I actually think this was probably consumer hostile as well, maybe toys and games should probably come with batteries - it was always very unpleasant opening up a toy and finding it had no batteries - then hoping that you had some in the house. There are tradeoffs to be made here, consumer rights vs waste vs cost, where we decide to find that balance is for the citizens of a country to decide. Apparently in this particular case this is where they have decided to place that point on the scale.
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 Must Compensate Brazilian Customer Over $1,000 for Selling iPhone Without a Charger, Judge Rules
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is a massive difference in scale between unit’s of MacBooks and units of iPhones. Additionally An 80 watt MacBook brick is not a common item. I’m guessing many people have a way to charge many usb accessories and phones in 2022.
I think most of these comments are missing the point to some degree.
On the one hand you DO need A charger to use the phone.
On the other hand, you DON'T need APPLE'S charger to use the phone.
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of chargers available withe either USB-A or USB-C that provide the minimum power required to charge the phone (heck, most of us even have computers that could charge the phone.) Most of these devices are both a better value and better designed and/or more durable than Apple's own devices.
Based on the above, I think that chargers for an iPhone are a commodity. It is no longer a matter of Apple selling a device and then charging customers extra to buy their proprietary charger. It could be argued Apple's Lightning port is proprietary, but Apple includes a lighting cable in the box, so, to me, this is a mute point.
Would it be nice for customers if Apple offered some sort of charger with the purchase of an iPhone? Definitely, especially if this is the first lightning powered device they are buying. Should Apple be FORCED to include one with every device? I think not.
Finally, let's be honest; how many people actually actively use the 5W charger Apple would have included with the phone? If the number is above 50% I would be shocked. If it is above 25% I'd still be surprised. I know I don't use it unless I happen to only need a phone charger on a trip (it's a nice size.) I usually need more capability than is provided by that charger, so this is very infrequent. To make things worse, I probably have at least 5 of them lying around the house. I think Apple is justified in removing e-waste from their products.
If I have a flawed logic I'd be interested to hear it.
P.s. I do realize most people in Brazil are stretching to buy an iPhone because incomes are so small relative to the price of the phone. I think there might be a bit of an argument to Apple being required to sell the device with a charger in this case only because it could be damaging to the buyer. Granted, in the any free market, the buyer is responsible for their own purchases.... Maybe Apple should be required to offer a warning that buying the phone will require the purchase of a charger or maybe the list price of the phone include a charger and if you don't need it you'd get a discount?
P.p.s. I realize my logic is only applies if it doesn't go against an already established law that requires the charger. In that case, Apple should be following the law. They are welcome to lobby or whatever to try and change the law, but as long as the law stands, they are required to comply.
On the one hand you DO need A charger to use the phone.
On the other hand, you DON'T need APPLE'S charger to use the phone.
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of chargers available withe either USB-A or USB-C that provide the minimum power required to charge the phone (heck, most of us even have computers that could charge the phone.) Most of these devices are both a better value and better designed and/or more durable than Apple's own devices.
Based on the above, I think that chargers for an iPhone are a commodity. It is no longer a matter of Apple selling a device and then charging customers extra to buy their proprietary charger. It could be argued Apple's Lightning port is proprietary, but Apple includes a lighting cable in the box, so, to me, this is a mute point.
Would it be nice for customers if Apple offered some sort of charger with the purchase of an iPhone? Definitely, especially if this is the first lightning powered device they are buying. Should Apple be FORCED to include one with every device? I think not.
Finally, let's be honest; how many people actually actively use the 5W charger Apple would have included with the phone? If the number is above 50% I would be shocked. If it is above 25% I'd still be surprised. I know I don't use it unless I happen to only need a phone charger on a trip (it's a nice size.) I usually need more capability than is provided by that charger, so this is very infrequent. To make things worse, I probably have at least 5 of them lying around the house. I think Apple is justified in removing e-waste from their products.
If I have a flawed logic I'd be interested to hear it.
P.s. I do realize most people in Brazil are stretching to buy an iPhone because incomes are so small relative to the price of the phone. I think there might be a bit of an argument to Apple being required to sell the device with a charger in this case only because it could be damaging to the buyer. Granted, in the any free market, the buyer is responsible for their own purchases.... Maybe Apple should be required to offer a warning that buying the phone will require the purchase of a charger or maybe the list price of the phone include a charger and if you don't need it you'd get a discount?
P.p.s. I realize my logic is only applies if it doesn't go against an already established law that requires the charger. In that case, Apple should be following the law. They are welcome to lobby or whatever to try and change the law, but as long as the law stands, they are required to comply.
The article was about a $1000 fine for an inexpensive brick.
No accusation.
Follow your own advice?
This might not be such a bad place to be either, I have I think 3 of Apple's 100W USB-C chargers so I definitely don't need more of them. The Brazil the law might not allow it, but if we (as a society) decide the tradeoffs are worth the costs it is a direction we might want to go.
I think not including a commodity with your device is ok. It might not be in the best interest of the customer and your relationship with them, but I don't think it can be called "hostile." Granted, what defines a "commodity" does get a little nebulous.
Imagine if Apple just gave a charger to the people who asked, a charger which likely costs them $1 to manufacture.
Someone isn't getting their cost-analysis bonus this year.
Apple, Samsung etc will always follow the law. However laws targeting specifically apple, for example, could probably be met with a Supreme Court challenge. And unintended consequences could cause accessories that rely on lightning, micro usb , usb/c etc to include chargers.
Who ever said anything bout an 80 watt charger. Most 18 watt chargers can power up a MacBook Air slowly. So yes it is a very common item. So your ok with that then? Or do you find the whole premise silly by now?
It’s a common item if you have a MacBook, else it’s not a common item. No I dont find the premise silly. Include a charger , don’t include a charger. I will vote with my $$$ as needed.
Do they though? It seems like Apple (in this case) is ignoring the law since the were previously warned and fined for not providing chargers at no additional cost.
I definitely think this law could have unintended consequences if it does cause accessories to require included chargers then perhaps it needs to be re-written/challenged (since that will likely lead to huge amounts of e-waste).
As I've said above, if we decide that the tradeoffs are worth it (waste vs convenience vs cost) then maybe nothing should include a charger or even a cable, after all, most people have cables too, I have at least a dozen micro-usb cables and plenty of USB-C to lightning cables. Maybe on the first generation of a new port and cable standard you include the cable (to save on packaging) but don't in subsequent generations?
Please, stop the comedy act. Is Apple receiving weekly fines in the Netherlands because it is following the law?
I didn't realize the Mac limited the output because other thunderbolt devices can output 100W.
Are you using USB 3 to come up with 5W? I was using USB 2, at 2.5W since that's what most existing USB ports are. I don't think it is reasonable to assume people have USB 3 ports. Maybe in the US, but not globally.
This is the correct ruling, IMO. If Apple sold the iPhone with an industry standard port for charging, like USB-C, then I can see Apple not having to be required to include a charger. But, the iPhone uses a proprietary connector that it licenses to companies (from which Apple receives payment for those companies to use it).
If an iPhone customer were to buy a 3rd party lightning charger and the phone were to suffer damage (directly due to the charger or not), Apple would say that the use of that 3rd party charger was the cause. Of course, by not providing the charger, Apple provides itself with plausible deniability and helps 3rd parties by increasing sales... win/win... for Apple and accessory makers, not so much a win for consumers.
If an iPhone customer were to buy a 3rd party lightning charger and the phone were to suffer damage (directly due to the charger or not), Apple would say that the use of that 3rd party charger was the cause. Of course, by not providing the charger, Apple provides itself with plausible deniability and helps 3rd parties by increasing sales... win/win... for Apple and accessory makers, not so much a win for consumers.
If I buy a PlayStation, does it automatically come with games?
if I buy a Playstation game, does it come with a Playstation?
if I buy a car does it come with gas, or a gas station?
if I buy frozen raviolis, do they come with a stove, and electricity, and a house, and bowls, and utensils?
if I buy glasses, do they come with glasses cleaner for the inevitable circumstance of them getting dirty and I can’t see through them?
if I buy a plant, am I automatically supplied with the cup to pour the water with? (No, I might already have a cup which I can use, kind of like how I might already have a power adapter).
the funny thing is that many of the same folks who complain about Apple not including a power adapter in the box also complain that Apple has an unfair advantage in shipping their own stock apps on their devices, like Safari, Photos, etc. It’s unfair that Apple ships stock device usage apps? Yeah, that’d be great if you start up your iPhone and you can’t surf the web or send messages.
The thing is, i lean toward the side of “you should get a power adapter as part of the package”. But the moral extremism of the folks who are just so upset by adapters not being included really confuses me. It’s not black and white.
Yeah you’re right. A nearly 3T company should be able to afford it. Thanks for pricing my point. Corporations aren’t your friend.
Just play that trick of saying free charger if asked and increase the price of the phone to cover the cost of charger. Like "free shipping". Or hell bake the price of "free charger" into all apple goods and call it price increase due to supplier price increases. The price game they all play.
Absolutely insane. No, that would be like not including a new lighting port because the old phone had one. A charger is a peripheral which someone might reasonably already have, ACCESSIBLE. Not something built into the device. Does it take any sort of mechanical knowledge to plug in an existing power adapter? This analogy war is BIZARRE.
They could do that. Or…stay with me..maybe they’re actually trying to reduce the amount of unnecessary plastic waste being shipped, which that solution wouldn’t address….
It only takes a moment to confirm that Apple did not report 25% more units sold or even a year over year 25% increase in profits in 2021. Even the iPhone 12 only managed to break 21% year over year increase for a single quarter. Services revenues were up 24% but that was only $19 B. Overall revenue was up 29% YOY but profits were only up 22% YOY which meant they made the spread on services and increased hardware sales volume and not product margins. In case you forgot, the big story was iPhones were less profitable despite higher sales prices and Apple was doubling down on services.
Not surprised, you cannot make a one decision fits all laws ideas. Apple full well knows that, it knows exactly what the consumer laws are in the difference countries it sells in, it hires a huge compliance and law team to understand them. It most likely assumes it could get away with it, or any fines like this are so small it's not worth abiding by the laws as it makes more money ignoring them.
So these are different levels of extreme on your own examples, additionally you're taking the law (which I assume is narrowly applied) and trying to generalize it to different product categories and purchasing flows than it was designed for.
Reasonable expectations based on past history are an important part of the equation, as are purchase categories (food, electronics, accessories) and expected workflows in life. We all expect the roads to get to work to be provided and not something we have to build ourselves. It is very difficult to come up with absolute general rules for what is required to be included in any given purchase given how varied life and what we buy in the course of a year and given the practicalities of the world. But we may have expectations based on past purchases, and sometimes the government sets those expectations into law. It also depends on how things fit into life, and as the world changes we change our expectations and laws accordingly.
If that were the case they wouldn't wrap every single device they make in plastic.
Let’s say you need to hire 200 people. That’s really small lol.