??
Where in the world did you come up with this idea? So many ppl make broad sweeping statements like this with absolutely no knowledge or background. Class action lawsuits are NOT against companies who knowingly sell defective products and have no plan to fix them or refund people's money. There's no intent (scienter for you the legal heads) requirement at all.
Those of you who keep asking "why doesnt she just avail herself of the 30-day return policy" are completely missing the point of the class action lawsuit here, as well as forgetting that this doesn't solve the entirely plausible possibility that she could be beyond her 30 day return period. Or that she could even just have started experiencing these problems after the 2.0.1 release, which has happened to some people. Either way, her individual situation is not that important, as she is representing (or trying to represent) a class of consumers here.
The point is, she is suing for breach of an implied warranty. This is a breach of contract case. No intent for breach is required. If no express warranties/promises are made in the advertising or product packaging, then implied warranties are applied by operation of law. This means that you can sue even if they did not expressly promise that it will work. It is assumed when you buy a phone that it will reasonably function as a phone does. Normally, all that is required is that a Plaintiff did not receive the quality of the product that is to be
reasonably expected, and that she suffered damages (monetary or the equivalent) as a result of the breach. Either the product was not of the same quality as those generally acceptable in the trade, was not fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used, was not adequately labeled/packaged, or did not measure up to the promises or facts stated.
This is similar to the Netflix class-action lawsuit in which it was found that they breached their advertisement claims that constantly asserted that in 2 days (I think) you would receive a new movie. You can ask why don't the subscribers just cancel the service, but again, that misses the point. As a class-action plaintiff you are representing an entire class of people who have not received the same quality of a product or service that was either promised or is to be reasonably expected.
One caveat is the requirement that Apple has been given reasonable notice and a reasonable time to remedy the defect. This is all up for interpretation, but I'd say 2 months is not unreasonable and people have certainly suffered the equivalent of monetary damages here (think lost minutes, lost data use -- all convertible to monetary value). I don't believe this lawsuit is THAT unreasonable, given the widespread nature, and that some people can't even make or receive calls more than half the time. If this was an issue contained to AT&T, Apple would certainly have a defense that they are not the ones at fault here, but this seems to be a worldwide issue affecting many, and could very well be a hardware defect.
Class action lawsuits are for companies who knowingly sell defective products and have no plan to fix them or refund people's money.
If you take your phone to AT&T or Apple, they will mostly likely replace it, or refund your money. So, where's the wrongdoing here?
