Criticism of Apple Inc.

Apple Inc. has been the subject of criticism and legal action. This includes its handling labor violations at its outsourced manufacturing hubs in China, its environmental impact of its supply chains, tax and monopoly practices, a lack of diversity and women in leadership in corporate and retail, various labor conditions (mishandling sexual misconduct complaints), and its response to worker organizing.

United States v. Apple is an antitrust lawsuit by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2024.^[1][2] The lawsuit contrasts the practices of Apple with those of Microsoft in United States v. Microsoft Corp., and alleges that Apple engages in similar tactics and committing even more egregious violations.^[3] This followed Epic Games v. Apple and the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act in the European Union.^[4]

Apple, Google, and other major technology companies illegally conspired in a "no-poaching" pact to prevent employees from seeking improved compensation, which The New York Times called "embarrassing."^[5] A class-action lawsuit was settled for $415 million in 2015.^[6]

Apple is litigious in enforcing its intellectual property (IP) rights including by challenging trademark applications. The New York Times called this bullying. This includes blocking a trademark of a logo with three interlocking apples used by the Appleton Area School District, a podcast named "Talk About Apples" from an artist in Atlanta; Apple Urgent Care in Riverside County, California; the stage name of a singer-songwriter, Franki Pineapple;^[7] DOPi, a company that makes laptop bags and phone cases, for the lowercase i; and Woolworths Supermarkets, which shapes its W logo into an apple.^[8][9] NBC News referred to the practice as "lunacy".^[10] In 2023, Apple attempted to gain IP rights over depictions of apples in Switzerland.^[11] Smaller competitors told the United States Congress in 2020 that such "bullying" drives them out of business, stifling competition.^[12] The Register wrote in 2006 that Apple "sues itself in the foot" for a lawsuit against a community site for deep linking to the MacBook Pro service manual claiming the site infringed on their IP rights.^[13] Apple has pursued civil and criminal action against blogs over IP to maintain its culture of secrecy.^[14]

Apple has been criticized for the use of proprietary parts thereby thwarting self repair and servicing.^[15][16] Apple has similarly faced controversy for having proprietary content ecosystems where the corporation gets to set unilateral policy. These proprietary services include the iTunes music and the App Store where it gets to unilaterally determine what content will be hosted, margins, and pricing.^[17][18]

Employees have criticized Apple's culture of secrecy saying that levels of disclosure create hierarchies of superiority at the company.^[19][20] They said it wears developers down and isolates them from their loved ones.^[21][22] In 2017, an Apple engineer was fired after his daughter recorded a video of the new iPhone X in the cafeteria and posted it to YouTube.^[23] Employees and outsiders have described Apple's secretive culture as creating a culture of fear and oppression.^{[24][25][26][27][28]} One employee told The New York Times, "Never have I met people more terrified to speak out against their employer."^[29]

The Outline said the secrecy is a "needless cult" because it does not stop leaks.^[30] Apple has issued misinformation to find leakers and keep the media unsure of current developments.^[31] Apple coordinated 'controlled' leaks to the public to gauge viability of products such as the iPad.^[32][33] The Guardian reported research showing pre-release product information gives people the time and opportunity to consider their purchases carefully, but sudden product launches cause people to make purchases more impulsively.^[34][35]

Apple aggressively investigates potential leaks and prosecutes and litigates against employees who are caught.^{[36][37][38][39][40]} In 2004, Apple sued several unnamed employees for leaking confidential information to two blogs. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) opposed to Apple's request for discovery of the blogs' sources and in 2006, the court of appeals sided with the EFF.^[41] In 2009, the strict secrecy drew ire from the public after a worker who lost a device died by suicide.^[42]

In 2009, Gizmodo published an article titled, "Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks," which detailed Apple's Worldwide Loyalty Team responsible for tracking down leaks and lost prototypes.^[43][44][45] Employees reportedly called the team the Gestapo, named after Nazi Germany's secret police. When the team suspects a leak, suspected departments are put on lockdown, searched, and asked to hand over their devices and sign non-disclosure agreements or face disciplinary action up to termination. Gizmodo and ZDNET compared the practice to George Orwell's novel 1984.^[43][46][44] ZDNET referred to the operations as "raids" and characterized them as "quite scary."^[46]

In 2010, a Reuters reporter was assaulted while taking photos outside of a Foxconn plant during an investigation.^[47] Later that year, Apple obtained a search warrant to raid a Gizmodo blogger's home in search of an iPhone prototype that was purchased from someone who found it at a bar. The man who found it at the bar was charged with theft^[48] and the blogger was cleared of all charges.^[49] The New York Times described Apple's response to the events as "churlish".^[50] CNN argued that constitutionally and under the Law of California, the district attorney should have issued a subpoena instead of a search warrant.^[51] Columbia Journalism Review published an article about Apple's aggressive behavior toward journalists to maintain secrecy, referencing the Gizmodo case, but also three lawsuits Apple filed against bloggers for reporting on leaked trade secrets.^[14]

The following year, Wired reported that Apple employees allegedly posed as San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) officers to search a home for a lost iPhone prototype left at a bar, which Apple tracked with GPS.^[52] Four plain-clothed SFPD officers accompanied two Apple investigators to the home. Three officers flashed their badges and announced they were the police, but the investigators did not identify themselves as Apple employees. The resident presumed they were all officers and allowed the investigators to search the home.^[53][54] The resident did not know anything about the device. One Apple investigator was later identified as a former police sergeant. No report was ever filed and there is no public record of the visit.^[54][55] Time and The New York Times referred to the incident as "sketchy" and Time asked, "Does Apple have its own secret mafia?"^[56][53]

Employees have said that Apple's secrecy policies conflate legally-protected speech such as working conditions with protecting product development.^[19][20] The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) made a statement that Apple's rules and communication around secrecy violate federal labor laws after a recording of an employee townhall, which detailed workplace conditions, was leaked to the press. Tim Cook sent employees follow-up memo that said they were doing "everything in our power to identify those who leaked," that "people who leak confidential information do not belong here," and "whether it’s product IP or the details of a confidential meeting."^[57][58][29] An employee who asked questions at the townhall and was known for activism at the company was investigated for the leak and subsequently fired after she deleted materials from her work devices.^[59][60]

In 2005, four voice actors, including Susan Bennett, made voice recordings as part of a database owned by Scansoft and licensed by Apple. None of them were compensated or told what the project was for.^[61][62]

In 2017, Apple announced Face ID as a neural network technology that was private and safe because it was stored locally on the device and never uploaded to the cloud.^[63][64][65] The Verge questioned Apple's intent for future uses of the data.^[66] Minnesota senator Al Franken questioned the privacy and security asking the source of Apple's facial training data (reported to be over a billion images), the diversity of the data set, and how Apple planned to respond to law enforcement requests for any facial data. Apple said in their response, "We worked with participants from around the world to include a representative group of people accounting for gender, age, ethnicity and other factors," and that studies were conducted with informed consent.^[64][67] In August 2021, The Verge published "Apple cares about privacy, unless you work at Apple," which detailed an internal tool called "Glimmer" (formerly "Gobbler") employees used to test Face ID.^[68] One employee later suggested the billion images came from Apple's dogfooding,^[69] a practice CEO Steve Jobs started in the 1980s.^[70] In 2020, Apple said they 3D scanned hundreds off ears for the development of the AirPods in user studies which invited participation of Apple employees.^[71][72]

In 2024, Apple announced its generative artificial intelligence product was coming to devices under the name Apple Intelligence. Artists criticized Apple's lack of transparency around the sources of its training data. Apple has publicly stated that it uses a proprietary web crawler called AppleBot that scrapes "public data" from the web to train its models. Apple says it requests publisher opt-out through the use of robots.txt, which tells crawlers not to scrape certain web pages. Engadget questioned from a technological perspective if opting out was even possible once data has been added to the model.^[73] CNN criticized the procedure saying it places the burden on publishers to safeguard their data from Apple.^[74] John Giannandrea, head of Apple's AI and machine learning department said large amounts of training data are created by Apple.^[73] CNN also questioned how Apple would use consumer data after it announced a partnership with OpenAI for use of ChatGPT.^[74] Earlier in the year, Apple apologized for a "dystopian" advertisement for the iPad, which crushed art tools and musical instruments with a hydraulic press, after the ad was widely criticized by artists.^[75]

In 2012, multiple groups of Chinese writers were awarded compensation of over $200,000 from Apple for hosting apps that contained unlicensed versions of their books, according to Chinese state media.^[76][77][78] Also in 2012, a US district judge ruled that Apple infringed on The Tetris Company's copyrights when it cloned Tetris into a game called Mino.^[79]

In 2023, Dan Ackerman sued Apple alleging that the film Tetris copied material from his 2016 book The Tetris Effect.^[80]

In 2022 and 2023, the United States International Trade Commission ruled that Apple had infringed on health company AliveCor's electrocardiogram technology and Masimo's blood oxygen sensor patent on the Apple Watch.^[81][82] AliveCor's antitrust lawsuit was dismissed in 2024.^[83][84]

In 2019, Apple contractor Thomas le Bonniec filed complaints with European privacy regulators and went to the press with allegations that Apple had been recording, storing, and using audio of its consumers without their knowledge or consent using Siri.^[85][86][87] In 2020, Apple apologized and suspended the program.^[88]

In 2022, Apple scrapped a plan to scan iCloud for child pornography, which received widespread criticism for its privacy and surveillance implications.^[89][90]

Apple has received praise and criticism for its environmental practices. Praise was for reduction of hazardous chemicals in products and transition to clean energy supplies. Criticism was for its wasteful use of raw materials in manufacturing, its vigorous opposition to right to repair laws, and the amount of e-waste created by its products.^{[91][92][93][94]} Apple has been fined numerous times by environmental authorities for improper handling of hazardous waste under state and federal regulations by various divisions of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).^[95][96][97] In June 2024, the EPA published a report about an electronic computer manufacturing facility in Santa Clara, California that found Apple may have violated the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.^[98]

Leaked National Security Agency documents obtained by The Guardian^[99] and The Washington Post^[100] in June 2013 included Apple in the list of American companies that allegedly 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^[101] 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.^[102]

In 2019, The Atlantic published the article "Apple’s Empty Grandstanding About Privacy," which alleged that Apple enables surveillance while the CEO claims that "privacy is a fundamental human right."^[103]

Apple has been criticized for censorship in compliance with authoritarian governments around the world, including during 2020 Belarusian protests,^[104] during the 2022 COVID-19 protests in China,^[105][106] the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests,^{[107][108][109]} the 2021 Russian legislative election,^[110] the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation,^{[111][112][113][114]} and for filtering out terms like "democracy" and "human rights" for iPhone engravings in Chinese and banning Muslim content from the App Store.^[115][116] Apple has also been criticized for censoring various media in the United States including books, music, podcasts, newspaper articles, and television shows.^{[117][118][119][120][121]}

Apple retail employees have unionized or formed work councils worldwide in response to wages, excessive overtime, health and safety concerns, and employee surveillance.^{[122][123][124]} In the United States, the company has been criticized for alleged anti-union stance and stifling worker organizing, resulting in unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).^[125][126] Charges have come from corporate workers,^[57] who formed a solidarity union called Apple Together as a "global network of solidarity between [Apple] unions".^[127] On September 30, 2024, the NLRB charged Apple with forcing employees to sign "illegal" employment contracts and "interfering" with and "restraining" their rights under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935.^[128] On October 10, 2024, the NLRB charged Apple with illegally firing an employee involved in #AppleToo and restricting social media and slack usage in violation of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935.^[129]

Corporate employees have criticized Apple's employee privacy rules, including a rule that says that employees have "no expectation of privacy" when using a personal device to conduct Apple-related business. They also spoke out about a practice of being discouraged from keeping a separate device for work and are expected to test software with informed consent.^{[68][130][131]} Retail employees involved in unionizing used Android phones due to surveillance concerns from software Apple installs on employee devices and practices such as bag checks.^{[132][133][134]}

Apple has been criticized for a lack of diversity^[135] and a culture of sexual harassment and mishandling of complaints by human resources and management.^{[136][137][138]} In particular, wage gaps and the failure to promote women into leadership have been criticized since the early 1990s.^{[139][140][138]} In 2022, Apple removed concealment clauses from its employment agreements after a practice of offering severance in exchange for non-disclosure agreements was reported by Financial Times, corroborated by a third-party audit, and reported to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.^{[137][141][142]} Employees remarked that it was a part of Apple's culture of secrecy.^[143] A gender pay bias and sexual harassment lawsuit was filed in June 2024 seeking class status.^[144]

Apple manufactures most of its products in China through partners like Foxconn. Apple's decision to outsource its manufacturing has received significant criticism, due to allegations of poor working conditions, long work hours, and other labor rights violations.^[145][146] A total of 18 suicide attempts were recorded at the Foxconn facility in 2010, with 14 attempts resulting in deaths.^{[147][148][149]} At least one suicide was due to the company's culture of secrecy after the worker lost a prototype.^[40] The Guardian reported an audit of Apple's supply chain found two-thirds of its factories did not properly compensate its workers, lacked proper safety and environmental credentials, and several instances of 15-year old workers.^[150]

Apple, Foxconn and Chinese workers are stakeholders in high-technology production, but relations between the three are perceived by analysts as imbalanced. Apple was able to capture 58.5 percent of the value of the iPhone, despite the fact that the manufacture of the product is entirely outsourced. Particularly notable is that labor costs in China account for the smallest share: 1.8 percent, or nearly US$10, of the US$549 retail price. While both Apple and Foxconn rely on Chinese workers to perform 12-hour working days to meet demand, the costs of Chinese labor in processing and assembly are insignificant in the overall commercial success of Apple. Other major component providers—such as Samsung and LG—captured slightly over 14 percent of the value of the iPhone, while the cost of raw materials was just over one-fifth of the total value (21.9 percent).^[151]

In 2020, The Information published "Apple Took Three Years to Cut Ties With Supplier That Used Underage Labor,"^[152] an article which detailed the company's reluctance to sever partnerships in their supply chain, even when they violate its ethics policies using child labor.^[153] Also in 2020, report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute listed Apple as a company that was "potentially directly or indirectly benefiting" from forced Uyghur labor.^[154] In 2020, Apple lobbyists tried to weaken the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, a U.S. bill against forced labor in Xinjiang, China.^[155]

An Amnesty International report on cobalt mining in the Democratic Republic of the Congo linked Apple to suppliers using child labor, some children as young as seven in 2016.^[156] The following year, The Washington Post reported Apple's intention to stop buying cobalt from the region until conditions were improved.^[157] Victims of child labor in the cobalt mines attempted to sue Apple and other technology companies, but were dismissed by the courts on procedural grounds.^[158] In 2023, an investigation into corporate technology supply chains carried out by The Independent found that Apple was among 400 companies associated with the Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) to root out child labor and human rights violations. Issues reported ranged from mines burying workers alive—including children—to sexual assault and birth defects caused by exposure to toxins. RMI said that the audits do not include site visits, despite being aware of the conditions at mines. Siddharth Kara, author of Cobalt Red, told The Independent, "there’s not much happening of any merit to assist the people of the Congo in addressing the human rights and environmental violations taking place every day as a consequence of cobalt mining."^[159] The Congolese government threatened legal action against Apple in 2024,^[160] later alleging they had evidence linking Apple to conflict areas.^[161]

In July 2024, Apple released the short commercial film The Underdogs: Out of Office, which promoted Apple products' usage for businesses abroad. The commercial was set and filmed in Bangkok, Thailand. The film is about three employees from a paper box manufacturer, who were told to find their business partner in Thailand. Facing struggles and difficulties, they were able to find their way through with assistance from Apple their devices. The settings of the film depicted their office in the U.S. in cold tone, reflecting modernity, and at the same time, using vintage filters to portray Thailand as underdeveloped third-world state, including settings that does not reflect the country's current state of development, such as the unpleasant look and feel of the airport, the accommodations and the transport modes.^[162] The film received criticism from the Thai public and foreigners, both residences and previous visitors, as "a stereotypical and dated portrayal of Thai society".^[163] On August 2, 2024, Apple apologized and removed access to the film on YouTube.^[164]

Apple's advertising has promoted a perception that its products are more secure than others.^[165] It says Apple products are less likely to breached by a hacker or infected by a virus or malware, and others contend this is mainly due to the lack of interest by hackers to attack Apple products.^[166][167] A 2006 report by McAfee found a 228% increase of the annual rate of vulnerabilities in Apple's products in 2003–2005, more than three times that of Microsoft's.^[168][169] The public's lack of awareness over the security vulnerabilities of Apple products has created criticism over Apple misleading the public.^{[165][170][171]} In 2022, hackers exploited a security flaw to take full control of devices including the Mac.^[172] Security experts believe that Apple plays down security concerns,^[173] does not pay researchers on par with the industry, and is slow to acknowledge and fix reported security bugs.^[174]

CNET said Apple's delay to fix security flaws puts users at risk and attributed it to the company's culture of secrecy. In 2011, Apple took nearly three years to fix the vulnerability that led to the exploit of the FinFisher trojan.^[173] Apple took six months to update a security flaw in Java, far longer than other companies, drawing sharp criticism by experts and journalists.^{[171][175][176]} It took five months to fix security flaw in Find My, reported by a former Apple security engineer.^[177] Apple's AirTag was identified as a stalking vector upon launch in 2021, on a much larger scale than similar products from Tile.^[178] In 2024, a judge denied Apple's motion to dismiss a lawsuit on behalf of stalking victims who allege that Apple has not done enough to "diminish the ability of stalkers to use AirTags effectively".^[179]

Apple has created subsidiaries in low-tax places such as Ireland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and the British Virgin Islands to cut the taxes it pays around the world. According to The New York Times, in the 1980s Apple was among the first tech companies to designate overseas salespeople in high-tax countries in a manner that allowed the company to sell on behalf of low-tax subsidiaries on other continents, sidestepping income taxes. In the late 1980s, Apple was a pioneer of an accounting technique known as the "Double Irish with a Dutch sandwich", which reduces taxes by routing profits through Irish subsidiaries and the Netherlands and then to the Caribbean.^[180][181]

There is a decade-long dispute between Apple and the European Commission regarding the tax arrangements between Apple and Ireland, which allowed the company to pay close to zero corporate tax over 10 years.^[182] In September 2024, The European Court of Justice ruled that Apple must pay $14.3 billion (€13 billion) in back taxes, determining that Ireland's tax breaks to the company were unlawful. This decision reverses a 2020 ruling that favoured Apple and Ireland, covering profits earned by Apple's Dublin units from 1991 to 2014. The unpaid taxes had been placed in an escrow account since 2018.^[183]