EFF to Apple Shareholders: Your Company Is Fighting for All of Us | Hacker News Reader

EFF to Apple Shareholders: Your Company Is Fighting for All of Us

eff.org

73 pointssinak20 comments

Shareholders don't care. Shareholders are not people. They are corporations and mutual/hedge funds. The closest thing to human would be the individual investor, but even they only ever act in their own financial interest.

Apple is working to protect its customer base and shareholders do very much care about customers. Should the iPhone be opened up to law enforcement, customers will walk. THAT gets the attention of shareholders more than any appeal to their non-existent humanity.

> "but even they only ever act in their own financial interest."

I'm an individual investor, and if fighting this out costs me some money, I'm pretty sure it was worth doing.

To whom will they walk?

They might walk to other phones, or they could cut down on their phone use in favor of desktops. Either is bad for apple. Or they could just cut down on the private information their share over their phones, which is very bad for google/facebook and a little less bad for apple.

Yes, and the fight won't stop after this court battle.

A bill by US lawmakers, set for release in March, could require encrypted devices to be able to give un-encrypted data to law enforcement. Feinstein says the bill is "coming along ... some people are making it a lot harder than we think it needs to be". An alternate proposal is also on the table

http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-cybersecurity/2016...

Is there anything Diane Feinstein has done in all her years of service that was actually good? I am struggling to find anything.

No.

She ran on "being a woman" that was her only credential that year. She's a self serving a-hole who has done absolutely nothing to help this state out.

As mayor, she had a canceal/carry permit when she backed laws refusing them to many.

At least Boxer has stated what she stands for and stood by that.

Feinstein, I never understood why we keep voting for her.

Honestly, part of me wants such a bill. As a big supporter of F/OSS, I think this could result in the creation of properly open phones running software beyond the control of US corporations. An open os running on standardized handsets could moot the entire debate. Users should be able to examine code and select from a variety of operating systems, even compile their own from source as PC consumers have done for years.

Hah, I agree, though personally I wouldn't risk a big brother future over supporting this bill.

Did anyone read the article?

> CNET reported that Apple's CEO, Tim Cook, was greeted with a standing ovation

T-Mobile says you aren't. :)

Little does EFF know, that will anger shareholders. They dont want to expend the costs to fight everyone's battle. Only those that bring shareholder value.

You may be mistaken: there's at least one shareholder that wishes Apple all the best. ;-)

Unless you're holding a massive chunk of apple and vote at meetings, you dont count.

Regardless of how cynical that sounds I actually think you're right here.

Your pretty broad assumption that being able to vote automatically makes you an opponent to fighting this battle seems flawed though. If the majority of the decision makers were against it, fighting it wouldn't be on the agenda in the first place, right?

> If the majority of the decision makers were against it, fighting it wouldn't be on the agenda in the first place, right?

Good point. Though from my limited understanding of how companies function, often the the CEO is chosen by the board and has the freedom to do most what (s)he wants but with knowledge that the board can step in at anytime if the CEO is offbase/course.

So it simply could be that Cook is standing up for something he believes and if it negatively affects the quarter/year then he's out.

As I understand it, shareholders are people from all walks of life, with their own thoughts, feelings, aims, and desires. Do you have special knowledge that would contradict my impression and provide support for your assertion?

And you don't think this very public battle is having a positive effect on Apple's sales?

It will have a positive effect, until it doesn't. There are some scenarios that could see the price fall rather dramatically should Apple put up too much of a fight.

If they lose on appeal and still refuse, we could see federal agents storm Apple's HQ to acquire the keys and anything else they deem necessary to construct what they need. Such a stunt could disrupt business. Similarly, the court could hold the board in contempt, even lock up directors or employees who disobey the court order. That would not aid the stock price.

Evidence of this? Or for that matter, that not letting the FBI ransack consumer privacy doesn't "bring shareholder value"?

I'm an Apple shareholder, and I'm the opposite of angry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com