Everyone claiming this is a made-up issue seems to imagine that the court decided this case based on a few internet posts and rumors. I can assure you that both sides introduced many expert testimonials from engineers, and that these cases only get decided in favor of the plaintiffs when there is overwhelming technical evidence, presented by experts conducting many independent tests. More than the rough tests by Anandtech or Consumer Reports, this outcome is evidence that scientific testing shows something was distinctly dysfunctional about the iP4 antenna. This engineering evidence was presumably augmented with a wide array of survey data showing the same thing. Saying that you've never yourself had a problem, or no one you know has, or that Gizmodo or Consumer Report's tests were spurious is all irrelevant. Court cases are not decided with this stuff, but with much, much more scientific evidence.
The nice thing about having millions on the line is that it amasses pretty good evidence. The bad thing is that, unless there is some incentive for the plaintiffs, the hard work assembling those engineers and surveys won't get done, and outcomes will default to the rich and powerful. Hence the need for the class action lawsuit. That said, I agree that $15 is essentially useless, especially when compared to a nice payout for the law firm. But the solution there is not to pay the law firm less, but to pay the plaintiffs more. My 3G phone drops calls all the time; if I discovered that many of those drops were due to negligence on the part of the designing engineers at Apple, I would deserve redress not just for the cost of repairing the flaw, but for the damage to my time and reputation for all those calls lost. That should be much more than $15. Sadly, the "punishment" part of the class-action fee essentially goes all to the law firm, and the plaintiffs themselves just get this trivial repair fee. That should be fixed -- especially when the complaint is something much more significant than this one -- but again, it is flaw in the class-action system, not a reason to abolish it. Without it, large companies would be able to cut engineering corners whenever the damages were small -- and for consumer electronics, this would cover the whole product, since even the whole cost of the product is nowhere near incentive enough for a single individual to sue. Of course, in lieu of class-action suits we could have much strong government regulations (and lawsuits) enforcing companies to do well by their consumers, but this is America, and no one seems to want that.
