Criticism of Apple Inc.
||This article's lead section may not adequately summarize key points of its contents. (May 2013)|
Apple Inc. is a multinational American corporation which produces consumer electronics such as computers, mobile phones, and online services. Although they have been predominantly successful, their production methods, which involve huge amoungs of hard labour have been a criticised area of their corporation. Apple Inc. has received much criticism for the use of sweatshop labor, environmental destruction, and unethical business practices as a result of the method they undertake to produce electronics.
- 1 Accusations of anti-competitive behavior
- 2 App Store
- 3 John Wiley & Sons and "iCon: Steve Jobs"
- 4 Price reductions
- 5 Media relations
- 6 Labor practices
- 7 Tax practices
- 8 Quality control and customer service issues
- 9 Misleading warranty claims
- 10 Comparison with a cult/religion
- 11 Vexatious litigation
- 12 Environmental destruction claims
- 13 Collaboration with the NSA
- 14 See also
- 15 Notes
- 16 References
Accusations of anti-competitive behavior
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 formerly 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. The Apple Lossless (ALAC) codec was reverse-engineered and an independent encoder and decoder was released. In 2011, Apple made the original ALAC source code available under the Apache license.
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 that "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 that 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:
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.
In March 2012, a group of Chinese writers demanded compensation from Apple for allegedly selling unlicensed versions of their books. They accused the company of selling pirated copies of 95 Chinese books through its online store. The writers are seeking 50 million yuan ($7.7 million) in compensation.
John Wiley & Sons and "iCon: Steve Jobs"
In 2005, Steve Jobs, co-founder, Chairman, and CEO of Apple Inc. banned all books published by John Wiley & Sons from the Apple retail stores in response to their publishing an unauthorized biography, iCon: Steve Jobs.
The book received criticism for "failing to cohesively and clearly express the opinion of Jobs, linguistic redundancies, and clumsy anecdotes." However, despite the criticisms of the quality of Jeffrey S. Young and William L. Simon's writing and the attempts to highlight Steve Jobs's "negative" characteristics as a boss and individual, Dan Sumption admitted that the book was relatively entertaining view into the life of Steve Jobs.
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 many 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.
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."
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.
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 misplaced 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 reporter incident
In February 2010, it was reported that security guards at a Foxconn facility that manufactures Apple equipment in China assaulted a Reuters reporter when they were attempting to take pictures.
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 labor 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 allegation, 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.
The highly uneven Apple–Foxconn business relationship
Apple’s commercial triumph rests in part on the outsourcing of its consumer electronics production to Asia. As the principal manufacturer of products and components for Apple, Taiwanese company Foxconn currently employs 1.4 million workers in China alone. The workers are part of China’s “floating population” of 200 million migrants, at the bottom of what Taiwanese tech entrepreneur Stan Shih calls “the smiling curve.” Controlling the upturned edges of the smile— brand, design and engineering on one side and marketing, sales, and external relations on the other—is what ensures serious value extraction, mega-profits. Apple, Foxconn and China’s workers are stakeholders in high-tech production, but relations between them are highly unequal. Apple’s strength is well illustrated by its ability to capture an extraordinary 58.5 percent of the value of the iPhone despite the fact that manufacture of the product is entirely outsourced. Particularly notable is that labour costs in China account for the smallest share, only 1.8 percent or nearly US$10, of the US$549 retail price of the iPhone. This ineluctable drive to reduce costs and maximise profits is the source of the pressure placed on Chinese workers employed by Foxconn, many of them producing signature Apple products. While Apple and Foxconn together squeeze Chinese workers and demand 12-hour working days to meet demand, the costs of Chinese labour in processing and assembly are virtually invisible in the larger success of Apple’s balance sheets. Other major component providers (such as Samsung and LG) captured slightly over 14 percent of the value of the iPhone. The cost of raw materials was just over one-fifth of the total value (21.9 percent) Wages average from $1 to $2 an hour for Foxconn workers, including overtime and depending on location. They are attractive only by impoverished rural standards. Fifty-hour work weeks and twelve-hour shifts are typical, but up to one hundred-hour work weeks are not unheard of during peak production. Few Foxconn workers can afford the iPads and iPhones they assemble.
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 committed suicide in a single month in the same factory. By May 2010, 12 workers had committed suicide at a Foxconn operations in China - although the number of suicides was lower than the general suicide rate in China. Apple, HP, and others stated that they were investigating the situation. In response to the suicides, workers were forced to sign a legally binding document guaranteeing that they would not kill themselves. It is not clear how employees who fail to abide by the terms of this agreement will be sanctioned.
Students forced to work at Foxconn & Apple's child labor abuses
Foxconn’s rampant use of students and minors further underlines its pursuit of cheap, flexible labor. When the fallout of the 2010 suicides left Foxconn with a labor shortage, the Henan provincial government, busy wooing the company to set up shop in the province, eagerly stepped into the breach. Giving them only nine days’ notice, the province directed 100,000 vocational students to staff the Shenzhen assembly lines as “interns” (the Chinese term shixi can also mean “trainee”). Students who failed to go—there was little in the way of education or training—were told they would not be allowed to graduate. “Interns” have become a significant component of Foxconn’s labor force, constituting as much as 15 percent at peak times, or 180,000 interns company-wide, making it by far the largest “internship” program in the world. Teachers have been stationed in the factory compound to monitor attendance, and some interns have been as young as fourteen—by the company’s own admission—in violation of Chinese law. According to SACOM’s Chan, Foxconn and other manufacturers that use interns are now doing so “covertly” to avoid detection and culpability, hiring them through the same labor agencies that hire Foxconn’s precarious “dispatch workers,” who are thus deprived of standard benefits and protections. The casualization of Foxconn’s labor army is well underway. US-based China Labour Watch (CLW) investigated into conditions at three factories operated by Pegatron, which makes equipment for Apple computers and iPhones, finding that Pegatron hired children under the age of 18 and made them work in the same poor conditions as adult staff. In total there were 10,000 aged between 16 and 20 working in crowded production rooms doing the same tasks as adults. But some were paid less and others did not have their wages paid on time.
Safety problems & harsh working conditions
Workers assembling iPhones, iPads and other devices often labor in harsh conditions, according to employees inside those plants. Forty-nine young men and women were poisoned at the Lianjian Technology factory in Suzhou Industrial Park by the toxic chemical nhexane, used to wipe clean the iPad display screens and speed up efficiency. Because the factory, to save money, did not provide proper ventilation during the cleaning process, workers developed neurological problems, the loss of motor function, and experienced numb limbs; others complained of constantly fainting and being overcome by a debilitating fatigue. Some of these sick workers were eventually bought off with a lump payment of 80,000 or 90,000 yuan ($12,000–$14,000), but only after signing an agreement stating they would not bring claims against Apple or its supplier companies in the future. An explosion in May 2011 at a Foxconn factory in Chengdu, China, killed four people and injured 18. It built iPads. Employees work excessive overtime, in some cases seven days a week, and live in crowded dorms. Some say they stand so long that their legs swell until they can hardly walk. Under-age workers have helped build Apple’s products, and the company’s suppliers have improperly disposed of hazardous waste and falsified records, according to company reports and advocacy.
|Pre-tax earnings||US$ 22 billion||US$ 12 billion||US$ 4 billion||US$ 38 billion|
|Global tax||US$ 10 million||US$ 7 million||US$ 4 million||US$ 21 million|
In the late 1980s Apple was a pioneer of an accounting technique, "Double Irish With a Dutch Sandwich", which reduces taxes by routing profits through Irish subsidiaries and the Netherlands and then to the Caribbean. In 2004,[Note 1] Ireland, a nation of less than 5 million, was home to more than one-third of Apple's worldwide revenues, according to company filings. Robert Promm, Apple's controller in the mid-1990s, called the strategy "the worst-kept secret in Europe". Such strategies helped Apple keep its international taxes to 3.2 percent of foreign profits last year, to 2.2 percent in 2010, and in the single digits for the last half-decade, according to the company's corporate filings.
According to a Senate report on the company's offshore tax structure concluded in May 2013, Apple has held billions of dollars in profits in Irish subsidiaries to pay little or no taxes to any government by using an unusual global tax structure. The main subsidiary, a holding company that includes Apple's retail stores throughout Europe, has not paid any corporate income tax in the last five years. "Apple has exploited a difference between Irish and U.S. tax residency rules," the report said.
Among the findings in the reports are:
- Almost all of Apple's foreign operations are run through an Irish company with no employees.
- Apple pays 2%—or less—in corporate income tax in Ireland.[Note 2]
- Apple Operations International, which provided 30% of Apple's worldwide net profits from 2009 to 2011, doesn't pay taxes anywhere.[Note 3]
- Apple's US profits keep ending up in Ireland, too.
- Most of the $102 billion Apple is keeping "overseas" is in US banks.
- The magic of "check-the-box" makes whole companies disappear.
- Apple is seemingly terrible at estimating its own taxes.[Note 4]
Quality control and customer service issues
The Danish Consumer Complaints Board reported a fault with Apple's iBook product line and criticized Apple's 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.
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 only 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,
|“||"Any computer user who believes a system is so safe that they don't have to care about security is prime material for exploitation by social engineering."||”|
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.
In August 2014, it was publicized that hackers had discovered an exploit involving the Find My iPhone service, which allowed them to brute-force a user's Apple ID and access their iCloud data. The exploit was later believed to have been used as part of an August 2014 leak of a large number of private, mostly nude photos of celebrities that had been synced into their iCloud storage. Apple has since denied that the iCloud service itself or the alleged exploit was responsible for the leak, asserting that the leaks were the result of a "very targeted" brute-force attack of iCloud account information.
Misleading warranty claims
On December, 27th, 2011, Apple was fined a total of €900,000 (around $1.2m) by the Italian Antitrust Authority for failing to properly inform customers of their legal right to two years of warranty service under Italy's Consumer Code. According to the Italian agency Apple only disclosed its own standard one-year warranty and offered to sell customers AppleCare for one additional year instead of abiding by the law. The agency fined Apple €400,000 for failing to disclose the legally mandated two-year warranty and €500,000 for selling overlapping AppleCare coverage.
On March 15, 2013, China Central Television aired a program for the World Consumer Rights Day. The program criticized the issue associated with Apple warranty issues in China. The report said, an iPhone always gets an old back cover when being repaired in China. It also states that the warranty period for changed product is only 90 days and the warranty period for Macintosh and iPad are not according to Chinese laws to get warranty in China.
Comparison with a cult/religion
|"The scenes I witnessed at the opening of the new Apple store in London's Covent Garden were more like an evangelical prayer meeting than a chance to buy a phone or a laptop. "|
|— Alex Riley, writing for the BBC|
Russell Belk argues that, like a religion, the Cult of Mac is a belief system that helps its followers understand technology and the world. The attitude of Apple sympathizers and fans is viewed by many as being "cult-like".
According to neurological research cited by the BBC on their Secrets of the Superbrands documentary, the response from the brain of an Apple enthusiast when viewing the brand-related symbols and imagery is similar to the one of a religious devotee when exposed to religious symbols and images.
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs is compared to a god figure and savior, and his life story is said to resemble Joseph Campbell's heroic adventure myths. Jobs was often viewed as a saintly figure to Mac users.
Loyalty to Macintosh computers and Apple have been compared to religious belief. The term Cult of Mac is often used to describe this group. Psychologist Dave Levine argues that the Mac community has a religious feeling, providing a sense of community and common heritage for those who have rejected religion. Mac users are frequently known to use religious language in describing Macs. Terms such as "evangelism", "persecution" and "martyrdom" are used. Many users view their devotion as a battle between good versus evil, with evil frequently being Microsoft. The term "cult" has been used to describe Mac users (Cult of Mac), however, Dave Arnott, author of Corporate Cults, argues that devotion to Macs is no different from devotion to a car or rollerblading.
There is also a website titled "Cult of Mac", dedicated to Apple-related news. This "cult" attitude has also been mocked/parodied by Samsung, on a video ad for an Android phone, and also by Motorola in their ad for the Motorola Xoom.
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 interoperate 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 Apple withdrew its 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."
Google has accused Apple (alongside Oracle, Microsoft and others) of trying to take down Android through patent litigation, rather than innovating and competing with better products and services. This ties into Apple's recent patent infringement lawsuits against Samsung, which by July 2012, included more than 50 lawsuits around the globe, with billions of dollars in damages claimed between them. Named as a third party in the suit, Google claims that this is another tactic by Apple to defeat Android, citing Apple's asking a judge to force Google to hand over documents containing Android's source code.
"Boycott Apple" hashtag on Google+
In June 2012, Google+ was in uproar over a recent Apple injunction against the Galaxy Nexus flagship Android smartphone. An appellate court has lifted the injunction as of July 30, 2012, but the injunction made "#BoycottApple" the longest trending hashtag Google+ has ever seen.
Environmental destruction claims
In 2006, Apple announced it would end shipments to Europe of certain products, including the eMac desktop computer and the AirPort wireless access point, as non-compliant with the European Union Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive (ROHS).
In 2007, Apple's Board of Directors recommended shareholders vote against proposals for adopting stronger environmental policies, like eliminating persistent and bioaccumulative toxic chemicals, assessing the phase-out of toxic chemicals such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs), and adopting a stronger e-waste "take-back" and recycling program.
On April 21, 2011, Greenpeace released a report highlighting the fact that data centers consumed up to 2% of all global electricity and this amount was projected to increase. Phil Radford of Greenpeace said “we are concerned that this new explosion in electricity use could lock us into old, polluting energy sources instead of the clean energy available today.” On April 17, 2012, following a Greenpeace protest of Apple, Apple Inc. released a statement committing to ending its use of coal and shifting to 100% clean energy. In 2013 Apple announced it was using 100% renewable energy to power their data centers, and overall 75% of its power comes from renewable sources.
In 2011, the Beijing environmental group Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs (IPE) singled out Apple for criticism, accusing the company's Chinese suppliers of discharging polluted waste and toxic metals into surrounding communities and threatening public health.
In June 2012, Apple withdrew its product line from the global registry for greener electronics program, Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT), reporting the line no longer qualified for EPEAT's ratings for green certification; the San Francisco Department of Environment then notified its agencies that Apple computers no longer qualified for city purchase funds. The line of products has since been added back.
Timeline of Apple's Recorded Environmental Progress
Apple provides a section of their website, titled “Apple and the Environment,” which includes a timeline of their progression. According to their website, Apple starts their timeline in 1990, though the Apple company was founded in 1976.
In 1990, Apple officially released and implemented its environmental policy, while in 1991, a phase-out of lead in batteries began. In 1992, Apple officially became a founding member of the U.S. EPA ENERGY STAR program, which was developed to identify and promote energy-efficient computers and monitors. During this time, there was also a phase-out of chlorofuorocarbons (CFCs) in Apple manufacturing, which are substances that deplete the ozone layer. In 1994, there was also a phase-out of nickel-cadmium batteries, while in 1995, PVC in packaging materials was phased out as well. The first Apple manufacturing site in Sacramento, California became ISO 14001 certified.
ISO 14001:2004 set the criteria for an environmental management system, mapping out a framework that a company or an organization can use. If one chooses to use ISO 14001:2004, it can provide assurance to company management and employees as well as external stakeholders that environmental impact is being measured and improved. The benefits of using ISO 14001:2004 are reduced cost of waste management, saving in consumption of energy and materials, lower distribution costs, and improved corporate image among regulators, customers, and the public.
While this was a big step for Apple, their concern for environmental well-being has continued to grow. In 1997, the first Apple products were tested for conformity to TCO (Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees) standards. TCO standards involve requirements that cover a variety of issues: environment, ergonomics, usability, emission of electrical and magnetic fields, and energy consumption and electrical fire safety. For example, environmental demands restrict the use of heavy metals, chlorinated solvents, and other various things. Mainly, products that are labeled must meet these environmental demands. Two years after Apple agreed to meet TCO’s standards, in 1999, Apple introduced “Apple Product Environmental Specifications (APES) files,” in which lead and cadmium in cables were restricted. Shortly after, in 2000, all of Apple’s manufacturing sites became ISO 14001 certified worldwide. This accredited that Apple had a structured environmental management system (EMS) in order to manage environmental impact of their operations. In 2001, Apple computers and displays first met ENERGY STAR requirements, in which they voluntarily phased out tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) in all their plastic enclosure parts greater than 25 grams. They also began to purchase 100 percent of electricity for the Austin facility from renewable sources, called Austin’s “Green Choice” Power Program.
In 2002, Apple continued to build a more environmentally friendly effort. For example, Apple signed the European Union Code of Conduct on Power Supplies, which encourages manufacturers to design power supplies that minimize energy consumption in “off” mode. In 2004, there was a phaseout of substances included in the European Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive was initiated. Importantly noted, The Apple Supplier Code of Conduct was implemented in 2005, and in 2006, Apple was the first computer manufacturer to replace CRT displays with material-efficient and energy-efficient LCDs.
In 2008, Apple introduced the unibody MacBook and MacBook Pro, which is made with recyclable aluminum and glass enclosures with arsenic and mercury free displays. It is also made with PVC-free internal components. The MacBook Air was the first Mac to use mercury-free backlight technology with arsenic-free LCD display glass. Along with that, the iPhone 3G shipped with PVC-free handset, headphones, and USB cables; BFR-free printed circuit boards; and a mercury and arsenic-free display. Apple achieved a recycling rate of 41.9%. In 2009, Apple revealed a complete life cycle analysis of greenhouse gas emissions, which set a new standard of full environmental disclosure. Apple is the only company of the industry that publishes the environmental footprint of each of its products. Other companies only report on a fraction of their emissions. All of their products became BFR-free with shipping, and mercury-free LED-backlit displays with arsenic-free display glass. The Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro met the ENERGY STAR 5.0 specification.
In 2010, all displays that were offered by Apple became mercury-free and used arsenic-free display glass. Apple introduced the Apple Battery charger for rechargeable batteries, which reduces battery waste by 78% and the carbon footprint by 63% over a four-year period. Also, Apple introduced the Mac mini, which was the world’s most energy-efficient desktop computer, because it can operate on 10 watts of electricity (which is less power than a single energy-efficient CFL lightbulb). By this time, Apple also began to build facilities in Cork, Ireland; Austin, Texas; and Sacramento, California, and converted to using 100% renewable energy.
In 2011, Apple introduced iTunes cards that use 100% recyclable paper, and they also introduced the Mac App Store in 123 countries. Delivering digital downloads reduce environmental impact of delivering software by eliminating the packaging and transportation. Apple also eliminates restore DVDs that were previously included in Mac product packaging.
Finally, in 2012, Apple launched the redesigned iMac, using 68% less material and generating 67% fewer carbon emissions than earlier generations. Also, the aluminum stand on the iMac is made using 30% recycled content. Meanwhile, at their headquarters in Cupertino, energy use was cut by over 30%, and Apple provided a biogas-powered fuel cell and built rooftop solar photovoltaic systems. They introduced their redesigned AirPort Express with an enclosure containing bio-based polymers derived from industrial-grade rapeseed and post-consumer recycled PC-ABS plastic.
Greenpeace's criticism of Apple
Greenpeace has criticized Apple for having products that are seen as unfriendly to the environment. In 2007, Greenpeace wrote an article explaining the hazardous materials that have been found in the iPhone, such as vinyl (PVC) plastic with phthalates, along with brominated compounds. Not only that, but Greenpeace also mentions in a different article from 2004 that Apple had refused to take the step of phasing out toxic chemical in all of their products. They argued that Sony was removing toxins from their TV’s, and that Samsung, Nokia, and Puma had also announced to phase out toxic chemicals in all of their products, yet Apple was not taking their part in the issue.
Because of Greenpeace’s concern, they published a ranking guide in 2006 to improve policies and practices regarding the process of “going green.”  Greenpeace reached out to Apple’s fans and consumers in attempt to gain attention of Steve Jobs in September 2006. In order to do this, they launched a “Green my Apple” website that was designed to look like Apple’s site. The caption on the site was, “I love my Mac. I just wish it came in green.” They called this the “Green my Apple” campaign. Ultimately, their campaign was successful. Steve Jobs spoke of the company’s desire to become greener in 2007.
Much later, in November 2012, Greenpeace created a ranking of companies in their progression toward greener products and waste management  Apple moved up to number six (out of sixteen), just behind Dell. Number one was WIPRO, and number sixteen was RIM. Apple scored a six due to the company’s lack of transparency on GHG emission reporting, clean energy advocacy, further information on its management of toxic chemicals, and details on post-consumer recycled plastic use. Despite that Apple lost points on Greenpeace’s e-waste criteria, Apple exceeded its 70% goal of global recycling in 2010. Greenpeace argues that the company can increase its score by setting an ambitious goal for boosting its renewable energy use by 2020. Apple also did not plan to phase out antimony or beryllium in their products, but overall, score well on the products criteria. For example, the Macbook Pro has been known for easy recycling.
Apple has been making progress since 2006 regarding greener tactics and products. Presently in 2013, Apple states that they achieve to power every Apple facility with energy from renewable sources. They have already achieved this goal at facilities in Austin, Cork, Munich, and at the Infinite Loop campus in Cupertino. Currently, Apple’s corporate facilities worldwide are at 75% renewable energy.
Collaboration with the NSA
Leaked NSA documents obtained by The Guardian  and The Washington Post  in June 2013 included Apple in the list of American companies that cooperate with PRISM, which authorizes the government to secretly access data of non-American citizens hosted by American companies without a warrant. Following the leak, government officials acknowledged  the existence of the program. According to the leaked documents, the NSA has direct access to servers of those companies, and the amount of data collected through the program had been growing fast in years prior to the leak. Apple has denied  having any knowledge of the program.
- Apple has not released more recent estimates
- Global Taxes Paid by ASI, 2009–2011
- "A.O.I.'s board minutes show that its board of directors consists of two Apple Inc. employees who live in California and one Irish employee of Apple Distribution International, an Irish company that A.O.I. itself owns," Levin said on Tuesday. "Over the last six years, from May, 2006, through the end of 2012, A.O.I. held thirty-three board meetings, thirty-two of which took place in Cupertino, California. A.O.I.'s lone Irish-resident director participated in just seven of those meetings, six by telephone, and in none of the eighteen board meetings between September, 2006, and August, 2012."
- In annual reports between 2009 and 2011, the company told investors it was setting aside $13.7 billion to pay federal taxes—but it has actually paid only $5.3 billion. Those set-asides are only advance estimates, but it's pretty strange that each year they're off by many billions of dollars. As a result, Apple's actual US tax rate is only 20.1%, much lower than the 24% to 32% it said it was paying.
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Criticism of Apple Inc..|
- The Stark Reality of iPod's Chinese Factories, Daily Mail (UK), August 18, 2006
- Musgrove, Mike (June 16, 2006), Sweatshop Conditions at IPod Factory Reported, The Washington Post
- Kahney, Leander (June 13, 2006), Judging Apple Sweatshop Charge, Wired
- Orlowski, Andrew (September 13, 2005), Apple shot first, asked question later, say sued sites, The Register
- Flores, Marc, Over 5000 apps stricken from the Apple app store, new rules in place, MobileCrunch, February 20, 2010.
- Orlowski, Andrew (May 4, 2006), Apple sues itself in the foot (again), The Register
- Thompson, Bill (September 19, 2007), Time for Apple to face the music?, BBC News
- . Apple http://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/itunes/au/terms.html. Retrieved 14 August 2014. Missing or empty
- Dalrymple, Jim (April 7, 2009), iTunes is DRM-free, adds variable pricing, Macworld, retrieved July 22, 2010
- Williams, Martyn (April 4, 2007), European Borders Fracture iTunes, PC World
- Kincaid, Jason (July 31, 2009), FCC Takes On Apple And AT&T Over Google Voice Rejection, TechCrunch
- Gassert, Patrick, Google Voice Arrives For The iPhone, Techie Insider
- Adobe Systems' SEC filing alleging expected loss of ability to compete in the market because of Apple's position on Flash on the iPhone and iPad, Form 10q, March 5, 2010.
- Brimelow, Lee (April 9, 2010), Apple Slaps Developers In The Face, TheFlashBlog
- Williams, Hank (April 8, 2010), Steve Jobs Has Just Gone Mad, Why does everything suck?
- Schonfeld, Erick (April 9, 2010), Is Steve Jobs Ignoring History, Or Trying To Rewrite It?, TechCrunch
- Worthham, Jenna (April 12, 2010), Apple Places New Limits on App Developers, The New York Times
- Cheng, Jacqui (May 3, 2010), Apple iPhone OS compiler policy may lead to antitrust probe, Ars Technica
- Kosman, Josh (May 3, 2010), An antitrust app, The New York Post
- New iPhone Developer Agreement Bans the Use of Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone Compiler
- Original iPhone OS 3 Developer Program License Agreement
- Thoughts on Flash
- Jobs Lies in Thoughts on Flash
- Decoding Steve Jobs' Dressing Down Of Flash
- Steve Jobs Is Lying About Flash
- Steve Jobs on Flash: Correcting the Lies
- List of open source projects built on the open Adobe Flash specification
- The Hindustan Times (March 19, 2012). "Apple is online pirate". Retrieved March 19, 2012.
- Hafner, Katie (April 30, 2005). "Steve Jobs's Review of His Biography: Ban It". The New York Times. Retrieved October 16, 2006.
- Orlowski, Andrew (April 27, 2005). "Book giant feels wrath of Jobs". The Register. Retrieved July 18, 2009.
- Sumption, Dan. "Review of iCon - Steve Jobs, The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business by Jeffrey S. Young and William L. Simon". Retrieved 20 November 2013.
- MacDonald, Chris. Were iPhone Early-Adopters "Abused?", The Business Ethics Blog.
- Apple screwed you: So now what? – The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)
- Apple – To all iPhone customers
- iPhone's $100 Apple Store Credit program goes live, Engadget, September 14, 2009. This pricing strategy used by Apple Inc. is known as "Penetration Pricing".
- Stone, Brad (June 22, 2009), Apple's Obsession With Secrecy Grows Stronger, New York Times
- Appleinsider Staff (January 6, 2010), Former Apple marketing manager describes company's 'controlled leaks', Appleinsider
- Apple v. Does, EFF, May 26, 2006. Retrieved on May 14, 2007.
- O'Grady v. Superior Court, 44 Cal.Rptr.3d 72, 139 Cal.App.4th 1423, modified by O'Grady v. Superior Court, 140 Cal.App.4th 675b.
- Apple mugs Think Secret, The Register. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
- Keizer, Gregg, Lawyer confirms identity of 'lost' iPhone seller, macworld.co.uk, April 30, 2010.
- Duan, Mary, "Valley REACTs to Craigslist counterfeits", bizjournals.com, San Jose Business Journal, May 18, 2009.
- Chen, Jason, This is Apple's Next iPhone, Gizmodo blog, April 19, 2010.
- Stelter, Brian, and Bilton, Nick, Computers Seized at Home of Gizmodo Reporter Who Wrote About iPhone, Gawker Media Says, Mediacoder Blog, The New York Times, April 26, 2010.
- Zimmerman, Matt, OverREACTing: Dissecting the Gizmodo Warrant, Electronic Frontier Foundation, April 27, 2010.
- Pomfret, James (February 17, 2010). "For Apple suppliers, loose lips can sink contracts". Reuters. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Dan Frommer (February 17, 2010). "Reuters Reporter Assaulted While Investigating Apple's Top-Secret China Suppliers – Business Insider". Articles.businessinsider.com. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Shapiro, Lila (February 18, 2010). "Apple's Secrecy: Guards Attack Reuters Reporter At Apple Factory In China". Huffington Post. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Grothaus, Michael, Foxconn: Apple supplier in China roughs up reporter, TUAW, February 19, 2010.
- Dean, Jason (August 11, 2007), The Forbidden City of Terry Gou, The Wall Street Journal
- Morphy, Ericka (January 31, 2008), Apple, IT and the Specter of Sweatshop Labor, Mac New World
- Apple 2010 Supplier Responsibility Report.
- Chen, Brian X. (May 14, 2010), Workers Plan to Sue iPhone Contractor Over Poisoning, Wired
- Chan, Jenny; Ngai Pun; Mark Selden (2013). "The politics of global production: Apple, Foxconn and China’s new working class". New Technology, Work and Employment 28 (2): 104–105. doi:10.1111/ntwe.12008.
- Perlin, Ross (2013). "Chinese Workers Foxconned". Dissent 60 (2): 49–52. doi:10.1353/dss.2013.0024.
- Suicides Spark Inquiries Apple, H-P to Examine Asian Supplier After String of Deaths at Factory, Jason Dean, Ting-i Tsai, May 27, 2010, accessed May 27, 2010
- The Foxconn Suicides, May 28, 2010, wsj.com, WSJ opinion, Retrieved May 27, 2010
- Carlson, Nichoas (July 27, 2009). "Life Inside A Chinese Gadget Factory". Business Insider.
- Worker commits suicide over misplaced iPhone, Yahoo! News, July 22, 2009
- Apple suppliers maintain tight security to avoid leaks: Foxconn said to have 'special status' in China, MacNN, February 17, 2010
- Apple's Recent Strike in Suzhou is Sign of Continued Bad Labor and CSR Practices in China, All Roads Lead to China, January 21, 2010
- Apple Supplier Responsibility 2010 Progress Report
- Moore, Malcolm, Big suppliers in China hold sway over Apple, Express Buzz, March 7, 2010.
- Carlson, Nicholas (April 7, 2010). "What It's Like To Work In China's Gadget Sweatshops Where Your iPhones And iPads Are Made". Business Insider.
- Blodget, Harry (April 7, 2010). "Apple-Supplier Factory Worker Tries To Kill Herself – That's 4 In 4 Weeks". Business Insider.
- "Suicides at Foxconn: Light and death". Economist. May 27, 2010. Retrieved April 24, 2012.
- Malone, Andrew; Jones, Richard (December 6, 2010). "Revealed: Inside the Chinese suicide sweatshop where workers toil in 34-hour shifts to make your iPod | Mail Online". Daily Mail (London). Retrieved October 7, 2011.
- Perlin, Ross (2013). "Chinese Workers Foxconned". Dissent 60 (2): 46–52. doi:10.1353/dss.2013.0024.
- ARMITAGE, JIM ARMITAGE (July 30, 2013). "'Even worse than Foxconn': Apple rocked by child labour claims". The Independent (London).
- Litzinger, Ralph (2013). "Labor in China: A New Politics of Struggle". South Atlantic Quarterly 112: 172–178. doi:10.1215/00382876-1891314.
- DUHIGG, CHARLES (January 25, 2012). "In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad". The New York Times. Retrieved 20 November 2013.
- "Offshore Profit Shifting and the U.S. Tax Code - Part 2 (Apple Inc.)".
- CHARLES DUHIGG, DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI (April 28, 2012). "How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes". The NY Times. Retrieved May 20, 2013.
- Levin, Carl; McCain, John (May 2013), Memorandum: Offshore profit shifting and the U.S. tax code - Part 2 (Apple Inc.) (PDF) (memorandum of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations), retrieved June 27, 2013
- "Senate Probe Finds Apple Used Unusual Tax Structure to Avoid Taxes". Reuters. Retrieved May 20, 2013.
- The seven craziest findings in the US investigation of Apple's tax avoidance practices
- McCoy, Kevin (May 21, 2013). "Apple CEO defends tax tactics at Senate hearing". USA Today. Retrieved May 21, 2013.
- Farrell, Nick, Danes prove Apple iBook G4 has a defect, Apple still denies it at the Wayback Machine (archived October 2, 2007), the Inquirer, May 4, 2007.
- Quality control problems or growing pains at Apple?. Ars Technica.
- Blogs: MashUp The Sydney Morning Herald.
- Erik Sherman, Erik, Smoking Hazardous to Apple Equipment, Or, at Least, Warranty, CBS News, November 22, 2009.
- Metz, Cade, Apple voids warranties over cigarette smoke, users say No repairs for 'biohazard' Macs, The Register, November 22, 2009.
- Northrup, Laura, Smoking Near Apple Computers Creates Biohazard, Voids Warranty, Consumerist, November 20, 2009.
- Alexander, Carey, Apple: Cosmetic Damage Keeps Us From Replacing Your Battery!, Consumerist, March 1, 2009.
- "The new Apple of Malware's Eye: Is Mac OS X the next Windows?". 2006. Retrieved July 9, 2010.
- "Month of Apple Bugs". The Washington Post. December 19, 2006. Retrieved July 6, 2010.
- "Apple Plugs 48 Security Holes in Safari Browser". June 8, 2010. Retrieved July 6, 2010.
- "Apple Patches 23 Security Holes in Mac OS X Leopard, Snow Leopard". June 16, 2010. Retrieved July 6, 2010.
- "Apple Patches 23 Security Holes in Mac OS X Leopard, Snow Leopard". The Washington Post. May 29, 2008. Retrieved July 6, 2010.
- Viega, J. (2009). The Myths of Security: What the Computer Security Industry Doesn't Want You to Know. O'Reilly Media, Inc. ISBN 0-596-52302-5.
- Goldman, David (June 17, 2010). "Apple is the new hacker bulls-eye". CNN. Retrieved July 6, 2010.
- "It's time for the FTC to investigate Mac security". May 26, 2009. Retrieved July 9, 2010.
- "Apple lags on Java security fix in OS X". May 20, 2009. Retrieved July 9, 2010.
- "Angered by Apple delay, hacker posts Mac Java attack code". May 20, 2009. Retrieved July 9, 2010.
- Chen, Brian X. (May 25, 2011). "Apple Promises Software Update to Kill ‘MacDefender' Malware". Wired. Retrieved May 26, 2011.
- "20 zero-day security holes in Mac OS X to be revealed". May 20, 2009. Retrieved July 9, 2010.
- "Apple's Mac OS 'lagging behind Vista on security". August 27, 2009. Retrieved July 9, 2010.
- "Apple vs. Microsoft: Patch Management Polar Opposites". June 22, 2010. Retrieved July 6, 2010.
- "Secunia Half Year Report 2010". July 10, 2010. Retrieved July 16, 2010.
- "Reported iCloud hack leaks hundreds of nude celebrity photos". The Verge. Retrieved 2 September 2014.
- "Apple 'actively investigating' and FBI 'addressing' alleged hack that revealed nude celebrity photos". The Verge. Retrieved 2 September 2014.
- "'Find My iPhone' exploit may be to blame for celebrity photo hacks (update)". Engadget. Retrieved 2 September 2014.
- "Apple denies iCloud breach in celebrity nude photo hack". The Verge. Retrieved 2 September 2014.
- Singletary, Michelle (December 21, 2011). "Italy fines Apple $1.2M". The Washington Post. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Reisinger, Don (October 13, 2011). "Italy fines Apple $1.2 million over AppleCare practices | The Digital Home – CNET News". News.cnet.com. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Horn, Leslie (January 1, 1970). "Apple Fined $1.2 Million in Italy for Misleading Consumers | News & Opinion". PCMag.com. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "Apple Fined €900,000 in Italy | PCWorld Business Center". Pcworld.com. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "BBC News – Apple fined by Italy over misleading product guarantees". BBC. December 27, 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Patel, Nilay (December 21, 2011). "Apple fined $1.2m in Italy for misleading warranty claims". The Verge. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "Apple China warranty policy is different from foreign countries". cntv.cn. Retrieved March 15, 2013.
- "Tim Cook apologies Chinese consumers for warranty policy". cntv.cn. Retrieved March 15, 2013.
- Riley, Alex (May 16, 2011). "BBC News – Superbrands' success fuelled by sex, religion and gossip". BBC. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Leander Kahney (December 5, 2002). "Worshipping at the Altar of Mac". Wired. Retrieved October 28, 2011.
- Simon Mills (May 28, 2010). "Why I hate Apple, the infuriating cult making people smug bores | Mail Online". Daily Mail (London). Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "Is Apple a Cult, a Religion or a Brand? — Apple News, Tips and Reviews". Gigaom.com. August 2, 2010. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "10 Ways to Think Different – Inside Apple's Cult-Like Culture". CBS News. March 2, 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "Things I hate about the Apple cult – Computerworld Blogs". Blogs.computerworld.com. April 8, 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Rifkind, Hugo (August 27, 2011). "Apple cult really makes me shudder". The Australian.
- "Apple triggers 'religious' reaction in fans' brains, report says – CNN". CNN. May 19, 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- May 18, 2011, By Trevor Mogg Tweet (May 18, 2011). "Apple causes ‘religious' reaction in brains of fans, say neuroscientists". Digitaltrends.com. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "About". Cult of Mac. February 18, 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Matyszczyk, Chris (November 22, 2011). "Apple cult mocked by Samsung in Galaxy S II ad | Technically Incorrect – CNET News". News.cnet.com. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- "Samsung Mocks "Cult of Apple" in Ad for Galaxy S II – Ina Fried – Mobile". AllThingsD. November 23, 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011.
- Isaac, Mike (February 6, 2011). "Motorola Bashes Apple in '1984' Super Bowl Ad | Epicenter". Wired. Retrieved January 10, 2012.
- Jay Yarow (January 31, 2011). "Motorola Pokes Apple Again, Says, "2011 Looks A Lot Like 1984" – Business Insider". Articles.businessinsider.com. Retrieved January 10, 2012.
- McNamara, Paul (July 22, 2009). "Apple takes legal heel off throat of wiki operator". Network World.
- "Apple Confuses Speech with a DMCA Violation". EFF. November 25, 2008.
- "Wiki Operator Sues Apple Over Bogus Legal Threats". EFF.
- "Re: OdioWOrks v. Apple, N.D. Cal. Case No. C 09-1818". September 8, 2008.
- "Apple Withdraws Threats Against Wiki Site". EFF. July 22, 2009.
- Cheng, Jacqui, Google publicly accuses Apple, Microsoft, Oracle of patent bullying, August 3, 2011. Accessed March 26, 2012.
- . "Apple seeks $2.5 billion in damages from Samsung, offers half a cent per standard-essential patent
- "Zoeken in Google". Plus.google.com. Retrieved March 10, 2013.
- "Galaxy Nexus banned: US Court grants Apple temporary injunction". Phandroid.com. June 29, 2012. Retrieved March 10, 2013.
- Moyer, Edward (July 6, 2012). "Galaxy Nexus ban temporarily lifted | Mobile - CNET News". News.cnet.com. Retrieved March 10, 2013.
- Mullins, Robert, Apple product hazards put to shareholder vote, IDG News Service, MacCentral, Macworld, April 23, 2007. Accessed 2012-3-26.
- Dalrymple, Jim, Environmental issues on Apple shareholder agenda, Macworld, MacCentral, March 22, 2007. Accessed 2012-3-26.
- "Dirty Data Report Card". Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-08-22.
- McMillan, Robert (May 17, 2012). "After Greenpeace Protests, Apple Promises to Dump Coal Power". Wired Magazine. Retrieved 2013-08-22.
- "Powering Our Facilities with Clean, Renewable Energy". Wired Magazine. Retrieved 2013-08-22.
- "Apple Says Data Centers Now Use 100% Renewable Energy". Business Week. March 21, 2013. Retrieved August 30, 2013.
|last1=in Authors list (help)
- The Other Side Of Apple II: Pollution Spreads Through Apple's Supply Chain, Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs, August 31, 2011. Accessed 2012-3-29.
- Barboza, David, Apple Cited as Adding to Pollution in China, The New York Times, September 1, 2011. Accessed March 26, 2012.
- Watts, Jonathan, Apple secretive about 'polluting and poisoning' supply chain, says report, The Guardian, January 19, 2011.
- Jobs, Steve, A Greener Apple, Apple, Inc.. Accessed March 26, 2012.
- Dragani, Rachelle, Mac News: iPad: With Proview in the Rearview, iPad Cruises Into China, macnewsworld.com, July 11, 2012. Accessed 2012-7-25.
- Schectman, Joel, Apple Removes Green Electronics Certification From Products, CIO Journal, The Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2012. Accessed July 25, 2012.
- Mansfield, Bob, Apple - Environment - A letter from Bob Mansfield, apple.com, July 13, 2012. Accessed 2012-11-05.
- Apple Inc. "Environmental Progress". Apple Inc. Apple Inc. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Apple Inc. "Apple Inc.". Wikipedia. Retrieved 2013-11-20.
- International Organization for Standardization. "ISO 14000-Environmental Management". International Organization for Standardization. ISO. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- The Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO). "Ecology, Energy, Ergonomics and Emissions". The Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees. Apple Computer, Inc. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Austin Energy. "Greenchoice Renewable Energy". Austin Energy. Austin Energy. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Greenpeace International. "Greenpeace International". Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-11-20.
- Greenpeace. "Hazardous Materials Found in Apple's iPhone: Chemicals Include those Banned in Children's Toys in EU". Greenpeace International. Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Greenpeace. "Toxins in your TV, poisons in your PC?". Greenpeace International. Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Greenpeace. "Green my Apple bears fruit". Greenpeace International. Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Appleinsider Staff. "Steve Jobs unveils Apple's environmental policy". Appleinsider.com. Appleinsider.com. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Greenpeace. "2012 Guide to Greener Electronics". Greenpeace. Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Greenpeace. "Apple: 6th position, 4.5/10". Greenpeace. Greenpeace. Retrieved 2013-11-19.
- Greenwald, Glenn (June 6, 2013). "NSA taps in to internet giants' systems to mine user data, secret files reveal". The Guardian (London). Retrieved June 6, 2013.
- Gellman, Barton; Poitras, Laura (June 6, 2013). "U.S. intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 6, 2013.
- Savage, Charlie; Wyatt, Edward; Baker, Peter (June 6, 2013). "U.S. says it gathers online data abroad". New York Times.
- "Google, Facebook, Dropbox, Yahoo, Microsoft And Apple Deny Participation In NSA PRISM Surveillance Program". Tech Crunch. June 6, 2013. Retrieved June 6, 2013.