Not willingly so.

Apple appears to be doing as much as it legally can to get around that fact, such as in providing end to end encryption on iMessage.

It can't do much legally. If Apple was serious about protecting privacy it would move operation to a different place where law actually still offers some privacy protection.

>If Apple was serious about protecting privacy it would move operation to a different place where law actually still offers some privacy protection.

Do you appreciate what your asking? You're honestly saying if they do something this radical then they're "not serious about privacy"?

Erm, there's a misunderstanding here. I'm saying they cannot be considered as being serious about protecting privacy because they operate from a country that has anti-privacy law.

If they did move to a country with privacy protection then privacy protection could be considered possible.

[citation needed]

PRISM is an endpoint for companies to upload data in response to court orders. The alternative would be that they have to provide the same data but employ an army of engineers to manually scrape the results together.

I’m not convinced this is somehow more virtuous than doing it automatically. The warrant was signed, Apples hands are tied either way.