Apple vs. FBI Case: Exploring Ethical Issues in Business Ethics

This case study examines the ethical dilemma presented by Apple's refusal to assist the FBI in decrypting an iPhone belonging to one of the shooters in the 2015 San Bernardino shooting. The analysis identifies key stakeholders, including Apple, the FBI, and the public, and evaluates the situation using ethical theories such as Utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and Ethical Relativism. It explores the conflicting duties of Apple to protect customer privacy versus aiding law enforcement, ultimately proposing a resolution that respects privacy while acknowledging potential ethical conflicts. The study concludes that while the decision may face criticism and potential misuse, it is ethically sound in protecting broader privacy rights and preventing future government overreach.

0 | P a g e
Business Ethics
Apple vs. FBI

1 | P a g e
Ethics is defined as moral principles that govern a person’s behaviour or conducting of a
particular activity. It deals with the fairness, justness, rightness or wrongness of actions.
Business ethics are referred to code of principals which governs most business decisions
while facing complex ethical issues (Spencer, 2017). The objective of this paper is to
evaluate the case of ‘Apple v FBI’ in order to identify the ethical issues presented in this case
and identify the key stakeholders who were affected. Ethical theories including
Utilitarianism, Kantian ethics and Ethical relativism will be used to analyse the issue, and
different options will be identified to solve the dilemma. Lastly, a decision will be proposed
for resolution, and the consequences of the decision that leads to ethical conflicts will be
identified in this paper.
The key ethical issue which is raised in this case is that Apple denied helping FBI in the
investigation for decrypting an iPhone 5C that belong to one of the shooters in the 2015 San
Bernardino shooting. Apple publically refused to comply with the Federal order by providing
that it is against its policies for the protection of private data of customers and the company
puts this data outside its own reach (Kharpal, 2016). Many people criticised this decision of
Apple by providing that they are putting profits over safety and they wanted to make more
money by showing that their products are secured. It was argued that they should join the
government and FBI to fight against attacks such as the 2015 San Bernardino shooting by
using their resources rather than focusing on the privacy of shooters who are responsible
for these incidents in the first place.
The key stakeholders who were affected in this scenario include Apple, FBI and the public.
Although the action of Apple was supported by technology companies such as Yahoo! and
Facebook; however, many customers were against its decision as well which adversely
affected its profitability (Tibken, 2017). This refusal makes it challenging for FBI to complete
its investigation and found necessary evidence which is required to avoid similar incidents in
the future. The public was divided between this decision since many supported the decision
of Apple which prioritised the data privacy policies and others criticised its decision of
prioritising profits above the lives of innocent people. Thus, these stakeholders were
affected in the given case.

2 | P a g e
Utilitarianism ethical theory determines the morality of those decisions that would provide
the greatest good to society. This theory provides that if the consequences of a decision
positively affect a large number of individuals, then it is considered as ethical (Kagan, 2018).
The decision taken by Apple negatively affected many people who believe that the company
should help FBI in the investigation to ensure that similar incidents did not happen in the
future. However, allowing the government to look inside the smartphones of users will
adversely affect the privacy of millions of individuals who keep their confidential
information on their smartphones. It will negatively affect their privacy which will not
achieve the goal of greatest good to society based on which the decision of Apple is ethical.
Kantian ethics is another ethical theory that contrasts the Utilitarianism approach. This
theory provides that there are moral duties which are imposed on individuals based on
moral rules and they should not violate their duties to act in an ethical manner (Stern,
2015). Apple has a duty towards FBI to help them in their investigation; however, it has a
bigger duty towards its customers protect their privacy. When the companies refused to
help FBI, it complied with its duties towards its customers based on which the decision of
the company is ethical. As per Ethical relativism, individuals decide what is ethical based on
their own feelings to identify what is right or wrong (Harman, 2015). In this case, Apple took
this decision based on its own feeling that the privacy of customers should be prioritised. On
the other hand, people who were affected by the shooting believed as per their feelings that
the decision of Apple is wrong since it is helping the criminals rather than supporting the
innocent people.
There are two options available based on ethical principles to solve the ethical dilemma. The
first option is that the government can enforce Apple legally to decrypt the phone and help
in the investigation of FBI. The second option is that the government can respect the
decision of Apple to support the privacy of its customers and find other ways to retrieve the
information from the phone. The second option is the proposed decision for the resolution
of the ethical dilemma in this case. This is an ethical decision since it achieves the goal of
greater happiness for a greater number of people while ensuring that Apple continued to
comply with its duties.

3 | P a g e
As a consequence of this decision, ethical conflicts will arise between parties. The key
conflict is that Apple is providing that it will not help the government to catch criminals and
terrorists in order to protect their privacy. Many people are likely to criticise this decision of
Apple, and they are likely to stop using Apple products. More criminals and terrorist groups
are likely to use Apple’s products for storing illegal data since they know that the
government will not be able to collect such information (Lichtblau, 2016). However, based
on the “big picture”, this decision will benefit many individuals by protecting their privacy
from their own government. If Apple agrees to help FBI in this case, then it will become
easier for the government to enforce Apple and other companies to reveal private data of
their users in future investigations which will create a major issue of privacy. Therefore, the
decision taken by Apple in this scenario is ethical.
In conclusion, this case highlighted the ethical issue which arises due to the refusal made by
Apple to help FBI in collecting private data from one of the shooter’s iPhone. This paper
evaluated this case by using different ethical approaches to evaluate it from different
perspectives. Lastly, a proposal of decision for the resolution of the ethical dilemma is made
in this paper which will assist in addressing the ethical issue while complying with ethical
principles.

4 | P a g e
References
Harman, G. (2015) Moral relativism is moral realism. Philosophical Studies, 172(4), pp.855-
863.
Kagan, S. (2018) Normative ethics. Abingdon: Routledge.
Kharpal, A. (2016) Apple vs FBI: All you need to know. [Online] Available at:
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/29/apple-vs-fbi-all-you-need-to-know.html
[Accessed 03/01/2019].
Lichtblau, E. (2016) In Apple Debate on Digital Privacy and the iPhone, Questions Still
Remain. [Online] Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/29/us/politics/in-
apple-debate-on-digital-privacy-and-the-iphone-questions-still-remain.html
[Accessed 03/01/2019].
Spencer, H. (2017) The data of ethics. Abingdon: Routledge.
Stern, R. (2015) Kantian ethics: Value, agency, and obligation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Tibken, S. (2017) Apple vs. FBI one year later: Still stuck in limbo. [Online] Available at:
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-vs-fbi-one-year-later-still-stuck-in-limbo/
[Accessed 03/01/2019].