Apple being sued for .Mac!!

[Draft]

I just thought it interesting that Apple UK is being sued for switching from the free iTools service to the pay .Mac service. The article is here:

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0208/16.applesuit.php

I personally think that this is good. I don't care that Apple has started to make people pay, it's just that there should be a discounted price for anyone just wanting to use email, like $5-10. This may make Apple change their minds.

Later,
Draft

 

[firewire2001]

Re: Apple being sued for .Mac!!

Originally posted by Draft
I just thought it interesting that Apple UK is being sued for switching from the free iTools service to the pay .Mac service. The article is here:

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0208/16.applesuit.php

I personally think that this is good. I don't care that Apple has started to make people pay, it's just that there should be a discounted price for anyone just wanting to use email, like $5-10. This may make Apple change their minds.

Later,
Draft

man. if this really won in court i wonder if it would affect us customers, too..

 

[Sun Baked]

Isn't there also a line that says features can be changed, altered, or eliminated at the will of Apple?

Apple just exercised their right to terminate iTools, and start up a new pay service called .Mac - heck they even offered a transition period and a discount to customers of the free service.

 

[DeusOmnis]

i never really used itools anyway...

When I tried to use iTools the uploads were always extremely slow (1.6 mbps DSL). Asking Apple to provide free services like that is a bit demanding. I know the game Planetarion now charges and yahoo has a billing thing for some of its services. Millions of people use mac and to have 10 mb for each of them would be $$$$!!

 

[Dr_Floyd]

this is crazy, next people will want apple to pay for their internet and light bills

 

[Beej]

Originally posted by Dr_Floyd
this is crazy, next people will want apple to pay for their internet and light bills

I wouldn't complain...

 

[funkywhat2]

isn't there and email only option for .mac, and if there is then why are all these people bitching about losing their beloved email accounts?

 

[ShaolinMiddleFinger]

Originally posted by crazy_will
isn't there and email only option for .mac, and if there is then why are all these people bitching about losing their beloved email accounts?

no there isn't any...unless if you buy a .mac account and then pay ten dollars for that feature.

If that person wins in court. Apple will probably either get a lot of lawsuits or end up canceling .mac

 

[mmmdreg]

'sif you'd take something like this to court...I mean this isn't America or anything..actually oops, I forgot you aren't all Australians...everyone should stop whinging about it seriously...

 

[drastik]

This has no hope in court and I'm surprised a lawyer would take the time. I don't know about the UK, but here in the US, an agreed upon contract is legit. No one was tricked here, if people didn't take the time to read the agreements they were agreeing to, that's not apple's fault.

People who agree without reading should shut up and learn to read.

 

[Draft]

I just want them to offer an email only version of .mac, that's all. It's pretty dumb of them not to, because most everyone that has complained, said that they would pay for the service, just not $100 or $50 for a suite of services that they don't even use. Hopefully this will change Apple's mind about the whole situation.

Draft

 

[drastik]

I don't know, apple doesn't really need to offer an email service, they don't really need .mac, yet. Apple's not a content provider like Yahoo or even MSN. Apple doesn't need to generate traffic to their website so they can get more money from ads. Apple doesn't make ad revenue. Anyfree email service you get takes ads or needs a paid name to not take ads. Apple isn't providing email, they are providing net based services, just like MS's .net. As much as I hate MS, this probably is going to be part of our future lives.

 

[mcrain]

Originally posted by drastik
This has no hope in court and I'm surprised a lawyer would take the time. I don't know about the UK, but here in the US, an agreed upon contract is legit. No one was tricked here, if people didn't take the time to read the agreements they were agreeing to, that's not apple's fault.

People who agree without reading should shut up and learn to read.

As a lawyer, I can say quite comfortably the following: "Sorry, you're wrong."

 

[Draft]

Originally posted by drastik
This has no hope in court and I'm surprised a lawyer would take the time. I don't know about the UK, but here in the US, an agreed upon contract is legit. No one was tricked here, if people didn't take the time to read the agreements they were agreeing to, that's not apple's fault.

People who agree without reading should shut up and learn to read.

LOL Why don't you shut up and study law! LOL

Draft

 

[G5orbust]

I dont think it will change much here. Its in the British small claims court system and that means apple is not obligated to not charge us here in the states. But since the US and Britain pretty much have the same laws regarding that kind of stuff, i tthnk if someone sued apple in the US, they would win. But i would only advise sueing apple if the british court case ended in the public's favor.