> What else could they do? Refuse and loose access to that population?
... yes ? that would require putting human rights above profits, though.
... yes ? that would require putting human rights above profits, though.
Making a principled stand is often important, and can make a big difference in the world. That said, I often see an assumption that China would bend if companies would just stand their ground. History suggests that this is not the case at all. China would be perfectly happy for all non-Chinese companies to withdraw and leave WeChat to stand alone. WeChat which happens to give the Chinese government access to any and every message they want. So other companies might be able to feel better about themselves, or not, but we can assume it will have no bearing on China's actions.
So, how does it benefit humans or the cause of human rights for Apple to completely withdraw from China over this? Chinese users would lose access to secure iMessage and a device with a secure enclave, but would gain... what?
What people don't understand here is that the principle of fiduciary duty binds the hands of a lot of these companies. If you don't hold the controlling voting interest in the company... you really have very limited room to maneuver legally speaking.
Now if Apple could count on its shareholders not to sue them...
THEN they could operate in the fashion that you postulate.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/03/tim-cook...