Encryption laws: carrot, not stick, likely to work

The case of Apple is illustrative. The company earned kudos from champions of personal privacy last year when it put up opposition to an FBI move to gain access to the contents of an iPhone which had been used by one of the terrorists involved in an incident in San Bernardino, California.

Annoyed by the FBI's move to take the matter to the courts, without first quietly approaching the company, Apple put up stiff resistance.

But the same Apple has now announced plans for opening a new data centre in China in order to comply with the government's demands to store Chinese customer data within the country. Despite the cost and inconvenience, Apple realises that there is a lot of money to be made in China.

{loadposition sam08}Hence it has bent over as the price is right.

Take the example of Microsoft. In May, the company released a version of its Windows operating system known as Windows 10 China Government Edition, a version vetted by the Beijing authorities and deemed suitable for use by the country's public sector.

There is plenty of money to be made by supplying operating systems to China's public sector; given that Microsoft was willing to show its crown jewels to the authorities. Money does indeed make the mare go.

One could go on. Practically every big tech company jumps through hoops when there is a pot of gold on the other side. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Yahoo!, they all say one thing in public, but buckle down to government demands provided there is something in it for them.

Given this, Turnbull and Brandis might like to think of some carrots that they can dangle in front of the tech companies whose encrypted products they are seeking access to. Wielding a stick, as Turnbull has done thus far, is unlikely to help.