What's "brave" about it? I'm a programmer making a good salary, and all I have to lose is my phone. I can buy another one if they decide to threaten me with seizure.

If you don't think it's an evil action, then why are you phrasing it as "I still believe they're trying to do the right thing"? I interpret that as "I think they're doing the wrong thing, but I don't mind because they think it's the right thing." If it's not evil then why not defend the action on its own merits, rather than appealing to the fundamental goodness of the organization?

When I read the article, my first thought that I'd let them keep the phone. Mine is quite old and I've been debating buying a new one since it is giving me trouble. Something like that would just be good excuse to get a new one.

If it were a brand new phone, I might think harder about it - but we really need to stand up to crap like this.

Because it's perceived as evil, and I didn't want to litigate that and be a force of negativity on HN.

Thinking it is appropriate to search phones is at least a solid argument. People might loudly disagree or downvote, but it's a coherent opinion.

The idea that trying to do the right thing can justify something is specious nonsense.

It's specious nonsense to try to do the right thing? You can't possibly mean that, right?

It's specious nonsense to justify things by saying they are trying to do the right thing.

And I do. I fail to see any kind of "good" that this could fall under.