If they choose to sure, but I dont see what incentive they would have. After all, the post is about a company removing products from a market rather than being subject to a law that would allow the gov to force them to do so.

> but I dont see what incentive they would have.

They are frequently subpoenaed for information, and turn over that data more often than not: https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html

Yeah, because they are asked to/legally required. I was questioning incentives to hand over information on their own accord, just because they can.

All of these are their own accord. That's even what OP's article is about - if Apple is legally required to break their encryption in the EU, then they will discontinue their product.

Let's not pretend this is a privacy-motivated decision. Where Apple doesn't have negotiating power (eg. China) they have been forced to compromise user safety and privacy[0]. We live in a post XKeyscore world, pretending like this doesn't also happen in America or the UK is a bedtime story for helpless capitalists.

[0] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351

Huh? Isn't this story about the possibility of the UK government legally requiring Apple to do something?

Which is a good reason to avoid giving your data to either one in the first place. If I don't have a choice though, I'll take the company over the government any day.

Difficulty: "Any day" meaning 1917 in Russia or 1933 in Germany.

I don't understand this comment the Tsar and the Nazi's were both governments.

Another good example is the Dutch housing all the data in an building that was used to track down and kill the right people.

The data existing is the problem. The ideal situation is that there is no data.

D'oh, you're right, I misread the GP. Finish coffee first, then post.

I had to double check everything to make sure it wasn't me.