Apple Sued Over Meltdown and Spectre in U.S. as iPhone Slowdown Lawsuits Now Total 45

[haydn!]

My understanding of the process Apple and others must follow in the event they're made aware of a bug, is they have X amount of time to acknowledge/address the issue before it should be made public. This window is to protect customers as if a vulnerability is shared before a fix is available, customers are at higher risk.

If in this case, Intel, Apple and others acted within the allowed timeframe, then what have they done wrong? They protected customers by not making details of the vulnerability public. They've addressed it with appropriate patches. I'm not sure what making customers aware earlier would have achieved, other than unnecessary and avoidable panic and risk.

I can see that case going nowhere.

The battery cases... it's a different matter but my personal view is that the only thing Apple is guilty of is poor communication. What they're doing actually makes sense. Given the choice, I'm sure most customers, given the choice, would opt for marginal drops in performance during peak processor activity over random shutdowns. But lets see what the courts decide there.

 

[CTHarrryH]

Lawyers should be sued - I really wonder how they hold their heads up. If Apple changed their boxes from white to blue dozens of lawyers would sue.
What an embarrassment.
And what many people don't realize that in the long run Apple doesn't pay we do - these legal costs and settlements are just calculate into the price of products. Same with all lawsuits - the customer ends up paying - all cost just go into prices.

 

[Neepman]

Well... there is truth to that.
BUT... lets say an entity purposefully cheats each customer out of $1.00
And, they have 20 million customers.
That is $20 Million a year... 1 dollar at a time.

Now, how would anyone sue that company for this $1 damage? You cant. You won't.

So... a class can collectively "police" this type of behavior.

Is there another way? And a way that serves as a deterrent to the next company?

Yes but when more than half of that money goes to the attorneys and the "costs" associated with the case and a lot of the cases are near-shams, thats a problem.

 

[iMi]

I hope these lawsuits just cost a bunch of *******s some money. Also, don't complain when Apple updates the terms of service to make it clear that you do not own the software that lives on your device and that they get to do whatever they want with it. That's where this is headed...

And yes, you will still buy the device. You can say you won't. But you will.

 

[Moorepheus]

In case anyone cares, the actual recently affected iPhones were benchmarked a few days ago. Not much performance change for iPhones 7 to X, but whopping 40% performance drop for anything A8 like the iPhone 6 and I suspect the iPad Air 2. I think that 40% drop due to Spectre and Meltdown patch and the 30% drop due to the battery throttling basically renders any iPhone 6 unusable (my opinion). Likely anything older than the A8 would suffer even bigger performance drops with the patch.

Link: https://www.gsmarena.com/spectre_an...rmance_impact_on_iphone_8_plus-news-29132.php

Link 2 (iPhone 6-specific): https://www.gsmarena.com/iphone_6_takes_massive_performance_hit_after_spectre_patch-news-29124.php

Not sure if these are identical to the numbers quoted already.

I saw no changes in performance after 11.2.2. My numbers for my 7+ are in line with numbers I had before the update. Which are in line with numbers from when the 7 was first released.

 

[iMi]

Lawyers should be sued - I really wonder how they hold their heads up. If Apple changed their boxes from white to blue dozens of lawyers would sue.
What an embarrassment.
And what many people don't realize that in the long run Apple doesn't pay we do - these legal costs and settlements are just calculate into the price of products. Same with all lawsuits - the customer ends up paying - all cost just go into prices.

Exactly. There is even a South Park episode that illustrates this concept, in the ridiculous, over-the-top way that only South Park can deliver... It must be a decade old now. Still rings true.

 

[lolkthxbai]

i don’t see this getting as much traction as the plaintiffs think because they’d have to prove malicious intent to really get a huge settlement and initially it just doesn’t seem like that was the intention of the tweaks made to iOS 10.2.1

 

[jasonsmith_88]

...compensate all iPhone users who have experienced slowdowns, offer free battery replacements...

Excellent idea. Also, I'm starting a lawsuit against every company who produces battery powered devices because none of them are producing batteries that last forever and it's unacceptable. I don't care about the physics of battery technology. If you sell a device with a battery, that battery should last forever, and every consumer in the world should be entitled to free battery replacements and compensation for life. Go team!

 

[gnasher729]

More horse-hockey hyperbole with numbers pulled from the latest Wikipedia article on the matter.

Here's what will happen. Lawyers claim "up to 30% slowdown". Apple says: "Prove it". Lawyers say "Here's a Wikipedia article". Apple: (Edits the Wikipedia article, shows it to the judge): "Look here, 40% faster!"

 

[Wawajey]

Let them sue Apple, in South Africa, if you want want to replace the iPhone 6s battery under their new battery replacement they keep your phone for a week, we can’t l live with out our phones Apple

 

[deferredAnon]

VS shutting down. At least be intellectually honest.

No iPhone 6's was shutting down. No iPhone 7 was shutting down. Facts.

 

[Act3]

You're not entitled to any particular clock speed at any given time. You have no idea what you're talking about and neither does anyone filing suit.

Apple is the one touting speeds. Of course we are entitled to what is advertised and claimed after we spent our money on it. There is no mention of throttling as a feature in that press release.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2015/09/09Apple-Introduces-iPhone-6s-iPhone-6s-Plus/

"A9, Apple’s third-generation 64-bit chip powers these innovations with 70 percent faster CPU and 90 percent faster GPU performance than the A8, all with gains in energy efficiency for great battery life."

 

[EdT]

My understanding of the process Apple and others must follow in the event they're made aware of a bug, is they have X amount of time to acknowledge/address the issue before it should be made public. This window is to protect customers as if a vulnerability is shared before a fix is available, customers are at higher risk.

If in this case, Intel, Apple and others acted within the allowed timeframe, then what have they done wrong? They protected customers by not making details of the vulnerability public. They've addressed it with appropriate patches. I'm not sure what making customers aware earlier would have achieved, other than unnecessary and avoidable panic and risk.

I can see that case going nowhere.

The battery cases... it's a different matter but my personal view is that the only thing Apple is guilty of is poor communication. What they're doing actually makes sense. Given the choice, I'm sure most customers, given the choice, would opt for marginal drops in performance during peak processor activity over random shutdowns. But lets see what the courts decide there.

I agree, but the phrase “given the choice” is where Apple failed. They ‘fixed’ the problem without saying WHAT they did, or why. Users also were stuck with the solution whether they wanted it or not. The bad press from admitting that their batteries’ life wasn’t very good would have been mild compared to the route they chose.

 

[a.gomez]

The battery cases... it's a different matter but my personal view is that the only thing Apple is guilty of is poor communication. What they're doing actually makes sense. Given the choice, I'm sure most customers, given the choice, would opt for marginal drops in performance during peak processor activity over random shutdowns. But lets see what the courts decide there.

Yeah, If aunt Betty walked into an Apple store and said "my phone is running slow" and the Genius said "that could be you need a new battery" they would have an out.

But they didn't - so now Aunt Betty who went and bought a new phone or just lived with it can go after them.

All they need to do is ahow Apple had a financial gain from that "poor communication" (intentionally or not) and they are done.

 

[craig1410]

Totally missed my point, but thanks.

It doesn’t take 7 months to patch a bug with testing data that you’ve been handed on a silver platter. With the proper motivation, there is no way it should take 7 months.

However with the “proper motivation” there is every reason for it to take longer than 7 months.

And you are basing your assumptions on what exactly? Direct experience? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[robertcoogan]

So how is any of this Apple's fault?

The only thing Apple is at fault for is the degraded battery issue (and they admitted it and offered lower cost battery replacements, and anyone who accuses them of doing it to goose iPhone sales would have to prove it). One would have to also prove that Apple acted maliciously (unlikely) or irresponsibly (likely).

The Spectre and Meltdown lawsuits also would have to demonstrate the same. However, in that case, Apple isn't likely to suffer greatly, as they didn't make the processors, and one would have to prove that they knew about the flaw and purposely didn't do anything about it (most likely they purposely didn't say anything until a patch was available). Which is why that lawsuit is pretty much doomed to failure (my guess, anyway). The only people who gain from this are lawyers.

 

[doctor-don]

Sue the hackers - then OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

 

[TiggrToo]

No iPhone 6's was shutting down. No iPhone 7 was shutting down. Facts.

The point I believe being that the alternative was to do nothing and end up with phones shutting down with 50% battery life reported just because the user fired up Waze.

 

[swamprock]

Another money grab where the constituents of the class action stand to gain a tiny amount and the lawyers walk away with a multi-million dollar settlement! One of the lowest forms of the legal world.

... and one of the biggest scams perpetuated on the ignorant. Yet another reason why "mo money mo money " is no way to live a happy life, IMO.

 

[brentsg]

Yes, making a hardware fix is very difficult, expensive, if not impossible in the late stages. Doesn't excuse apple of releasing a product with a known defect. Takata knew about their air bags hurling shrapnels but continued to sell them. Takata then got sued into bankruptcy. With Apple, if certain security breaches occurred using spectre/meltdown after the known fact, like a hack on transunion where everybody's social security numbers got stolen, there will be a lot of pain for apple. My opinion is, if Apple released a security patch quickly after the discovery, then Apple will probably get off scotch free. But 10.2.2 was only released last week. 6 months window where a lot of bad things can happen.

Not that anyone is interested in being fair, but this is pretty unprecedented. These exploits affect just about every chip designed by anyone that would still be in operation. It's really an attack on some pretty fundamental design philosophies.

 

[swamprock]

Steve Jobs would have never allowed this to happen. Yet another boneheaded decision by Tim Cook! Now pardon me while I buy yet another Apple product for the sole purpose of whining about it.

Even if Apple didn't exist, people would find something to whine about. Being a victim is the in-thing these days...

 

[2807]

Yes but when more than half of that money goes to the attorneys and the "costs" associated with the case and a lot of the cases are near-shams, thats a problem.

All of these cases face a defense.
That defense ALWAYS has the opportunity to show it is a "sham" and if proven, the case is over.

So, it is "Shams" you are against?
Aren't we all?

I think it is clear that this issue is more than a sham to many people.
So, let them have their day in court.

Folks may disagree, but that is the whole purpose of the Court.
Get the facts, apply them to the law...and see what kind of society we make.
We can change the law too, if enough are unhappy with the result.

The system works.
It is frustrating.
But, it has purpose.

 

[MadDawg2020]

Yes, we throttle your phones. Why of course it is a feature!

2018 when people are okay with their phones being throttled.

Ummm ? Try READING and learning facts, instead of posting ignorant comments.

 

[Morgenland]

If the headline had been read "Jacqueline L Olson, aged 42, and Anthony Keith Bartling Sr, aged 48, looking for the last chance to make fast money", nobody would have read the article.

 

[TiggrToo]

All they need to do is ahow Apple had a financial gain from that "poor communication" (intentionally or not) and they are done.

Wrong, even in a class action the members have to prove they were affected. Normally this comes down to receipts or other such proof to show a member owned a thing or was contracted to a service.

What's going to be significantly harder to prove us that Aunt Betty would have not brought a new phone anyway, or she'd have not done it if her phone had started shutting down at 50% battery.

That's going to be monumentally hard to prove, infinitely more so in a class action lawsuit.