The rhetorical trope you’ve just engaged in here is called “whataboutism” or more formally tu quoque or “you also”. The topic here is Apple, not corporate malfeasance in general, which is far too vast a topic to approach in a comments section, particularly one about Apple. In passing, I’ll mention that although the companies you’ve listed are in fact American corporations.
Thank you to @seth and @silbey for their erudite commentary on corporate purpose. Straight greed and selfishness in serving only the shareholders are not the only possible motivation for a corporation and are a relatively recent invention. The common good and the good of the company were the watchwords of economically progressive America. It’s only in the current period of Babylonian decadence that economists thinking has become so astonishingly primitive and shallow.
@silbey asked me several times:
is Steve Jobs a tax criminal?
given that these Irish tax evasion shenanigans started under SJ. An interesting question. My take on it is that when this scheme started to unravel Steve Jobs would have gotten ahead of the Apple cart (pardon the pun) and solved the issue without a protracted and negative PR battle.
Given the amount of revenue Apple is making in the EU and Apple’s current bank balance, Jobs might just have paid it or paid most of it (getting a discount for not taking the issue to court). Or Jobs might have agreed to fund and create a huge design and technology research centre in Europe instead of paying the tax.
Apple’s interest here would be positive PR, their name on a major research centre and some control of what comes out of that centre.
In any case, Jobs is a visionary and entrepreneur who solved problems where possible with big ideas and not petty and sordid squabbling. Tim Cooks is exactly the opposite sort of business leader, even if he looks roughly the same at a distance with a black turtleneck on. Most tall white men over fifty look roughly alike.