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 Sued Over Online Apple Store Receipts
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Eenu: they are not seeking "actual" damages. "Actual" damages are only one type of damages you can try to recover in a lawsuit. In this case, they have chosen to try to recover "statutory" damages instead of "actual" damages.
Look at paragraph 26:
"[] Plaintiffs and each of the Class Members are entitled to monetary relief under 15 U.S.C. s1681(n) of not less than $100 and not more than $1000 for each violation by Defendant . . . ."
"Statutory" damages are recoverable as provided for in the statute, and the plaintiff would not have to show that he or she has been harmed to recover them.
So, I think Arn has it right.
Suing another company
Don't worry about this lawsuit, it's not against our beloved Apple Inc., it's against a company called Apple Computers Inc...
Is that valid?
Don't worry about this lawsuit, it's not against our beloved Apple Inc., it's against a company called Apple Computers Inc...
Is that valid?
The attached documents look like the final order confirmation page and not what Apple sends in an email. If I'm not mistaken, most online retailers have similar pages that display similar info to close out an order.
I would since I'm not a fanboy. Apple is just another corporation who take my money everytime they can, and I'll take theirs anytime I can.If it were done where we could all go and collect money, how many of you would?
I wouldn't. I can't take money from Apple.
Got on the iPod battery $50 store credit as well.
An example of the receipt is in the Lawsuit. It is the last page of the online order process, where they tell you to "print this page".
As petty as it may seem, it would appear that the lawsuit has legal merit, especially since they encourage you to print the receipt.
As petty as it may seem, it would appear that the lawsuit has legal merit, especially since they encourage you to print the receipt.
This is a real, if minor issue. Apple should fix it. That's the end of story to me.... I don't know that people particularly need any kind of statutory damages. But this is essentially in our interest as consumers. Hmmm, anyway, I bought in 2007. I'd have to go back and check mail.app on my iMac to see what the e-mails look like, though.
um wow, i dont believe you've ever heard of an injunction???... thats when you sue someone so they stop the practicies that were harmful.
Printing is the same as showing on the screen?
The law says that the company can't print that info on the receipt, but they don't print it at all, the customers have to print the page from their computer. I guess it is against the spirit of the law though.
The law says that the company can't print that info on the receipt, but they don't print it at all, the customers have to print the page from their computer. I guess it is against the spirit of the law though.
So how much does Apple have to spend for this ridiculous lawsuit? Will you pay the lawyer fees to defend this then?
EDIT: err... I think you're right. article 27 does seem to indicate that they are just trying to get an injunction. They are laying everything out to prove what the consequences COULD have been.
Story updated
You can't have a system where the consumer is powerless. We live in a system of checks and balances, a law suit provides a mechanism for an independent party to hear the arguments of the consumer and rebuttal of the defendant and determine who is right.
However our justice system is more concerned with "winning" than it is in finding the truth and making the "right" decision most of the time.
Hey eenu, they are actually asking for money. I had to reread points 26 & 27 a couple of times but in the end it does make sense that they are asking $100-$1000 per violation.
In point 27 it says that since "actual" damage (that someone actually used the information from the receipts and committed fraud based on the data supplied to him/her from Apple" is small or difficult to quantify so they aren't suing for it. However, under they are suing for statuary damages which are the $100-$1000 dollars.
Under point 27 it also states that if some one actually DID receive "actual" damage they are entitled to sue Apple for that amount too.
And even though I love Apple they are obviously at fault here. It might have been a small oversight, a mistake by a new employee or whatever, but in the end it's real. The evidence they supply clearly shows that Apple did indeed violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act. It's nit picky and someone probably sat there looking for something to sue for but they found it since this definitely does carry legal merit.
In point 27 it says that since "actual" damage (that someone actually used the information from the receipts and committed fraud based on the data supplied to him/her from Apple" is small or difficult to quantify so they aren't suing for it. However, under they are suing for statuary damages which are the $100-$1000 dollars.
Under point 27 it also states that if some one actually DID receive "actual" damage they are entitled to sue Apple for that amount too.
And even though I love Apple they are obviously at fault here. It might have been a small oversight, a mistake by a new employee or whatever, but in the end it's real. The evidence they supply clearly shows that Apple did indeed violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act. It's nit picky and someone probably sat there looking for something to sue for but they found it since this definitely does carry legal merit.
I think the term 'receipt' and the encouragement regarding printing are the keys. I just ordered something from Amazon and the exact same info is displayed on the final page. The difference is that it isn't called a receipt and they don't ask you to print it.
This is *the* kind of system where a tort is appropriate. Apple is not complying with the law in a way that potentially endangers customers. Even if this were done privately without an actual lawsuit, Apple still should fix this and pay the legal fees involved. It's their *job* to follow the law.
If Apple was seriously sending out receipts with all that info on it they should be smacked with an idiocy lawsuit. Not like identity theft just showed up in the world this last year.
I'm glad the plaintiffs aren't seeking damages (from what people have posted above--haven't read that far into the report yet) and it seems like they are just trying to make Apple aware of their mistakes -- which is a good thing IMO.
I'm glad the plaintiffs aren't seeking damages (from what people have posted above--haven't read that far into the report yet) and it seems like they are just trying to make Apple aware of their mistakes -- which is a good thing IMO.
Actually, they _shouldn't_ fix it.
Whenever I order something on the internet, I first want a page displaying exactly what I am ordering and what addresses the goods and the invoice are sent to, so that I can check it, and then I print it out and if they send stuff to my neighbour I have some evidence that they got it wrong and not I. And second, the printout contains exactly the things that I would have printed out if I had ordered something by mailorder, where it is kind of difficult to order stuff without giving them your printed name and address, and whenever I send any business mail out I make a copy that I keep.
Note that this is not about information that is sent to your computer via email. This is information that is shown on your screen ten seconds after you typed your credit card number, and your address yourself
What is it with America?
Every second day I come to this site someone else is suing Apple. Sneeze in this country and there's a lawsuit?
Sove Global Warming by stopping the energy and paper being wasted with these cases.
Every second day I come to this site someone else is suing Apple. Sneeze in this country and there's a lawsuit?
Sove Global Warming by stopping the energy and paper being wasted with these cases.
Actual damages are different than the punitive damages of $100 to $1000. This means that the plaintiffs cannot prove that anybody actually had their identity stolen as a result of Apple. Even if somebody did have his identity stolen, the plaintiffs will not attempt to quantify those damages, and aren't asking for recovery of those damages. However, they are still asking that Apple pay the punitive damages, because they violated the law.
This isn't a frivolous law suit. If what the plaintiffs allege is true, then Apple violated the law, and they should be subject to the penalties. What if your identity is stolen as a result of Apple's violation of the law? It might not have happened yet, but it can.
No. The part of a complaint in which you tell the court what you want is called the Prayer for Relief -- this is the list of things you are asking the court to give you. The Prayer for Relief is the last thing in the document. Here, they list exactly what they want (this list appears just after paragraph 30):
A. Certification of a Class [and in the end, this is what they REALLY want, since a certification order would cause Apple to settle, most likely]
B. That the lawyers who filed the lawsuit be appointed class counsel [this impacts how much money they would get]
C. "Statutory damages" under 15 U.S.C. s1681n for each willful violation of as alleged herein.
D. Punitive damages.
E. Cost and attorney's fees.
F. Interest.
G. Injunctive relief.
H. Such other relief.....[this is a throw away you put in pretty much every complaint]
----------
So, aside from the class stuff, they are seeking statutory damages, punitive damages, their costs of suit, and injunctive relief. The original post is accurate.