Apple Fined $2 Million in Brazil for Selling iPhones Without Chargers

[SuperMatt]

I thought those who had power adapters will not request for a free charger. So the paying customer does not care for the environment but Apple does, where is the choice without a financial penalty. Let the stats of choice speak for itself.

Your thinking is incorrect. As I showed before, psychology shows almost everybody will ask for the charger if it’s considered “free” because that is how our brains work. So then there’s no dent made in the waste problem, in fact it’s worse because of shipping separately.

 

[MacModMachine]

Was it included when one originally purchased the device? I usually list what is and is not included that way there is no surprises. If something is not included such as a power adapter the buyer either will negotiate a lower price or walk away.

Usually these buyers are coming from another platform.

usually not. I have sold 30+ iPhones. most already own an iPhone and were upgrading.

accessories rarely come with used items, to expect that is unreasonable. if you want it all original. buy new.

 

[cmaier]

I don’t have any USB-c bricks. None. I’d dislike spending for a new iPhone only to have to go get the brick separately. Maybe more than once as we transition the family.

You don't have to go get it separately. You can buy it at the same time as the phone. Just like many people buy a case, a screen protector, or other accessories.

 

[smorrissey]

Good good.

 

[ericwn]

I feel Apple had an opportunity here, if it claimed people have a draw full of unused USB-A 5W chargers that their provided rather than higher Wattage chargers or USB-C chargers sooner the consumer would not be in this particular issue. Why did Apple not offer a trade-in/up option for those 5W chargers and wired EarPods. If you are going to claim being all for the environment offer solutions with options not just, hey you must already have one so there you go, what if you sold your old iPhone with the charger and Lightening to USB-A cable the guess what buy either Apple’s USB-C charger or another.

If I stand corrected I don’t believe the basic warranty covers damage from third-party USB-C power adapter, unless the language has changed with iPhone 12.

It’s not a charity though. Paying $20 for an Apple charger, in the rare case you need one, is fine. It’s a stock trading company marketing some greener elements in their lineup. It’s still a business and we are free to vote with our money.

 

[ericwn]

Not everyone has extra chargers. I think the problem here is that some of you can’t fathom that others might live life a little differently and possibly not hoard a bunch of charger bricks.

Not to mention, they got rid of the brick the very same year they changed the brick-facing tip of the cable to USB-C. Tell me if you can - where exactly is that hypothetical drawer of old USB-C charger bricks if they’ve never sold an iPhone with a USB-C charger brick?

And folks here would complain if it were the old fashioned legacy a style regardless. Not everyone may have extra chargers, but with North of 1.5 billion active Apple devices, bloody plenty people do.

Luckily there are cheap and affordable wireless charging options and lightning charging options (for those who missed the port in the last 9 years) widely and readily available from third parties from Amazon to your local gas station or supermarket.

 

[iBreatheApple]

You don’t. It charges just fine with a USB-A charger. It charges with the charger and cable from an old iPhone 5.

But not with the one that was included. If the idea is that “you already have plenty of these,” why include a usb C cable? Furthermore I’d think a huge number of people probably experience breaking down of a charging cable from an iPhone 5, even if they don’t abuse their equipment.

 

[spazzcat]

Once again, this is great news. I’m glad some countries are at least realizing what a dumb move this is fuelled entirely by financial motivation and nothing to do with environmental impact.

They changed the charger the same time they got rid of it from the box. Tell me more about how we’re supposed to use our existing USBC bricks that we got with our iPhone….?

They sell charger bricks separately in a ton of packaging and at exorbitant prices and they just got called out for it.

Bravo, next country now please.

iPhone will just go up there...

 

[gaanee]

I usually charge iPhone by connecting to the laptop USB port or occasionally plug it in wall USB outlets (not sure if those are safe in terms of voltage surge). However, I feel that Apple should have made it optional for customers to request a charger if they need because the old chargers are USB-A and the new cable is USB-C.
Apple has also not reduced the iPhone price. The concern is it could set a precedent for not including essential accessories, in the future if Apple goes port-less, they can force everyone to buy a wireless charger separately in addition to the iPhone price.

 

[iGobbleoff]

lol "environmental" reasons. They're a sales company, pure and simple. Maximise profits. The environmental excuse is a croc of ****.

 

[ericwn]

Basically there seems to be two trains of thought here:
1) I want Apple to include chargers in the box because I think it's a consumer right
2) PEOPLE IN 1 ARE DUMB AND ENTITLED AND SHOULDNT COMPLAIN, GO BUY AN ANDROID

People in bucket 2 need to calm down, seriously. You won't get anyone agreeing with you by posting this way. Instead, try finding a more productive way of showing your opinion that doesn't involve trying to tell people how to live their lives or calling them entitled or whiny or whatever. We have certain consumer rights written into law and Brazil is simply enforcing them as is their right.

Hirarious. You wrote a gazzillion enraged posts about a product you don’t seem to have and then summarize that everyone who disagrees with your entitlement needs to calm down. LOL

 

[ericwn]

Look at what you're doing, though. I came in here agreeing with Brazil and got nothing back but "IGNORANT" "OBTUSE" "ENTITLED" "BARKING" "WHINY".

Don't forget, those 16 pages are publicly visible.

Yeah, you and Brazil had a hard time here.

 

[ericwn]

Well in that case it won't have been for a lack of trying. Some of us out there still take consumer rights seriously.

That’s excellent. Been explained above that chargers are not a right.

 

[ericwn]

If you already bought iPhones and you like iOS and iPhones, very few are going to shift just because the charger is not included.

If you are an Android user, Apples decisions don't affect you, and you shouldn't care.

Exactly. On Android you get the same from Samsung, other soon to follow. The kindle method, Amazon has been doing this for a decade.

 

[ericwn]

I don't consider getting a charger or batteries or cables with a product as a consumer right.

I don't even consider being able to use a procuct without additional costs a consumer right.

We should be extremely careful in dictating how companies do their business when it comes to pricing and how they package their products.

Well said, because they aren’t. Neither is the filling station I need for my pickup truck.

 

[ericwn]

Doesn’t take a business major to see that all Apple will do now is add the charger, increase the price, and profit. It’s ultimately the Brazilians that will be paying the $2 million fine and then some.

Plus all the rather strong taxation they have going on already. But yes, they’ll likely ship a bigger box containing two items instead of one from their nearest depot.

 

[I7guy]

I don’t know man.

If you think your argument hold any water, then don’t blame consumer when their iPhone start on fire for using third party charger.

Consumers have been using third party chargers prior to the iphone 12. That's why Apple made "a stink" about them years ago.

You cannot in one hand, saying it is OK for Apple not including charger because you can use pretty much any charging accessories.

Then on other hand, when **** happens, you are blaming consumer for using non-Apple charger.

If you have both way, it is essentially saying, you must pay a fortune to buy Apple branded charger. If you want iPhone, pay up for the phone and charger.

What next? Apple clam that people already have lots of boxes, so all you get is a phone?

I think some of this is just exaggeration. I'm not having this both ways, it's up to the consumer to determine if a charger is safe. Consumers have been using third party non-mfi charging bricks prior to the iphone 12.

 

[I7guy]

You bring up a good point, the difference is that consumers consider a computer, tablet, smartphone as main products not accessories like smart watches, wireless earphones/buds, etc. Accessory manufacturers were depending on people who use their product such as headphones will be in compliment with a smartphone, tablet, computer, etc that does (did) come with a power adapter or some form of aux port on the device to charge it. iPhone does not have a method to charge other devices but iPad Pro/Air with USB-C does as well as a computer.

The question remains does Apple now consider an iPhone as an accessory and expects consumers to charge it via iPad/Mac/Qi/MagSafe/power adapter.

In my own opinion, it doesn't matter if the iphone is considered an accessory or not. My main point was the USB charging solutions for the iphone are ubiquitous. The iphone 12 has been out for a few months and some of this is water under the bridge. For those who didn't have a charging solution for the iphone 12, they already have one by now.

 

[ericwn]

But chances are that amount of storage was fine when you originally purchased it and probably for some time afterwards.

Wait 5 minutes and someone here will demand that Apple provide her with free storage upgrades.

 

[I7guy]

We already explained why they may not have the accessories, you're simply ignoring that evidence.

If Samsung does it, it doesn't make it any more ethical, moral, or just. Just because multiple companies get cheap, doesn't let Apple off the hook. In fact, it means they started the trend. LOL

We who? This is already a done deal and according to Apple the iphone 12 has sold very well. If there was this hue and cry I could understand, but it doesn't seem to have made a difference to the consumers. The might be some who are off put by the lack of charger, and went to android, but we will never know what the ramifications were. It's not this this is unethical not moral or any other description, it's what Apple and Samsung are doing and consumers can vote by not purchasing those products that don't meet their criteria.

 

[I7guy]

Difference being, your Bose came with a USB-A tip which has been the industry standard for a very long time. USB-C hasn't, and Apple has never sold an iPhone with a USB-C brick. It's changing the port AND removing the brick in 1 move that caused all the anger honestly.

The lightning port and USB-A and charging bricks have been around since the iphone 5 in 2012. Almost 10 years. The iphone 12 has sold like mad (according to Apple and others) for a few months. As I said above if the phone didn't meet a potential customers criteria, they went somewhere else, either iphone 11 or other iphone model or android. But that ship has already sailed.

If a customer has spare chargers and bricks, they would use those, else they would purchase a USB-C. Either way I don't see this as a deal breaker. And sure some are angry, some are ambivalent. But it's a done deal and there doesn't seem to be any ramifications on Apples' part.

 

[leonardoasm]

That’s excellent. Been explained above that chargers are not a right.

If there is a court decision that selling phones with an extra charger is tied selling then chargers are a right.

If big corporations cared so much about the environment new iPhones wouldn’t come out every year. Apple would focus on giving you the most durable and long lasting phone that they could possibly make, but that’s not how capitalism works. It’s naive to think a company would put the environment over profit at any circumstance.

 

[ericwn]

If there is a court decision that selling phones with an extra charger is tied selling then chargers are a right.

If big corporations cared so much about the environment new iPhones wouldn’t come out every year. Apple would focus on giving you the most durable and long lasting phone that they could possibly make, but that’s not how capitalism works. It’s naive to think a company would put the environment over profit at any circumstance.

Luckily the fine in this case is not for not bundling as someone explained earlier on. Apple was not fined for not adhering to consumer law.

 

[Delta-NC]

Deleted.

 

[leonardoasm]

Well if you sell your old charger with your old phone you need to buy the higher spec faster charger which happens to fit your shiney new USB-C cable for a mere €19. Shock horror! Or go buy the Samsung one I saw on sale today at a special offer of €11, it’s pins don’t fold but it’s cheaper. Out of interest if you would struggle to buy an €11 fast charger why on Earth would you be selling your old iPhone and upgrading to a new model?

So just again, explain to me why it was important that between me, my parents, and my brothers family (oh yes I counted earlier!) 17 chargers had to be manufacturer (pollution) shipped (double box sizes mean double shipments, pollution) and then left in the boxes unused just because you feel you personally are being ripped of by €19 on a phone you have no obligation to buy?

Enjoy your new Android when you get it! (Not a Samsung though, they‘re not doing the chargers included now either).

By this logic you could say why would someone upgrade their phones 17 times if they are trying to reduce carbon emissions.

I’m not judging people who upgrade every year because they like it, but the environmental problem is much more related to our lavish patterns of consumerism than it is to a phone without a charger. It’s easy to expect that a company will change their ways so you can have your new phone every year and not feel guilty about it, but ultimately it’s your decision to buy what they’re selling and the impact is on your hands as much as it is on theirs.

That is why it’s very hard to think that the whole charger situation is solely related to environmental damage. Maybe it does make a difference in the environment, but I think it’s hard to believe that a company which its sole purpose is to grow and make money is somehow interested in doing this just because they care about the rainforests.