Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Communications Encryption Government Privacy Your Rights Online

RIM Co-CEO Cries 'No Fair' On Security Question 329

bulled writes "When asked about letting governments in Asia and the Middle East into the 'secure' message service used by their BlackBerry devices, Mike Lazaridis, the co-chief executive of RIM, walked out of the interview and said, 'We've dealt with this, the question is no fair.' By 'dealt with,' we can only assume he meant: 'been paid handsomely to let governments read what they wish.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIM Co-CEO Cries 'No Fair' On Security Question

Comments Filter:
  • by fotbr ( 855184 ) on Thursday April 14, 2011 @07:51PM (#35823706) Journal

    He'll just avoid the whole question. Instead of, perhaps, explaining why the word used was unfair, and what was being done about the situation.

    Guess it's easier to just whine like a little kid about things being unfair, and when that didn't work, to pull out the "national security" trump card.

    Not that I was seriously considering a blackberry, but there's no way I'll buy anything from RIM now. I don't like whiners.

  • by tukang ( 1209392 ) on Thursday April 14, 2011 @08:09PM (#35823884)

    But how can he not anticipate this question? Its been the number 1 question of RIM for the last 24 months, and he thinks its *unfair* he was asked about it? He's either naive or an idiot.

    Another possibility is that he's very aware that this has been a hot issue and had an agreement with the interviewer not to go into that. Maybe that's what he meant by "We've dealt with this" i.e. "You and I had an agreement not to talk about this". Not saying that's what happened but I wouldn't be surprised.

  • by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Thursday April 14, 2011 @08:18PM (#35823934) Journal

    The RIM CEO called an end to an interview when he realized (after a minute and a half) that he was just being ambushed with a combative line of questioning. The interviewer had no interest in him answering the questions, he just wanted to make the CEO look bad in order to get ratings. This is, unfortunately or fortunately, rather common in british television.

    I respect British Journalists far more than I respect American ones because the Brits are always willing to go into interviews and hammer away at uncomfortable questions.

    I enjoy watching the Q&A sessions in Parliment for much the same reasons.

    But in this case, it does seem genuinely unfair.

    Asking for the truth is never unfair.

    When the king holds your entire business for ransom, with the requirement that you do for them what you do for every other government out there, you do it. Whining and complaining about RIM's "security problems" is just childish.

    Time and time again the western world has been bitten in the ass by what it has enabled in developing nations.
    Complaints about Western companies enabling repressive governments is not "childish"

  • Re:Defending Satan (Score:4, Interesting)

    by grainofsand ( 548591 ) <grainofsand AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday April 14, 2011 @08:59PM (#35824240)

    Whilst this may be the case in the US (and I am not sure that it is) it is most certainly not the case at the BBC.

    Interview subjects would never be given "a list of questions". They may be provided an overview or outline of the areas to be covered but a list of actual questions would not be provided.

  • Re:IOW (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Thursday April 14, 2011 @10:25PM (#35824834)

    Ya that is really the only problem. Everyone who acts like RIM should stand up to them has little idea of how the world works. At best, it'll mean that Blackberrys get banned in that country and people just have to use some other communications the government can monitor. At worst RIM employees in that nation get arrested and so on. If a government says "You have to do this to sell products in our country," then your choice is to do it or to leave. Personally I think the right answer in a situation like this is to do as they ask.

    However, you do need to man up and declare what is going on. You need to say "Yes, these governments can access communications over the Blackberry messenger system, just like they can over any sort of cellular call in the country. It is required by law. So your communications are secure from third party snooping, but the government can access them."

    You do see the same shit in the US all the time. Read pretty much any privacy policy and it'll say something along the lines of "We will share your information with any law enforcement agency upon a lawful request." If the police show up with a wiretap warrant, well they'll give the police what they need.

    Same deal here, unfortunately these countries do not have the same system for due process as some other nations. That just means that the privacy policy needs to say "The government may monitor any of your communications if it wishes to."

    Doing it isn't the problem because frankly, for nations to keep advancing and get more human rights/due process communications is one of the key requirements. However it is a problem if they try to cover it up. Be honest.

  • no (Score:5, Interesting)

    by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Thursday April 14, 2011 @10:36PM (#35824904) Homepage Journal
    bbc has a habit of asking hellish questions.

    you think this single question asked by click, a i.t./internet show is hard ? wait until you see some dastardly figure get fried in hard talk - and its not frying as in the 'frying' of silly american shows -> they ask SO shattering questions that you may see politicians blabbering, speechless, and trying to talk by babbling in absolute silence, aghast at the weight of the question.

    this is the blonde man that does the majority of hard talk though. there is a woman who occasionally hosts it, but she is apparently not witty enough as the blonde host, and instead tries to bog down her guests by talking too much, and being a prick by not letting them answer.

    the blonde guy would ask something like "why did you compromise morals and ethics of the country you are based in, in order to do business in another", and the rim ceo would start babbling in this case, and when gets "but isnt it hypocrisy?" answer to his babbling, he would be dumbstruck.

    few dare to sit on that chair. those who do sit, go through the hoop of fire and come out clean, get big p.r. points.
  • Re:Wrong Job (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pete6677 ( 681676 ) on Friday April 15, 2011 @12:25AM (#35825340)

    A CEO's job, above and beyond all else, is to sell the company. It is far more important than "running" the company which is usually done by a COO or someone like that.

The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.