Filing Lawsuit Against Apple - Please Read

[SilverTard]

After speaking with my lawyer (who happens to be my brother) I have decided to file a lawsuit against Apple for fraud. When I purchased my Mac Pro (which is a Mac Pro 1,1) it was represented that it was a 64-bit system, not a 64-bit system with 32-bit limitations.

I am now prevented from being able to upgrade my 64-bit machine to the 64-bit only operating system, Mountain Lion, due to a policy decision made by Apple AND fraud by misrepresenting the capabilities of this machine when it was sold to me. I feel that I have the right to receive what was represented to me, a 64-bit system. Nice way to try to force hardware sales Apple.

We have not yet decided if we wish to make this a class action (which it is looking like we might but there are some requirements my brother is still looking into) to seek relief for all of us that were mislead or if I am doing this as an individual action.

If you are interested in participating in this action with me if I decide to do this as a non class action suit please PM me so I have contact information for you in the future.

This should not be that expensive of a suit because I have all of the old Apple website pages from the time period and other advertising they submitted. It all pushed the Mac Pro as a fully functional 64-bit system. It is a very focused lawsuit with very limited claims. I will carry the burden of the cost of the suit and am not looking for money from you.

Apple, I am very disappointed with your company. Now I guess your business model permits for false advertising and misleading your customers. I have decided I am not going to take this without a fight. I have owned (and still do except for the iPhone) 3 iPhones, 2 iPads, a Macbook Pro, a Mac Pro and a Apple TV. I have been a good customer but now I am feeling very taken advantage of and I am very disappointed. I paid for a 64-bit functioning system not a non-functional 32-bit/64-bit hybrid.

 

[paulrbeers]

All of these posts about "suing" Apple over the Mac Pro 1,1. Question, when did Apple promise that they would support the Mac Pro 1,1 (or 2,1 for that matter) for eternity? When is it okay to stop supporting computer hard ware (since you seem to know better than Apple). Apple never stated it would support the Mac Pro 1,1 for 6+ years in writing did they? If you have that somewhere, please show us! If you can show where it states in writing they will support the Mac Pro 1,1 for 10 years, I will vote you up in a heart beat. Until then, there is no basis for this lawsuit... Just a disgruntled consumer who wants to tie up our courts in more frivolous lawsuits.

 

[Mal]

Expect to be laughed out of court. Your machine was not misrepresented, and you are not being defrauded. Just because they have additional requirements for Mountain Lion (which came out 6 years after that computer and all of it's marketing documentation was created) beyond a 64-bit processor, does not entitle you to damages from that lack, nor does it mean that there was any misrepresentation on Apple's part. If you attempted to purchase and install Mountain Lion and found that it wouldn't work, the most you could possibly expect is a refund of your $20.

jW

 

[G4DP]

All of these posts about "suing" Apple over the Mac Pro 1,1. Question, when did Apple promise that they would support the Mac Pro 1,1 (or 2,1 for that matter) for eternity? When is it okay to stop supporting computer hard ware (since you seem to know better than Apple). Apple never stated it would support the Mac Pro 1,1 for 6+ years in writing did they? If you have that somewhere, please show us! If you can show where it states in writing they will support the Mac Pro 1,1 for 10 years, I will vote you up in a heart beat. Until then, there is no basis for this lawsuit... Just a disgruntled consumer who wants to tie up our courts in more frivolous lawsuits.

Why respond with the same rubbish then?

Apple lied, they stated that the 1,1 was a fully 64bit capable computer. Nowhere does it mention in Apples material that it has a 32bit EFI.

 

[SilverTard]

Expect to be laughed out of court. Your machine was not misrepresented, and you are not being defrauded. Just because they have additional requirements for Mountain Lion (which came out 6 years after that computer and all of it's marketing documentation was created) beyond a 64-bit processor, does not entitle you to damages from that lack, nor does it mean that there was any misrepresentation on Apple's part. If you attempted to purchase and install Mountain Lion and found that it wouldn't work, the most you could possibly expect is a refund of your $20.

jW

Incorrect. It was represented to be a "Fully operation 64-bit operating system". In black and white, their words not mine. Look, I doubt you are an attorney so please stop playing armchair attorney.

It is NOT a fully operational 64-bit system and they made the DECISION to not support the system (posts in their own developer areas) despite the fact they represented it as 64-bit.

If we get this fired up as a class action I highly doubt THEY WILL BE LAUGHING.

I am going to do all I can now to do this as a class action.

There are a lot of Mac Pro 1,1 owners that just got screwed.

 

[paulrbeers]

Why respond with the same rubbish then?

Apple lied, they stated that the 1,1 was a fully 64bit capable computer. Nowhere does it mention in Apples material that it has a 32bit EFI.

Great! Then find the documentation and get the ball rolling. Anyone looked into the statute of limitations? Although be prepared to prove that that was the true intent by Apple and what they meant was that it could run a 64bit OS and NOT just 64bit applications....

 

[SilverTard]

Incorrect. It was represented to be a "Fully operation 64-bit operating system". In black and white, their words not mine. Look, I doubt you are an attorney so please stop playing armchair attorney.

It is NOT a fully operational 64-bit system and they made the DECISION to not support the system (posts in their own developer areas) despite the fact they represented it as 64-bit.

If we get this fired up as a class action I highly doubt THEY WILL BE LAUGHING.

I am going to do all I can now to do this as a class action.

There are a lot of Mac Pro 1,1 owners that just got screwed.

Stupid typo....

a "Fully Operational 64-Bit System"

----------

Great! Then sue them based on that! Although not sure what the statute of limitations are on suiting for misrepresenting a product 6 years after the fact. Suing because it won't run an OS that didn't even come out until 6 years after the computer was released is rubbish.

It is not out of SOL. Plus, the problem was not discovered as a limitation nor became a problem until Apple made this latest step. NOW it is a problem. Plus, the act might have been INTENTIONAL to force additional purchases.

There is a whole can of worms here and I am sure as more and more people come forward with information we will find more and more intentional actions.

----------

Great! Then find the documentation and get the ball rolling. Anyone looked into the statute of limitations? Although be prepared to prove that that was the true intent by Apple and what they meant was that it could run a 64bit OS and NOT just 64bit applications....

It is beyond the level of responsibility of a consumer to have to be expected to read Apples mind. Most people would assume that a "Fully functional 64-bit system" means exact that "It is fully functional". The court would not allow them to use that as an excuse.

Anyone with a right mind would assume that a 64-Bit Intel Processor in a "Fully Functional 64-Bit System" would be, well 64-bit, not saddled down with some 32-bit limitation that was not advertised .... ANYWHERE.

 

[MonkeySee....]

Incorrect. It was represented to be a "Fully operation 64-bit operating system". In black and white, their words not mine. Look, I doubt you are an attorney so please stop playing armchair attorney.

It is NOT a fully operational 64-bit system and they made the DECISION to not support the system (posts in their own developer areas) despite the fact they represented it as 64-bit.

If we get this fired up as a class action I highly doubt THEY WILL BE LAUGHING.

I am going to do all I can now to do this as a class action.

There are a lot of Mac Pro 1,1 owners that just got screwed.

Rude much?

Why post this on McRumours any way? Can't you just update your blog or myspace page?

 

[GermanyChris]

I don't think they'll be laughing, but scared is not the word I'd use either. They've stared down Samsung, Moto, LG and other who are also their suppliers. If you lose I believe you can be forced to pay their legal bill, which might be "expensive"

 

[SilverTard]

I don't think they'll be laughing, but scared is not the word I'd use either. They've stared down Samsung, Moto, LG and other who are also their suppliers. If you lose I believe you can be forced to pay their legal bill, which might be "expensive"

I can not believe they buried my thread in here. Nobody will see it. Thanks mods.

----------

Rude much?

Why post this on McRumours any way? Can't you just update your blog or myspace page?

Well, perhaps because there are Mac Pro 1,1 owners here that need to be aware of what I am doing because it will affect them? Think much?

 

[Heilage]

I can not believe they buried my thread in here. Nobody will see it. Thanks mods.

Oh, don't worry. The word of this hilarity will spread.

 

[yg17]

I can not believe they buried my thread in here. Nobody will see it. Thanks mods.

LOL, you don't know how a forum works, do you?

 

[SilverTard]

Oh, don't worry. The word of this hilarity will spread.

There is nothing funny about it.

Apple represented, IN WRITING, in multiple places that the Mac Pro was a, and I quote them directly, "A Fully Functional 64-Bit System".

Do you understand what FULLY FUNCTIONAL means?

I really don't care if you agree with me or not. I want them to supply me a FULLY FUNCTIONAL 64-BIT system that can run their latest Operating System. I feel that anyone that was UNFORTUNATE enough to be duped by these people deserve to be supplied with what they purchased, simple.

 

[MonkeySee....]

Please let us know how you get on. I'll be on the edge of my seat

 

[thewitt]

The only one more foolish in this than you, is your brother the lawyer...

 

[SilverTard]

The only one more foolish in this than you, is your brother the lawyer...

LOL. Alright pal. My brother happens to be a very successful attorney of 25+ years that now has a large firm with over 40 lawyers working for him.

I will take his opinion over yours any day.

You do realize that in the case of a non-class action suit there is a 99% chance they will just settle out and fix the problem (their deception when they sold this to me) by providing me a new machine (or motherboard to fix the problem) then litigate this matter? They will have to hire a firm in Florida to represent them (or send an internal attorney) and the costs to do that will way exceed the costs of simply fixing this problem BY FAR.

One way or another I will be made whole. Laugh all you want, but they WILL address this issue. Why do you think most businesses insurance companies will just step up to offer slip and fall folks $8,000-$10,000 to "just settle". It is way more cost effective then to litigate, bear the costs and then on top of it possibly have a $25-50K ruling.

Trust me, Apple will just want this to go away. All I want is what I paid for and that is a "Fully Functional 64-Bit System". Easy.

Actually, I have a fair expectation that will respond intelligently to the letter my brother is sending them in ADVANCE of us having to file. We are giving them the opportunity to address this PRIOR to use having to file a suit against them. If they choose not to address it directly we will use the courts to do it. I doubt they would like to go through the discovery process where will will ask for their engineering notes and such. Can you imagine the costs here for them?

I will be enjoying my replacement Mac Pro or Mac Pro motherboard soon where I will then have received what I paid for AND will be able to use the newest operating system and not be stuck on an obsolete platform (that was intentionally made so for marketing reasons).

Mounting Liar, looks like this might be the new Apple mode of operation.

 

[paulrbeers]

LOL. Alright pal. My brother happens to be a very successful attorney of 25+ years that now has a large firm with over 40 lawyers working for him.

I will take his opinion over yours any day.

Holy crap, your brother is a lawyer too? Mine has 30 years of experience and 50 lawyers working for him. My other brother is an Astronaut and has been to Space 12 times.

So glad Internet forums are anonymous. I think the use of LOL at the start of your post was the give-a-way....

You do realize that in the case of a non-class action suit there is a 99% chance they will just settle out and fix the problem (their deception when they sold this to me) by providing me a new machine (or motherboard to fix the problem) then litigate this matter? They will have to hire a firm in Florida to represent them (or send an internal attorney) and the costs to do that will way exceed the costs of simply fixing this problem BY FAR.

Or Apple chooses to fight your claim to make you an example for all other future law suits in which case you will lose your shirt in lawyer fees. Tread Lightly my friend.

 

[Pivs]

Can't you just update your blog or myspace page?

I think he'd need a 64-bit system for that

 

[t0rr3s]

I'm very interested to see how this pans out. Keep us updated OP and best of luck.

 

[SilverTard]

Or Apple chooses to fight your claim to make you an example for all other future law suits in which case you will lose your shirt in lawyer fees. Tread Lightly my friend.

Legal fees and court costs would not be available to them in this type of cases here under Florida State Law. Already checked with my brother.

We have a valid legal complaint here, this is not something based on use just making false claim. It is in BLACK AND WHITE, it THEIR published material, was on THEIR website. We have archived copies of their website from the correct time period and we have printed magazine advertisements as well.

Unless they find a way to redefine "Full Operational 64-bit System" then I say they wouldn't win anyhow.

Watch and learn young man.

----------

I'm very interested to see how this pans out. Keep us updated OP and best of luck.

I will, thank you.

We are sending their legal dept a letter today or tomorrow and based on their response we will do what we need to do.

We are going to give them an opportunity, pre-lit, to make me whole here. If they supply a new motherboard or refurb machine then I will feel like I received what I paid for and will just settle. I don't expect a new machine here, I am more then willing to be fair about this matter. If they refuse to do what is right and correct this deception then we will file suit... and ask for much more .... and win.

Florida is known for not going well for those that misrepresent. Because of the level of fraud that happens in this state the courts tend to not lean well toward the side of fraudsters and those that "misrepresent" their products or services.

 

[quagmire]

Oh boo hoo. I don't think you care about the whole 64 bit thing. You're just sore that you can't upgrade to Mountain Lion.

Welcome to the Apple universe. Go back to Microsoft if you want legacy hardware to always run the latest OS....

 

[Baytriple]

I guess you are in America. The land of suing.

In the real world. We spend an afternoon getting the Mac Pro all ready for running Mountain Lion through searching via google.

I have a Mac Pro 2,1 3ghz running Mountain Lion via Chameleon on another drive.

Such a sad a waste of time venture when you CAN run mountain lion seamlessly on Mac Pro 2007 2,1 at 11000 scoring on geek bench.

THE EVIDENCE!!! Not get the hell out of this suing mentality and get mountain lion running!

 

[GoCubsGo]

Your brother is a terrible lawyer. He should go for violation of the unfair and deceptive practices act which falls under consumer protection even if it doesn't apply to your situation. At least it'll sound cooler. Either way, you're foolish and should friend this dude and discuss case details.

 

[SilverTard]

Your brother is a terrible lawyer. He should go for violation of the unfair and deceptive practices act which falls under consumer protection even if it doesn't apply to your situation. At least it'll sound cooler. Either way, you're foolish and should friend this dude and discuss case details.

He is actually a great attorney and is paid very well by some very large companies for his firms services. He didn't grow a 40+ lawyer firm by being a crappy attorney.

Anyhow, I am sure he will look into all the angles including the consumer protection laws.

 

[Pivs]

He is actually a great attorney and is paid very well by some very large companies for his firms services. He didn't grow a 40+ lawyer firm by being a crappy attorney.

Sounds like this small matter of just a few thousand dollars is going to be a waste of his time then.