Possible Class Action vs Apple

[CubicleGeek]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

The difference here is that there is a specific exemption in the US to allow unlocking of phones:

So, it is legal for the owners of iPhones to unlock their phones.

The question that is raised is was there specific code in the update to fubar the phone? If so then I think Apple should fix the phones.

This would be like an automaker making a deal with Petro Canada, then saying, if you buy my car, you must fill up at Petro Canada; and if you fill up at Shell your car breaks down and the automaker says you voided your warranty. As long as you weren't putting the wrong fuel in the tank you should be fine.

As long as these people weren't using their phone as a hammer, Apple should fix them.

Edit: here is a link to the pdf from the US copyright office that I quoted.

I've always argued against the whole locking-your-phone to a carrier thing. It's illegal to do that in Asia (including China) in order to promote competition between carriers. Ironic how in this respect, our communist friends have a better grasp of capitalism than the supposed countries that are supposed to symbolize this idea.

I have no reservations with them making you sign contracts for the subsidizing of the handset, but I have a very big problem if after the terms of the contract end or I buy a phone outright I can't use it on another carrier using the same wireless technology.

[CubicleGeek]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

As kermitology pointed out, when Microsoft de-activates your illegal copy of Windows, they don't brick your PC. It's still usable and you'd be able to install another OS (such as a Linux distro) or even a licensed copy of Windows on it. Microsoft does not render your hardware useless.

Welllll... that's kind of a stretch considering that MS doesn't own the intellectual property rights to the PC hardware. You try to load your own BIOS firmware onto your motherboard, bricking your board, and see if the motherboard manufacturer will warranty it. Without lying about what you did that is . That is probably a closer example to what we have with iPhone firmware vs. iPhone hardware here than operating system software vs. PC hardware.

[Juventus3]

That link is definitely interesting. There's no precedence for such a carrier exclusive deal in the US, so the can of warm will be a new one for US lawmakers to open. It still seems to me that if you buy a product designed to work on a specific network, then attempt to switch it to another network, you're at your own risk.

If apple has put code in it's latest update to purposefully disable any phone that has it installed, it could get interesting...As people have pointed out.

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I'm not sure what prompted this personal attack, but it's certainly uncalled for.

So was yours.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by CubicleGeek

Welllll... that's kind of a stretch considering that MS doesn't own the intellectual property rights to the PC hardware. You try to load your own BIOS firmware onto your motherboard, bricking your board, and see if the motherboard manufacturer will warranty it. Without lying about what you did that is . That is probably a closer example to what we have with iPhone firmware vs. iPhone hardware here than operating system software vs. PC hardware.

Yeah, I agree, which is why I pointed out that using the example of Microsoft deactivating illegal copies of Windows isn't an apt analogy in this case, but if you compare the iPhone to the Xbox (where the respective companies produce both the hardware and firmware/software involved), it makes for a much better comparison:

Hack your Xbox: Microsoft bans you from Live and voids your warranty, but otherwise your Xbox still works fine.
Hack your iPhone: Apple turns your iPhone into an unusable paperweight.

[MarchHare]

So was yours.

Uh...what?

[Juventus3]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Yeah, I agree, which is why I pointed out that using the example of Microsoft deactivating illegal copies of Windows isn't an apt analogy in this case, but if you compare the iPhone to the Xbox (where the respective companies produce both the hardware and firmware/software involved), it makes for a much better comparison:

Hack your Xbox: Microsoft bans you from Live and voids your warranty, but otherwise your Xbox still works fine.
Hack your iPhone: Apple turns your iPhone into an unusable paperweight.

And I do agree your Xbox analogy is a better comparison in this case.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by llama64

When flashing firmware stored on a ROM chip, there is a possibility that you will permenantly corrupt that chip, which would lead to their warning.

Flashing any type of ROM shouldn't physically destroy anything.

[Juventus3]

Not sure if this has been posted yet. Apple also being sued for their iphone price cut.

http://news.wired.com/dynamic/storie...MPLATE=DEFAULT

Truly unbelievable is the USA. A company releases a product that is more highly anticipated than anything else in our generation, and to thank them the costumers sue them left right and centre for any reason imaginable.

This case in particular is almost laughable.

[Ozy_Flame]

Why the hell would anyone need to hack their phone? Does saving 10 bucks a month on phone bills really mean that much to some people? Anyone who tampers with their phone is voiding the warranty. I have no sympathy for these people experiencing "bricking".

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Why the hell would anyone need to hack their phone? Does saving 10 bucks a month on phone bills really mean that much to some people? Anyone who tampers with their phone is voiding the warranty. I have no sympathy for these people experiencing "bricking".

Well if you already have phone service not through AT&T (ie You're Canadian and deal with Rogers or Fido) then what option do you have? If you want to use the phone, you'd have to get an American number with AT&T?

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Why the hell would anyone need to hack their phone? Does saving 10 bucks a month on phone bills really mean that much to some people? Anyone who tampers with their phone is voiding the warranty. I have no sympathy for these people experiencing "bricking".

why the hell should i be forced to download and use ringtones that i can only get from my wireless provider? Why can't i download and use a royalty free ringtone? why should i have the privlage to purchase the same song 4 times, so I can play it on 4 different media devices?
If i buy the phone out right, why should I be forced to using it only a single wireless provider?

And as Bobblehead posted, it is a law in the states, to allow the purchaser of a phone to use it on any network they wish.

[Ozy_Flame]

Do the research before you make a purchase like that. That's my advice. The bigger the purchase, the more conscious people should be of what they're buying.

Also, more legal trouble for Apple:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/10/02/a....ap/index.html

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by arsenal

And as Bobblehead posted, it is a law in the states, to allow the purchaser of a phone to use it on any network they wish.

If that's the case, then definitely read the fine print. I'm sure they can use this as evidence or the basis for arguement, but cell phone companies make you sign a contract before the term begins, and trying to void that contract by switching providers is breaking a contract.

I don't know the nitty-gritty, but again, it comes down to the law of contracts.

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If that's the case, then definitely read the fine print. I'm sure they can use this as evidence or the basis for arguement, but cell phone companies make you sign a contract before the term begins, and trying to void that contract by switching providers is breaking a contract.

I don't know the nitty-gritty, but again, it comes down to the law of contracts.

Well that's what I am saying. If you have a contract with verison or another GSM carrier in the states, and you purchase an iPhone from the apple store (not the AT&T) store, why can't you use the phone with your current provider?

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If that's the case, then definitely read the fine print. I'm sure they can use this as evidence or the basis for arguement, but cell phone companies make you sign a contract before the term begins, and trying to void that contract by switching providers is breaking a contract.

I don't know the nitty-gritty, but again, it comes down to the law of contracts.

You can buy the phone without contract, but it's still only able to work on AT&T

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Why the hell would anyone need to hack their phone? Does saving 10 bucks a month on phone bills really mean that much to some people? Anyone who tampers with their phone is voiding the warranty. I have no sympathy for these people experiencing "bricking".

Would you be willing to buy a Sony tv if it only worked with one specific cable/satellite provider and didn't work if you tried to use another company's service?

People have an expectation that if they buy something, they should be able to use it as they choose. Sure, if you violate the terms of agreement, no reasonable person would expect tech support or for your warranty to be honoured, but that's a big step from the device actually being rendered useless by the manufacturer.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Would you be willing to buy a Sony tv if it only worked with one specific cable/satellite provider and didn't work if you tried to use another company's service?

Ah, but if the TV is subsidized by the cable company; then I would.

Once again, a closer example would be a digital cable terminal. I would not expect to buy a Rogers DCT and have it work here on Shaw.

From what I read; AT&T paid some bucks to have sole use of the iPhone. And even the people who buy it off contract get a bit of a subsidy.

I really like the BIOS/motherboard example given earlier. IMHO that is the best analogy.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Would you be willing to buy a Sony tv if it only worked with one specific cable/satellite provider and didn't work if you tried to use another company's service?

No, which is why I wouldn't buy an iPhone either. I would read the fine print. That is the point I'm trying to make. I'm sure that the AT&T policy is written in the purchase of the phone and/or the service contract.

For the record though, how many of you would use, say, Telus for your home line, and then use Bell or Rogers for your cell phone? Lots of people have dual providers for their telecommunication needs. The whole "one-provider" is a matter of personal preference, not a right.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I really like the BIOS/motherboard example given earlier. IMHO that is the best analogy.

What about the Xbox example? I haven't seen anyone say something contrary to that.

[CubicleGeek]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Yeah, I agree, which is why I pointed out that using the example of Microsoft deactivating illegal copies of Windows isn't an apt analogy in this case, but if you compare the iPhone to the Xbox (where the respective companies produce both the hardware and firmware/software involved), it makes for a much better comparison:

Hack your Xbox: Microsoft bans you from Live and voids your warranty, but otherwise your Xbox still works fine.
Hack your iPhone: Apple turns your iPhone into an unusable paperweight.

In truth, I think that it's because MS has no way of bricking the XBox remotely, that is why they don't do that. If you have a softmod, you don't want to log onto XBox Live! because it will attempt to upgrade your firmware, effectively removing the mod, since the mod is really just a hacked version of a legit BIOS. If you have a hardmod, MS can't do anything other than ban you on their end, since the modchip cannot be flashed by the MS FW updater. But that is just my speculation.

I've never agreed with Apple's closed nature approach to their intellectual property. That killed them in the PC battle way back vs. IBM & IBM-compatible clones despite having a larger initial install base and it killed them with IEEE1394 (i.e Firewire) with USB now really leading the market, despite the former being a better technology IMO. They just have such a superior product and superior marketing for the "i" series product line that they can more or less do anything they want. Because despite what they do, people will keep buying their products.