5 ms·

> I'm still missing how this could be enforced ? By banning Apple from doing business in the UK. The US used a similar strategy decades ago to break Swiss Ban

> I'm still missing how this could be enforced ? By banning Apple from doing business in the UK. The US used a similar strategy decades ago to break Swiss Bank Secrecy laws (either Swiss banks had to give up the info or they were going to be kicked out of the US).

mohamedattahri 2y ago
Yep, and the US had a lot more leverage; out of the US translates into no access to US dollars either directly or via a correspondent bank, which essentially means bankruptcy.
throw0101c 2y ago
> By banning Apple from doing business in the UK. To use poker terminology: I think that if the UK made this bet that Apple would call.
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  I really hope so. I would love to see that showdown. Hopefully, "can't buy an iPhone in the UK and everyone knows why" makes the Snooper's Charter a radioactive mess that legislators fall all over themselves to repeal.
  - elcritch 2y ago
    Exactly, imagine the legislatures facing their irate teen daughters for bricking Apple devices.
  - chrisjj 2y ago
    I don't see how closing Apple UK would mean "can't buy an iPhone in the UK". Importing is a thing.
    - JoshTriplett 2y ago
      In which case, Apple still wins by not having to put in a backdoor.
- izacus 2y ago
  Apple stockholders would never allow that.
  - throw0101c 2y ago
    > Apple stockholders would never allow that. Then they can vote in a board of directors that agrees with them, and have that board fire Tim Cook. I would hazard to guess that you'll see an exodus of a lot of folks leaving Apple either because (a) they won't follow that order, or (b) in solidarity with those that are fired. Reminder that privacy is feature that Apple touts (how much you believe them is up to you): > On January 28, 2021, Apple CEO Tim Cook delivered remarks at Computers, Privacy & Data Protection Conference: Enforcing Rights in a Changing World. The virtual conference — hosted annually in Brussels, Belgium — is one of the foremost international privacy and technology conferences bringing together leaders from academia, government, civil society and the private sector. Learn more about the features and controls Apple provides users to safeguard their privacy at http://www.apple.com/privacy http://www.apple.com/privacy * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaLxTz1Yw7M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaLxTz1Yw7M * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HjDpPnxcP0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HjDpPnxcP0 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YOi0r3vptQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YOi0r3vptQ
    - izacus 2y ago
      I don't know where your ideas are coming from - Apple easily folded and gave all data to Chinese government when commanded to do so under leadership of Tim Cook. Where does your thinking that they'll suddenly forget about revenue from UK over this come from?
      - throw0101c 2y ago
        > Where does your thinking that they'll suddenly forget about revenue from UK over this come from? * https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+china+revenues https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+china+revenues * https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+uk+revenues https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+uk+revenues
      - 2y ago
bluGill 2y ago
Swiss banks didn't care - they didn't have a large Us presence anyway. Until the US started enforcing this by proxy, other banks couldn't do business with you and the US and overall the US is more important to the world than Swiss banks.
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Not so sure. Yeah, they didn't have a large US presence but they did a lot of business with US banks and securities markets -- that's what was threatened. It's wasn't the ability to have branches in the US but the ability to conduct business in US markets.
christkv 2y ago
They ban Apple from doing business and watch as the uk stock market goes into the toilet as companies scramble to get out.
bilekas 2y ago
> By banning Apple from doing business in the UK. As someone else here said, Apple would 100% call this bluff. And you can be certain the UK won't have the US to put pressure on Apple for them. All the would happen is the UK Apple users would be with an expensive paperweight.
- mahkoh 2y ago
  That assumes that Apple's shareholders believe that Apple's privacy reputation (relative to other companies) is more valuable than access to the UK market. All evidence that I have seen suggests that consumers by and large do not care about this kind of privacy. They do not buy iPhones instead of other phones due to the privacy properties. Therefore Apple's shareholders could order Apple to stay in the UK market. And if not, then Apple's customers could be compensated with money and other UK-held assets that the government could confiscate.
  - pmontra 2y ago
    According to NASDAQ [1] the two main investors are Vanguard and Blackrock, but the two of them together are far away from 50%. There are a number of other large investors. I didn't do the sums but there must be probably 30 of them to get to 50%. Do some of them care about privacy of common people? Probably not. About the people in their boards? Probably yes. [1] https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/aapl/institutional-holdings https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/aapl/instituti...
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    This is usually true of any corp. However, Apple is the one big tech company that has built its reputation on privacy more than any other, and Cook in particular is very strong on that -- and he's not prone to Zuck-like flip/flopping, at least not so far. You may be right, of course. But if there's one tech company who _might_ say "no", it's Apple. Counterpoint: Apple in China.
  - collyw 2y ago
    Most users don't care about that stuff, but I think a small but significant percentage do. I have never been an Apple fan but I am aware that they are significantly better than Windows and Andorid for security and privacy.

mohamedattahri 2y ago

Yep, and the US had a lot more leverage; out of the US translates into no access to US dollars either directly or via a correspondent bank, which essentially means bankruptcy.

throw0101c 2y ago

> By banning Apple from doing business in the UK. To use poker terminology: I think that if the UK made this bet that Apple would call.

JoshTriplett 2y ago
I really hope so. I would love to see that showdown. Hopefully, "can't buy an iPhone in the UK and everyone knows why" makes the Snooper's Charter a radioactive mess that legislators fall all over themselves to repeal.
- elcritch 2y ago
  Exactly, imagine the legislatures facing their irate teen daughters for bricking Apple devices.
- chrisjj 2y ago
  I don't see how closing Apple UK would mean "can't buy an iPhone in the UK". Importing is a thing.
  - JoshTriplett 2y ago
    In which case, Apple still wins by not having to put in a backdoor.
izacus 2y ago
Apple stockholders would never allow that.
- throw0101c 2y ago
  > Apple stockholders would never allow that. Then they can vote in a board of directors that agrees with them, and have that board fire Tim Cook. I would hazard to guess that you'll see an exodus of a lot of folks leaving Apple either because (a) they won't follow that order, or (b) in solidarity with those that are fired. Reminder that privacy is feature that Apple touts (how much you believe them is up to you): > On January 28, 2021, Apple CEO Tim Cook delivered remarks at Computers, Privacy & Data Protection Conference: Enforcing Rights in a Changing World. The virtual conference — hosted annually in Brussels, Belgium — is one of the foremost international privacy and technology conferences bringing together leaders from academia, government, civil society and the private sector. Learn more about the features and controls Apple provides users to safeguard their privacy at http://www.apple.com/privacy http://www.apple.com/privacy * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaLxTz1Yw7M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaLxTz1Yw7M * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HjDpPnxcP0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HjDpPnxcP0 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YOi0r3vptQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YOi0r3vptQ
  - izacus 2y ago
    I don't know where your ideas are coming from - Apple easily folded and gave all data to Chinese government when commanded to do so under leadership of Tim Cook. Where does your thinking that they'll suddenly forget about revenue from UK over this come from?
    - throw0101c 2y ago
      > Where does your thinking that they'll suddenly forget about revenue from UK over this come from? * https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+china+revenues https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+china+revenues * https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+uk+revenues https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+uk+revenues
    - 2y ago

bluGill 2y ago

Swiss banks didn't care - they didn't have a large Us presence anyway. Until the US started enforcing this by proxy, other banks couldn't do business with you and the US and overall the US is more important to the world than Swiss banks.

insane_dreamer 2y ago
Not so sure. Yeah, they didn't have a large US presence but they did a lot of business with US banks and securities markets -- that's what was threatened. It's wasn't the ability to have branches in the US but the ability to conduct business in US markets.

christkv 2y ago

They ban Apple from doing business and watch as the uk stock market goes into the toilet as companies scramble to get out.

bilekas 2y ago

> By banning Apple from doing business in the UK. As someone else here said, Apple would 100% call this bluff. And you can be certain the UK won't have the US to put pressure on Apple for them. All the would happen is the UK Apple users would be with an expensive paperweight.

mahkoh 2y ago
That assumes that Apple's shareholders believe that Apple's privacy reputation (relative to other companies) is more valuable than access to the UK market. All evidence that I have seen suggests that consumers by and large do not care about this kind of privacy. They do not buy iPhones instead of other phones due to the privacy properties. Therefore Apple's shareholders could order Apple to stay in the UK market. And if not, then Apple's customers could be compensated with money and other UK-held assets that the government could confiscate.
- pmontra 2y ago
  According to NASDAQ [1] the two main investors are Vanguard and Blackrock, but the two of them together are far away from 50%. There are a number of other large investors. I didn't do the sums but there must be probably 30 of them to get to 50%. Do some of them care about privacy of common people? Probably not. About the people in their boards? Probably yes. [1] https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/aapl/institutional-holdings https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/aapl/instituti...
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  This is usually true of any corp. However, Apple is the one big tech company that has built its reputation on privacy more than any other, and Cook in particular is very strong on that -- and he's not prone to Zuck-like flip/flopping, at least not so far. You may be right, of course. But if there's one tech company who _might_ say "no", it's Apple. Counterpoint: Apple in China.
- collyw 2y ago
  Most users don't care about that stuff, but I think a small but significant percentage do. I have never been an Apple fan but I am aware that they are significantly better than Windows and Andorid for security and privacy.