, even if they were born in Iran. It just says that Apple is not allowed to send them out of the country. You could possibly also claim that you are not allowed to sell directly to current Iranian citizens, as they could be said to represent Iran, although this would still be reasonably open to question, especially if they have a green card, which are available to current Iranian citizens.

excuse-me 14y ago
No the law says you are guilty of a federal crime if you SUSPECT that the sale would violate an export restriction. If two white guys with snow on their boots ask "how much for the nucular wessels" you aren't to sell to them.
- ktizo 14y ago
  Selling something to someone in a shop who can speak in a language other than english and who was born somewhere else doesn't qualify as suspicion of violating an export restriction, unless you have such appallingly lousy pattern recognition that you really shouldn't be working in a shop in the first place, or in extreme cases, even be allowed out without supervision just in case you get run over while talking to a tree because you thought it was the local dentist as the leaves were the same shade of green as his favourite hat. [edit] also, ipads, while shiny, are not of the same export class as 'nucular wessels'. I think this might be that pattern recognition problem we've been talking about. Have you been remembering to take your pills at the right time?
  - 14y ago

DrMfloss 14y ago

yes if you speak Farsi and you are from Iran it is safe to say that you are an Iranian. I must also add that this girl probably speaks better English than Farsi. However to conclude that this person is buying this item to go to Iran is not a good assumption. that is like saying every Spanish speaking person that is from Cuba is going to go to Cuba in the next year or two.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

chives 14y ago

But Farsi is spoken by millions of people who are not from Iran, many of whom are United States citizens. So no, it wouldn't make any sense. None.

dedward 14y ago

Selling something in a retail outlet in the US to a person physically there does not qualify as "exporting.". it's a nont-starter. It is not a salesperson's job to interrogate customers to ensure their intentions are not to export things. That would be stupid. Apple must ensure they don't export things to Iran, like other retailers....... but that means, you know, shipping stuff to iran.