This was a warrant.

Different countries have different standards for burden of proof. I'm not trying to say India has no right to ban the device if they don't comply.

It was seen as rank collusion with Pakistan. A country that has repeatedly received American Taxpayer Dollar and Weaponry while sponsoring terrorism.

An easy statement to make, and it sounds like a good reason. Yet this is exactly why the bar for a fishing expedition should be high.

Blackberry was defending terrorists and their technology was used to kill hundreds of people and wound hundreds more. And create the blue print for terror attacks on the West. Because you know... not only can you commit a terror attack but Blackberry won't agree to Warrants resulting in the infrastructure of terrorism to remain.

No, they were defending their CUSTOMERS right to be free from unfettered BLANKET access to encrypted communications. They'd ALREADY offered to grant access to non-encrypted services (which also a bridge too far if you ask me).

Your privacy ends the moment you use that privacy to commit a crime. Particularly if it is state sponsored terrorism.

And if that's all the ambiguous, "danger" filled rhetoric needed for you to surrender your privacy, then don't pretend it's even remotely pragmatic. It's pure reactionary kneejerk authoritarianism - let's call it what it is. If that works for India, well then great for you. I certainly hope it works out and isn't abused.