https://medium.com/bull-market/there-is-no-effective-fiducia...
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/6/1578437/-The-Myth...
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co...
There is such a thing as fiduciary duty, but it's not related to the common usage of public companies needing to maximize profit for shareholders.
Directors and officers of Apple Inc., incorporated in California, are bound to serve in a manner such that they believe to be in the best interests of the corporation and its shareholders.
If the directors and officers of Apple Inc. could determine that their shareholders have an interest in abstaining from the Chinese market for ideological reasons, they could (possibly) make a decision which would not serve the financial interest of the shareholders, but I find it unlikely that their shareholders would consent to that.
It's obvious to me that remaining in the Chinese market despite the CCP's suppression of liberties is in the interest of the shareholders. It is a huge market, and the other markets simply don't care enough about this issue to stop buying Apple devices and services on account of this concession to the CCP.
Not really, look up fiduciary duty. When you trade publicly, you have a special form of contract to the shareholding trusts, and in turn to the shareholder.
If you breach this, you are liable for damages, and likely to be replaced by somebody who isn't going to make the same mistake.
This is a vital part of publicly traded companies.