Apple explains why it removed VPN apps in China

Wrong explanation. They were requested, but they are not required by law to do so.
 
crackersa said:
Aren't they required by Chinese law? So if they want to continue operating there they need to follow the laws there.
Click to expand...
If they were required by law, the press release would point it out. Instead they issued a statement which opens many ways for interpretation:
We have been required to remove some VPN apps in China that do not meet the new regulations.
Click to expand...
 
sajunky said:
If they were required by law, the press release would point it out. Instead they issued a statement which opens many ways for interpretation:
Click to expand...

They say it is to comply with government regulations regarding VPNs, that is not open for interpretation.
 
R13... said:
They say it is to comply with government regulations regarding VPNs, that is not open for interpretation.
Click to expand...

It is if you are sajunky...

For the rest of us sane people who live in the normal reality, its not.
 
R13... said:
They say it is to comply with government regulations regarding VPNs, that is not open for interpretation.
Click to expand...
Nope. They say that VPN operators did not comply with regulation, it is not about Apple.
 
sajunky said:
Nope. They say that VPN operators did not comply with regulation, it is not about Apple.
Click to expand...
So, apple should let the apps stay and leave the app makers to sort it out? While the Chinese government nods understandably?
 
Apple would lose so much money in China if they didnt comply. That, and their market share there would be gone instantly
 
R13... said:
So, apple should let the apps stay and leave the app makers to sort it out? While the Chinese government nods understandably?
Click to expand...

Completely... cos the Chinese really care about all the nuances here. Its not Apples fault that the software doesn't comply...
 
sajunky said:
If they were required by law, the press release would point it out. Instead they issued a statement which opens many ways for interpretation:

We have been required to remove some VPN apps in China that do not meet the new regulations.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You never fail to amaze (in a bad way).

You post a quote that they are required to do so by new regulations and then you babble on as if it was a choice for them to do so. Do you understand what the words in your quote actually mean?
 
Dave said:
You never fail to amaze (in a bad way).

You post a quote that they are required to do so by new regulations and then you babble on as if it was a choice for them to do so. Do you understand what the words in your quote actually mean?
Click to expand...
They didn't say "required by law", so I read it "required by executive orders", bulling or secret agreements, not by the law. If they were required by law they would say it clearly. They are clever to fool guys like yourself who are unable to read between lines. Fair enough?
 
sajunky said:
They didn't say "required by law", so I read it "required by executive orders", bulling or secret agreements, not by the law. If they were required by law they would say it clearly. They are clever to fool guys like yourself who are unable to read between lines. Fair enough?
Click to expand...

It might be fair enough if you had a clue...


You do know that “government regulations” equals law?

Why don’t you use your extensive internet expertise and ability and go find and read the actual Apple statement?

um, as it’s you, maybe I should just post it...

IMG_0014.PNG

If you need help with any of the content (like what the word “illegal” means) let me know and I’ll try and help ;).
 
sajunky said:
They didn't say "required by law", so I read it "required by executive orders", bulling or secret agreements, not by the law. If they were required by law they would say it clearly. They are clever to fool guys like yourself who are unable to read between lines. Fair enough?
Click to expand...
So there was some ambiguity with the terminology? In China?
The company said it removed the apps to comply with government regulations requiring VPN applications to be explicitly licensed.
Click to expand...
 
Dave said:
It might be fair enough if you had a clue...


You do know that “government regulations” equals law?

Why don’t you use your extensive internet expertise and ability and go find and read the actual Apple statement?

um, as it’s you, maybe I should just post it...

View attachment 452458

If you need help with any of the content (like what the word “illegal” means) let me know and I’ll try and help ;).
Click to expand...
This issue hasn't been even touched in the news article (by the Apple or the reporter). It actually support my point of interpretation of the Apple statement.

To all others, if you want to argue that Apple was forced to comply by law, but not some other means, bring a proof by quoting relevant part of Chineese regulation.
 
sajunky said:
This issue hasn't been even touched in the news article (by the Apple or the reporter). It actually support my point of interpretation of the Apple statement.

To all others, if you want to argue that Apple was forced to comply by law, but not some other means, bring a proof by quoting relevant part of Chineese regulation.
Click to expand...

No... you are the one claiming something the rest of us don't see... so you need to prove your cockamamie story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X