Exactly right. Class action plaintiffs rarely get a fact pattern this good. It seems to be uncontroverted that Apple knew when it gave the demo that it was fabricated, that it did not at that time have the ability to provide the promised features, and that it had no roadmap for providing the features during a reasonable time. It then knowingly sold the iPhone 16 based primarily on the nonexistent features. The complaint practically writes itself.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Hit With More Class Action Lawsuits Over Delayed Siri Features in U.S. and Canada
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I find this kind of lawsuits pathetic. Yet, don’t know if it would fall well with SEC.
Having said this don’t think Apple intended to be so so late. I think is one of those management issues that Apple has been exposing in the last 4 years. Kind of following Microsoft lead in the practice. Announce first, paint it like it’s awesome for the year, deliver 2
years later with lots bugs, 5 years later still waiting for something robust. Meanwhile let us face lift, change the UI and naming of things because … well you just asked for it.
Having said this don’t think Apple intended to be so so late. I think is one of those management issues that Apple has been exposing in the last 4 years. Kind of following Microsoft lead in the practice. Announce first, paint it like it’s awesome for the year, deliver 2
years later with lots bugs, 5 years later still waiting for something robust. Meanwhile let us face lift, change the UI and naming of things because … well you just asked for it.
Last edited:
Very good point. At this point, we shouldn't believe anything Apple says based on a presentation alone.
I should sue MS for breaking Excel and Word font management to the point the apps won’t open in latest macos.
I have to say - although im usually pro-Apple and try not to be overly critical having worked in IT development and understand some of the issues that can arise....
... on this occasion Apple deserves this. Not so much the class action although we are talking about litigious Americans who will sue for anything so it was inevitable...
But to completely fabricate a commercial showcasing Siri working in a way it couldnt at the time is inexcusable. Why they did this I cant fathom and for sure iPhone 16s were sold on this promise AND people who may have sat out the 16 and waited another year to upgrade their phone purely on this promise should rightly feel annoyed.
I appreciate Apple may have thought at the time they could meet their deadline to get this working by 18.4 but it goes to show the risks of over promising stuff in WWDC unless they are certain they can deliver. This is happening more and more with WWDC features being later and later. I dont see the point of announcing things that wont be ready until the following WWDC!
But, to make a commercial which was 100% simulated was very foolish and they will quite rightly feel some pain for that.
... on this occasion Apple deserves this. Not so much the class action although we are talking about litigious Americans who will sue for anything so it was inevitable...
But to completely fabricate a commercial showcasing Siri working in a way it couldnt at the time is inexcusable. Why they did this I cant fathom and for sure iPhone 16s were sold on this promise AND people who may have sat out the 16 and waited another year to upgrade their phone purely on this promise should rightly feel annoyed.
I appreciate Apple may have thought at the time they could meet their deadline to get this working by 18.4 but it goes to show the risks of over promising stuff in WWDC unless they are certain they can deliver. This is happening more and more with WWDC features being later and later. I dont see the point of announcing things that wont be ready until the following WWDC!
But, to make a commercial which was 100% simulated was very foolish and they will quite rightly feel some pain for that.
"The two named plaintiffs said they never would have purchased or been willing to pay as much for an iPhone 16 had they known that Apple's marketing surrounding the features was false and misleading."
If you believe this, I have a bridge to sell to you. Either way, Apple brought this onto itself.
If you believe this, I have a bridge to sell to you. Either way, Apple brought this onto itself.
it depends what is argued. That one ad included vaporware. Is a company allowed to run ads for a product or feature that doesn’t exist? Or is Apple going to argue it all falls under the Apple Intelligence broad marketing umbrella and since some features shipped it doesn’t matter if this one doesn’t exist?
Normally I kinda scoff at most of these class action lawsuits. But it was incredibly deceptive by Apple to advertise something that didn't exist at the time -- and still doesn't exist now. Why should they be able to get away with that? It's like me making a golf ball advertisement saying "No more lost golf balls! There's a chip inside that you can track your golf balls with." And then ship them without the chip or have anything close to it being ready for customers to purchase.
I don't know what you could do about it though. Even if Apple gets hit with a huge fine, I doubt if it would make any difference to a company as massive they are. Other than give it some bad publicity of course.
Which makes me wonder. You know how Apple wants to name things itself instead of using the usual terms to describe something. Like instead of Artificial Intelligence it's now "Apple Intelligence" to try and own their own brand of AI. If it's successful it can be a great marketing gimmick. Though the way it's going now, it could very well be a negative term -- that is, more like a joke instead of a product that people will want.
I don't know what you could do about it though. Even if Apple gets hit with a huge fine, I doubt if it would make any difference to a company as massive they are. Other than give it some bad publicity of course.
Which makes me wonder. You know how Apple wants to name things itself instead of using the usual terms to describe something. Like instead of Artificial Intelligence it's now "Apple Intelligence" to try and own their own brand of AI. If it's successful it can be a great marketing gimmick. Though the way it's going now, it could very well be a negative term -- that is, more like a joke instead of a product that people will want.
Good. I don’t have the patience for your Apple negativity either. Not today or tomorrow. Apple intelligence works on every iPhone. You may not like the level of implementation but that’s another story.
Other than a bunch of nice hardware updates to the iPhone 16, which Apple does every year, Apple intelligence is a software feature that hopefully over time will be thoughtfully in an Apple like way into iOS. The fact that it is late, AI is an evolving technology and the smartphone vendors are tripping over themselves to showcase their “useful” features”. Imo, somewhat things relate. I’d rather Apple be late and better than earlier and screw it up.
My two uses for Siri are "set a timer for 11:15" to time the coffee making and set an alarm for a time and it works. That is all it was originally designed to do and at least that function is not disabled by all the other non-operative code in the ever getting bigger program file.
Be thankful for the one or two functions that still work.....
The cell phone, email (I use Spark) and web browser work so the basic functionality of the original model have been slightly improved but more importantly still work.
Everything else is "glitz". Kind of like comparing a Chevy to a Cadillac. Today's basic guts are the same in both vehicles. The Caddy has lots of do dads that might still work in a year while the chevy just works.....
We bought two new iPhone 16 Pro Max models with max memory when they came out as we figured there could be tariffs on the 17s depending on the election results. We made the smart choice for us. Will be interesting to watch and see if Apple is still here in four years.
There are NO guarantees in this life except death and taxes
Be thankful for the one or two functions that still work.....
The cell phone, email (I use Spark) and web browser work so the basic functionality of the original model have been slightly improved but more importantly still work.
Everything else is "glitz". Kind of like comparing a Chevy to a Cadillac. Today's basic guts are the same in both vehicles. The Caddy has lots of do dads that might still work in a year while the chevy just works.....
We bought two new iPhone 16 Pro Max models with max memory when they came out as we figured there could be tariffs on the 17s depending on the election results. We made the smart choice for us. Will be interesting to watch and see if Apple is still here in four years.
There are NO guarantees in this life except death and taxes
Yes, we definitely need to make it harder for normal consumers to sue multinational trillion-dollar corporations with legal teams the size of small cities who cut corners and scam, injure, or sometimes even kill their customers, vendors, partners, and employees.
Tim Cook appreciates your free service.
Apple seemed to think AI was enough of a selling point to cook up an elaborate fake feature demonstration and to make AI the focus of their advertising campaign. Are you saying that you know more about Apple's target market than Apple does?
I guess I was just reiterating your point, while also pointing out that it doesn't matter *why* people are buying the new phones...that's not the point of the class action lawsuit.Right, and I said this in my original post.
I’m saying MR posters seem to. However not sure how much of it was fake. SJ went through 3 or 4 iPhones at the iPhone 4 intro. Was that fake as well?
The iPhone 4 demonstration was nearly 15 years ago when smartphones were still a relatively new thing, was done in-person in front of a live audience, and featured actual devices showcasing actual functionality. The subject of this lawsuit is centred around a pre-recorded infomercial promising completed functionality that was so vapourous that even the engineers charged with creating it had never seen it before. This comparison is beyond dishonest.