TECH INDUSTRY RESPONSE TO BUILDING A NATIONAL MUSLIM

REGISTRY Overview Unprecedented change is on the horizon for the nation as the new administration readies itself to take office. Many of the goals proposed by the incoming administration will specifically impact the tech industry, perhaps none so immediate and impactful as the possibility of a national registry that would be used to identify and track Muslim immigrants in the U.S. The potential for a national Muslim registry is a real one. Throughout his campaign, the President Elect repeatedly said he would undertake mass-deportations of immigrants in the U.S., and step up scrutiny of Muslim immigrants in particular. A top Trump advisor on issues related to immigration, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, is a vocal supporter of establishing a national registry. Kobach proposes to reinstate the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), a system he helped design, for that purpose. Prominent Trump supporters have publicly said that the mass internment of Japanese Americans during World War II sets a precedent for the President Elect’s plan to create and implement a national registry of Muslims in the U.S. In a preemptive move intended to create obstacles for reinstating NSEERS, the Obama administration announced on December 22 that it would formally dismantle the system. However, amid widespread speculation that Kobach may have a lead role with the Department of Homeland Security, there is a very real possibility that some version of a national Muslim registry could in fact become a reality.

Industry Response Without the support of the major tech companies and data brokers, building a Muslim surveillance system would be difficult, if not impossible. As a result, tech companies are increasingly coming under fire to answer questions regarding how their company would respond to a government request to build a national registry. The first opposition to emerge from within the industry came from tech company employees. In the weeks following the election, a coalition of engineers, designers, and business executives from major tech companies established the NeverAgain.Tech website, publicly pledging their refusal to cooperate with any effort to build a national registry of Muslims in the U.S. The tech employees pledged to advocate within their companies to minimize collection and retention of data that would support ethnic or religious targeting under the Trump administration; to fight any unethical or illegal misuse of data; and to resign from their positions rather than comply. The pledge also notes that tech companies have collaborated with autocratic regimes in the past, specifically calling out IBM’s collaboration with the Nazi regime during World War II:

We have educated ourselves on the history of threats like these, and on the roles that technology and technologists played in carrying them out. We see how IBM collaborated to digitize and streamline the Holocaust, contributing to the deaths of six million Jews and millions of others. We recall the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War. We recognize that mass deportations precipitated the very atrocity the word genocide was created to describe: the murder of 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey. We acknowledge that genocides are not merely a relic of the distant past—among others, Tutsi Rwandans and Bosnian Muslims have been victims in our lifetimes.

The NeverAgain.Tech website temporarily stopped accepting new signatures on December 21 in order to manually verify the 2,833 signatures already collected. There is a growing backlog of signatures to be added to the list once the verification process is completed. A number of major tech companies have also gone public with vows not to participate in efforts to build a national Muslim registry. At the time this paper was prepared, according to Inc.com, the following companies had issued public statements signifying they would not participate in the development of such a registry:

Apple: "We think people should be treated the same no matter how they worship, what they look like, who they love. We haven't been asked and we would oppose such an effort." Atlassian: "Atlassian has not been asked to help build a Muslim registry, and we certainly would not do so. We believe the best innovation happens when diverse teams of people come together as equals to create amazing things. We recognize the important

contributions that Muslims--around the world and here at Atlassian--have made. We look forward to supporting organizations and initiatives that advocate for creating a more collaborative, inclusive world." Facebook: "No one has asked us to build a Muslim registry, and of course we would not do so." GitHub: "As an organization, we firmly believe in the value of collaborative, diverse, and safe communities. We refuse to participate in the creation of a database based on anyone's religious beliefs and are committed to ensuring data on our platform is handled ethically and appropriately." Google: "In relation to the hypothetical of whether we would ever help build a 'Muslim registry' - we haven't been asked, of course we wouldn't do this and we are glad - from all that we've read - that the proposal doesn't seem to be on the table." IBM: "No, IBM would not work on this hypothetical project. Our company has long-standing values and a strong track record of opposing discrimination against anyone on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion. That perspective has not changed, and never will." Lyft: Asked if Lyft would ever help facilitate the creation of a national Muslim registry, the company said "No." Medium: "Medium would not participate in any efforts whatsoever to create a registry for any ethnic or religious grouping.” Microsoft: "We've been clear about our values. We oppose discrimination and we wouldn't do any work to build a registry of Muslim Americans." Pinterest: "Pinterest opposes any registry based on religion or ethnicity. We welcome and encourage diverse perspectives and beliefs, both with our employees and on Pinterest." Salesforce: "We have not been approached by anyone about the creation of a ‘registry’ of any kind. Equality for all people is a core value of Salesforce and we oppose any effort to discriminate against anyone on the basis of religion, race, ethnic background, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, age or disability status." Twitter: Asked if Twitter would ever help facilitate the creation of a national Muslim registry, the company said "No." Uber: Asked if Uber would ever help facilitate the creation of a national Muslim registry, the company said "No."

Many other tech companies have yet to state their position, leaving themselves open to scrutiny and fostering a perception they might in fact assist in the development of a national registry. While the list of tech companies vowing not to participate in the development of a national registry demonstrates solidarity across the tech industry, many media experts point to the importance of garnering the same level of commitment among the data brokers who have the actual data. CNNMoney asked some of the largest data brokers whether they would provide data or help build a national Muslim registry or a database based on race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Three companies -- Acxiom, Recorded Future, and CoreLogic – stated they would not help to build a Muslim registry. However, at the time this paper was prepared, other heavy hitters including eBureau, ID Analytics, Intelius, PeekYou, and TowerData had yet to respond.

Implications There are many potential implications and ‘costs’ related to a tech company’s decision to participate or not participate in the development of a national Muslim registry, including public perception and goodwill; partnerships and strategic alliances; employee retention, hiring and productivity; and alignment of values and corporate mission statements. Public perception and good will: The concept of a national registry has been denounced by the leadership of both Democrat and Republican parties, and attracted strong opposition from national civil rights organizations with regard to its legality. As another indicator of public perception, mayors in several major U.S. cities, including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle, and others have vowed to be sanctuary cities and stated they will not coordinate with federal efforts to identify, track and deport illegal immigrants. In addition, the Snowden revelations about NSA data mining have already drawn harsh criticism and objections from around the world. The scandal undermined consumer confidence in U.S. tech companies and surfaced issues related to the legality and legitimacy of anti-terrorism measures that compromise and overshadow citizen privacy. Development of a national registry that targets a specific demographic group could resurface the concerns related to discrimination and civil rights violations that emerged in the wake of the Snowden scandal. Tech companies could find themselves on the ‘bleeding edge’ of public policy that is divisive and viewed by many as racist. Ultimately, companies that might be impacted by the development of a national registry must consider the implications for their brand reputation and the potential perception of customers and shareholders. Partnerships and strategic alliances: The list of tech companies vowing they would not participate in an effort to build a national registry is expected to grow. Organizations must consider the potential impact on business relationships. For example, if business partners take a stand for or against the registry, and the view is opposing, could there be ramifications to the relationship? Could opposition from fellow technology companies, especially heavy hitters like Apple, Microsoft, IBM, and Facebook that have made a strong commitment to diversity and

inclusion, alienate the company and affect future business relationships and alliances? Companies will need to weigh their options and get input and/or buy in from stakeholders (industry, Board of Directors, shareholders, partners, suppliers, and employees should be considered). Employee retention, hiring, and productivity: Employee perception is an essential aspect to consider in the decision of a company to participate or not. If a tech company chooses to participate in developing a national registry, or does not take a public stand vowing not to participate, will they risk losing valued employees, or may it hinder their ability to attract new talent in the future? There are already 2,833 IT professionals listed on the NeverAgain.Tech website that have pledged to quit their jobs if their company participates in the development of a national registry. In addition, many valued technology professionals in the industry have come from a variety of countries, including Muslim countries. Will participating in the registry impact the ability to attract diverse talent? Overall, forcing employees to participate in an effort that is perceived as divisive and potentially racist is bound to foster tension and impact morale and productivity. Companies should survey their employee resource groups and top talent for their perspectives and insights. Alignment of values and corporate mission statements: Some of the most successful tech companies build their cultures and strategies based on their core values and mission statements. Strong leaders play a vital role in ensuring the alignment of their organization’s values with their objectives. Organizations must consider their core values and mission statements when deciding to participate in a registry or not. Misalignment of core values is problematic and could negatively impact the credibility of these values.

Conclusion In the last decade, there has been no shortage of bold social action on the part of Silicon Valley. In 2013, Facebook and other tech companies launched FWD.us, calling on Congress to open the U.S. to more immigration. In 2015, Salesforce threatened to pull out of Indiana after the state passed a law discriminating against the LGBT community. In 2016, Apple refused to comply with a court order requiring it to create tools that would make it easier for FBI investigators to unlock the phone used by one of the attackers in the December massacre in San Bernardino, California. CEO Tim Cook called the demand nothing less than a threat to civil liberties. Individuals, advocacy groups, shareholders, many in the legal community, and other tech companies have lionized and lauded Apple for standing up to the government, both in terms of consumer privacy rights as well as on the grounds that the government cannot force companies to do work. The concept of building a national registry, whether it comes to fruition or not, has forced tech industry leaders to weigh moral and ethical considerations against their company’s bottom-line, particularly those companies that rely heavily on government contracts for business. Cisco for example, describes among the company’s six core values one that is perhaps the most instructive in light of the dilemma:

Always do the Right Thing – We’re honest and straightforward in all our actions. We earn the trust and confidence of others. We say what needs to be said and hold ourselves accountable.

How companies interpret and implement their core values in light of participating in development of a national registry may ultimately dictate what side of history a company lands on.