Right, but when asked, no official or authority stated there was a law that was violated. Apple couldn't or didn't cite a law. The police and authorities don't claim they made a request. Whatever the rule of law Apple might claim to follow, it's 100% opaque and misleading.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sfmnemonic @zeynep and
Glenn Fleishman Retweeted Charles Mok 莫乃光
If I didn't say that, why impute it? But no law has been cited, no criminal activity shown. See https://twitter.com/TMclaughlin3/status/1182301330339184641 … and https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-apple/apple-pulls-police-tracking-app-used-by-hong-kong-protesters-after-consulting-authorities-idUSKBN1WP09U … and BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50009971 … HK legislator doesn't agree law broken:https://twitter.com/charlesmok/status/1182336160611201024 …
Glenn Fleishman added,
Charles Mok 莫乃光Verified account @charlesmokToday I wrote to Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, to tell him his company’s decision to remove HKmap live app from Appstore will cause problems for normal Hong Kong’s citizens trying to avoid police presence while they are under constant fear ofpolice brutality. Values over profits, pls! pic.twitter.com/guaBfV8PnfShow this thread1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @GlennF @sfmnemonic and
Apple is not acting according to its stated principles. Whether Cook is lying or not, I can’t tell. However, given Apple says they follow local laws, it would be good to know under what authority and what laws they are removing the app. For transparency.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sfmnemonic @GlennF and
It’s a perfectly reasonable assumption: that there is no lawful obligation for them to remove this app. If there were some lawful basis, the presumption would be they would disclose it rather than hide that in their press releases or emails.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sfmnemonic @GlennF and
What law is violated? Hong Kong legislators are on the record saying this app isn’t violating a law. Cook hasn’t said a law was violated. Even the Hong Kong police haven’t made this claim. Honestly, you’re the only person that I ever heard assume there was a lawful obligation.
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Which law? He is assuming a use—and that assumption is unwarranted—and then claiming this use would make it in violation of Hong Kong law. That’s not a lawful obligation. That’s a string of assumptions that he’s using to make a decision. There is no court order. No law cited.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sfmnemonic @GlennF and
For this to be a lawful obligation, there has to be some connection to laws! You can’t just say here’s what my police friend claimed, therefore it’s illegal. Also Hong Kong police were asked by journalists and didn’t back Cook up publicly.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.