Apple Inc. has received criticism for the use of sweatshop labor, environmental destruction, and unethical business practices.

Additionally, it has been criticized for its litigious legal policy of suing before first gathering all the facts necessary to pursue a legitimate lawsuit.

Accusations of anti-competitive behavior

Portable devices

There has been criticism of Apple's portable devices, whether iOS-based (i.e. iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad), or other non-iOS-based (i.e. iPod Classic, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle), being locked into iTunes and creating an iTunes Store monopoly for these devices. Because of this, Steve Jobs was ordered to attend a court hearing regarding antitrust violations specifically with iPods and iTunes. Similarly, Apple has not licensed its FairPlay DRM, or its proprietary lossless format codec Apple Lossless (ALAC), to any other company, thus preventing content —either purchased from the iTunes store, or Apple Lossless encoded in the iTunes computer application or bought from non-iTunes sources— from being used on other manufacturers' devices. As of April 2009, all music on the iTunes Store is DRM-free, however this does not apply to other content.

iTunes

Apple was caught up in controversy regarding the online sales of music in the European Union where, as a single market, customers are free to purchase goods and services from any member state. iTunes Stores there forced consumers and other music buyers to iTunes-only sites by restricting content purchases to the country from which the customers' payment details originated, which in turn forced users in some countries to pay higher prices. On December 3, 2004 the British Office of Fair Trading referred the iTunes Music Store to the European Commission for violation of EU free-trade legislation. Apple commented that they did not believe they violated EU law, but were restricted by legal limits to the rights granted to them by the music labels and publishers. PC World commented that it appeared "the Commission's main target is not Apple but the music companies and music rights agencies, which work on a national basis and give Apple very little choice but to offer national stores".

Google Voice controversy

Apple has been criticized over attempting to prevent iPhone users from using the Google Voice application by disabling it on the iPhone. Apple declined to approve the Google application for use on the iPhone, claiming that the application altered iPhone intended functionality, i.e., that with Google voice installation, voicemail is no longer routed to the iPhone's native application Visual Voicemail but instead is routed through Google's application, thus "ruining" the iPhone user experience. This caused controversy among iPhone developers and users, and the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began investigating Apple's active decision to deny users' ability to install Google Voice from the Apple online store from where users routinely download and install iPhone applications. As of November 2010, Google Voice has been made available for the iPhone.

Antitrust issue with Adobe Flash and iPhone OS controversy

With the release of iOS 4.0 SDK, Apple changed its terms of service to prohibit programs that are originally written in non-Apple approved languages from being used on the iPhone. This was criticized for being anti-competitive by disallowing use of Adobe Flash and other programs on the iPhone. The New York Times quoted an Adobe employee alleging the policy to be anti-competitive. On May 3, 2010, Ars Technica and The New York Post reported the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) are deciding which agency will launch an antitrust investigation into the matter.

The controversy over Apple's changes to section 3.3.1 of the iPhone SDK license agreement erupted after John Gruber's April 8, 2010 Daring Fireball blog post entitled, New iPhone Developer Agreement Bans the Use of Adobe’s Flash-to-iPhone. Strong opposition to Apple's licensing changes spread quickly with bloggers and others. Others were quick to note that the language used in the agreement also banned other developer tools including MonoTouch, Lua, Unity3D, and many others.

The original iPhone OS 3 section 3.3.1 reads:

:3.3.1 Applications may only use Published APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any unpublished or private APIs.

The revised iPhone OS 4 section 3.3.1 reads:

:3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

Uncertainty over Apple's exact intentions went largely unresolved with platform developers reaching out to Apple such as Novell who tried but Apple remained silent over the issue. Steve Jobs posted a reaction entitled "Thoughts on Flash", but did not directly address any third party development tools other than Adobe's Flash platform.

The "Thoughts on Flash" post drew immediate and harsh criticism with Steve Jobs being accused of outright lying by many. Jobs' assertion that Flash is not open, or closed and proprietary, attracted a great deal of attention with references to open source projects that take advantage of Adobe making the Flash specification open for developers to build on.

Price Reductions

Apple has been criticized for post-launch price reductions, most notably after the price of the iPhone was cut by $200 just two months after its release. This quick drop in price resulted in a flood of complaints to Apple. Apple worked to rectify complaints by offering $100 store credit to early iPhone customers who had bought their iPhones from Apple or AT&T.;

Corporate secrecy

Apple has also been criticized for its methods of tightly controlling information regarding product launches, deliberately passing out misinformation in an effort to find leakers and keep the media unsure of Apple Inc.'s current developments. Therefore Apple's methods result in more hype surrounding product launches. In some cases, Apple deliberately leaks information to the public to gauge potential viability of products such as the Apple iPad. Many attribute Apple's secrecy to Steve Jobs' reclusive nature where "he has always kept things close to the vest...and only confided in relatively few people.�

Corporate secrecy policy's effect on media relations

Think Secret lawsuit

With regard to leaked information about new Apple products, Apple has been accused of pressuring journalists to release their sources, has filed lawsuits against unknown persons, "John Does", to find out how their product information has been leaked and has been chastised by the courts for doing so as an abuse of the legal discovery process. In particular, Apple fought a protracted battle against the Think Secret web site that resulted in a "positive solution for both sides". No sources were revealed.

Gizmodo incident

In April 2010 a Gizmodo editor, Jason Chen, became the subject of legal controversy in San Mateo, California when the California Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team (a multi-county task force that investigates high-tech crimes in the Silicon Valley area, of whose steering committee Apple is a member) seized computers from the editor's home office, ostensibly to investigate the reverse-engineering of an iPhone. The Gizmodo blog published an article the week prior about the iPhone product's future, including a product dissection, after Chen's purchase of a stolen iPhone device. Gawker Media published the warrant on its website as an example of over-reaching by Apple and its improper use of law enforcement to police its patents. The Electronic Frontier Foundation(EFF) has also come to the defense of Gizmodo, citing the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 that protects journalists from police "rummaging through sensitive information contained in a reporter's notes and communications" and the warrant served was too broad, as it included "all records and data located and/or stored on any computers, hard drives, or memory storage devices, located at the listed location."

Reuters incident

In February 2010 it was reported that security guards at a Foxconn facility in China that manufactures Apple equipment roughed up a Reuters reporter. The reporter was attempting to take pictures.

Labor practices

In 2006, the Mail on Sunday alleged that sweatshop conditions existed in factories in China, where the contract manufacturers, Foxconn and Inventec, operate the factories that produce the iPod. The article stated that one iPod factory, for instance, had over 200,000 workers that lived and worked in the factory, with workers regularly doing more than 60 hours of labour per week. The article also reported that workers made around $100 per month and were required to live on the premises and pay for rent and food from the company. Living expenses (required to keep the job) generally took up a little over half of the worker's earnings. The article also said that workers were given buckets to wash their clothes.

Immediately after the allegations, Apple launched an investigation and worked with their manufacturers to ensure that conditions were acceptable to Apple. In 2007, Apple started yearly audits of all its suppliers regarding Worker's Rights, slowly raising standards and pruning suppliers that did not comply. Yearly progress reports have been published since 2008. In 2010, workers in China planned to sue iPhone contractors over poisoning by a cleaner used to clean LCD screens. One worker claimed that they were not informed of possible occupational illnesses.

Allegations of labor abuse in Chinese factories

During the international launch of the iPad news reports broke of about a dozen suicides over the past year at the manufacturer Foxconn's complex in Shenzhen, China, where products from many manufacturers including Apple, Dell, HP, Nokia and Sony are produced. Apple together with Dell, HP, Nokia and Sony have pledged to investigate the suicides.

Foxconn employee suicides

On July 16, 2009, Sun Danyong, a Chinese factory worker employed by Apple's manufacturing partner Foxconn, committed suicide after reporting he lost a prototype model for a fourth generation iPhone. Upon filing his report on July 13, Chinese media reported that his residence was searched by Foxconn employees, and that he was beaten and interrogated by his superiors, actions illegal under both Chinese and American law. The incident raised questions regarding Apple's secrecy policy and working conditions in their Chinese factories. An Apple spokesman told reporters that the company was "saddened by the tragic loss of this young employee." Apple's relationship with Foxconn regarding corporate security has been a continuing subject of controversy since Sun Danyong's death.

Apple states its policy on how it influences the corporate culture of its suppliers in its Supplier Responsibility Progress Reports. Holding suppliers accountable for their errors and omissions in their relationship with Apple is an area of concern Apple reports itself as taking seriously, and in its latest report, Apple stated that "[our] procurement decisions take into account a facility’s social responsibility performance, along with factors such as quality, cost, and timely delivery. When social responsibility performance consistently fails to meet Apple expectations, we terminate business." Apple has not announced whether it has severed business ties with Foxconn. Given Apple's stated policy, terminating relationships with such suppliers may be difficult without incurring huge financial losses.

In 2009 and 2010, Foxconn factories supplying iPhones, iPads and other devices have still come under fire in the press, with one source describing conditions as a "white collar prison". In 2009, Foxconn guards were videotaped beating employees. Later in April 2010, four workers attempted suicide in a single month in the same factory. By May 2010, 12 workers had attempted suicide at a Foxconn operations in China. Apple, HP, and others stated that they were investigating the situation.

Quality control and customer service issues

The Danish Consumer Complaints Board reported a fault with Apple's iBook product line and criticized Apple's lackluster response to the issue, indicating customer support problems at Apple. In that case, a solder joint between two components fractured after a certain number of computer restarts causing the computer to break down, with most incidents occurring outside Apple's warranty period. Websites such as AppleDefects.com were created in response to the issue and detailed quality control issues with Apple's product portfolio.

Apple has been repeatedly criticized for its unwillingness to honor its warranties and its concomitant penchant for giving any reason for doing so, no matter how bizarre: in 2008, Apple repair centers began to refuse to honor warranties of its products which had been used in an environment it deemed hazardous, i.e., that had been used around someone who smokes; and in 2009, Apple refused to honor its warranty and replace a defective battery on a machine that had a small amount of unrelated cosmetic damage that did not affect the machine's functionality, nor that of its battery.

Allegations of false security projection

Apple advertises its products as being secure and has succeeded in persuading the public of this. Despite the existence of a small number of known viruses and malware designed for Apple products, a 2006 report by McAfee found a 228 percent increase in the annual rate of vulnerabilities in the period 2003-5, compared to Microsoft's products, which saw a 73 percent. Moreover, every year since then a significant number of vulnerabilities have been found and fixed through security updates. However, the public's lack of awareness of the security vulnerabilities of Apple products has led to criticism of Apple for misleading the public which has risen over the years. This criticism has also drawn attention to Apple's failure to update its products with security updates in a timely fashion. An example of this was a security flaw in Sun Microsystems's Java, which Sun fixed promptly, while Apple took more than five months to distribute the fix. That is much longer than other companies, and drew sharp criticism from experts and journalists. A recent example is a malware product called MacDefender, MacProtector, MacSecurity, or MacGuard, which is an application that can be installed in OS X by the user; ZDNet's Microsoft Blogger Ed Bott estimates that it has been installed by 60,000 to 120,000 Mac customers who thought it was legitimate anti-virus software.

Overall, experts admit that Apple products are less likely to be breached by a hacker or infected by a virus/malware, though they emphasize that this is mainly due to the lack of interest by hackers in attacking Apple products. In particular they fear that Apple places its clients in danger by not taking action to inform the public of its security vulnerabilities. As David Harley, security expert from anti-virus vendor ESET said:

}}

According to Secunia vulnerability rankings, Apple has led Microsoft in reported security vulnerabilities since 2007, and currently leads all other vendors in reported vulnerabilities for 2010. This ranking, however, doesn't "indicate the actual security (or lack thereof) in the different vendors products; it rather shows that vulnerabilities continue to be discovered in significant numbers in products from even the largest and most popular vendors including those who spend significant resources on improving the security of their products" according to the authors of the study.

Vexatious litigation

In November 2008, Apple sent a cease and desist letter to BluWiki, a non-commercial wiki provider, alleging a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Apple claimed that a discussion of how to get other hardware and software to inter-operate with the latest iPods infringed their copyrights. On April 27, 2009, Odioworks (the operators of BluWiki), backed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, sued Apple in OdioWorks v. Apple, seeking a declaration of non-infringement and non-circumvention (an official response that Apple's intellectual property rights were not being infringed upon). On July 8, 2009, Apple ceased claiming infringement, stating that they are "withdrawing [Apple's] takedown notifications", and that "Apple no longer has, nor will it have in the future, any objection to the publication of the itunesDB Pages which are the subject of the OdioWorks complaint." The EFF noted, "While we are glad that Apple retracted its baseless legal threats, we are disappointed that it only came after 7 months of censorship and a lawsuit."

References

Category:Apple Inc. Apple