Apple: U.S. Can’t Force It to Unlock Terrorist’s iPhone

The transcript discusses Apple's legal response to a court case demanding it unlock an iPhone linked to the San Bernardino attack. Apple argues that complying would violate its rights and set a dangerous precedent, potentially compromising global privacy and security. The case has significant business implications, especially in light of past NSA spying revelations, affecting trust in US tech companies abroad.

What is the main argument Apple presents in its legal filing against unlocking the iPhone?

• It would violate the company's rights and global privacy.

• It would be too costly for Apple.

• It would enhance national security.

• It would improve Apple's market position.

What concern does Apple raise about the potential consequences of unlocking the iPhone?

• It could decrease government surveillance.

• It would boost Apple's reputation.

• It might result in a global hacking risk.

• It could lead to increased sales.

How does Apple view the government's request in terms of its impact on privacy?

• As a boost to their public image.

• As a way to enhance security.

• As a significant threat to privacy.

• As a minor inconvenience.

What challenge do U.S. tech companies face in international markets post-Snowden revelations?

• Increased competition from local companies.

• Lack of trust in data privacy.

• Higher taxes on technology exports.

• Limited access to new technologies.

Why is the issue of unlocking the iPhone significant for U.S. tech companies?

• It increases their domestic market share.

• It reduces their production costs.

• It impacts their international business relations.

• It affects their ability to innovate.