Florida Lawyer Sues Apple for Renting HD Movies on Non-HD Devices

Discussion in 'iOS Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jul 8, 2013.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Apple is being sued in a new class action suit (via GigaOM) led by Florida lawyer Scott Weiselberg, who accuses the company of allowing customers with older devices supporting only standard definition films to pay for and download higher quality content.
    According to the filing, Weiselberg rented and downloaded the high definition version of the movie "Big Daddy," before discovering that his iPhone did not support HD playback. HD content is often offered at a premium in the App Store, and Weiselberg says that he was "tricked" into paying an extra $1 for the content.

    While SD and HD content is clearly marked in the App Store, Weiselberg was not aware that his phone could not play HD content, and within the filing, he suggests that Apple should have automatically recognized the device type and prevented the purchase of HD content from an SD-only phone.

    HD playback was first introduced in 2008, alongside iTunes 8.0. At that time, older iPhones and iPod touches were not able to support the new format, allowing some mistaken purchases to be made. Apple has since changed the download process, introducing warnings and preventing HD content from being downloaded by SD device, but Weiselberg believes that SD options are still too difficult for users to find.

    The lawsuit seeks an unspecified amount of damages, plus interest, sustained by the Plaintiff and the Class, as well as legal fees.

    Article Link: Florida Lawyer Sues Apple for Renting HD Movies on Non-HD Devices
  2. Amazing Iceman macrumors 68040

    Amazing Iceman

    Nov 8, 2008
    Florida, U.S.A.
    This is so stupid... He could have just call Apple and ask to switch the format of his rental..

    And weird... A lawyer with an old phone??? he must be a bad lawyer that makes no money...
  3. komodrone macrumors 6502

    Apr 26, 2011
    You're a lawyer, you're not using a Retina device, and you're suing Apple for this fact. Stingy!
  4. TheKrs1 macrumors 6502

    Apr 11, 2010
    Option 1: Request refund

    Option 2: Learn for the future

    Option 3: SUE!

    Clearly the most rational choice is option 3.
  5. LastLine macrumors 65816

    Aug 24, 2005
    In fairness while this is a bit frivolous, you have to agree to some extent with the logic that a non HD capable device shouldn't offer HD films. Kinda how your iPhone can't see iPad only apps :)

    I'm sure a letter of complaint and request for a refund would have worked well enough though :p
  6. thadoggfather macrumors G4


    Oct 1, 2007
    Damages compensated: $1 and an ass kicking and waste of the lawyer's time and resources (so high opportunity cost)

    I like what he's getting at, that 13" non-retina/iPad2/mini/all iPhones don't output at 720p :D

    Still not a great approach dude.
  7. bacaramac macrumors 65816


    Dec 29, 2007
    Wow, just wow. Next lawsuit from this lawyer is they going to allow rental on HD devices and then sue when they watch it on their non HD iPhone since Apple is nice enough to support older devices that don't display HD.

    People seriously need to get a life.
  8. mattopotamus macrumors G5


    Jun 12, 2012
    People are ass hats when it comes to lawsuits.
  9. BaldiMac macrumors 604


    Jan 24, 2008
    That logic ignores the fact that you can transfer rentals to other devices, so there is a legitimate reason to offer HD content on non-HD devices.
  10. thedarkhalf macrumors member

    May 15, 2008
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but just cause you buy the movie on one device, that doesn't mean it's only playable on said device. I thought you could buy something on the iPhone and it would be available on your iPad, Laptop and AppleTV as well.

    Edit: Baldimac just answered my question :)
  11. Berti10 macrumors regular


    Jan 24, 2012
  12. lolkthxbai macrumors 65816


    May 7, 2011
    Why Weiselberg? Why? I'm tired of people like this making us normal Floridians look bad :/

    Seriously though, I think the only device that can't do HD playback is the 3GS (and previous models), iPad mini and iPad 2.

    And honestly, what's the definition of HD anyways...? It's so loosely used. I mean, the iPhone 5 is 640 x 1136 and 720p HD is 720 x 1280...
  13. jwdsail macrumors 6502

    Mar 3, 2004


    When you buy or rent on iTunes, the content is playable on any device tied to your AppleID, including a Mac, PC, or AppleTV that you may have hooked up to an HDTV....

    Just because I rent or buy it on one device, doesn't necessarily mean that I intend to watch it on that device.. How is Apple supposed to know???

    I suppose Apple could add a nanny/idiot dialogue that states, "We see you are currently using a non-HD Device. If you do not have an HD device (iPhone 5, AppleTV, Mac, PC, iPad (Current Generation)) that you intend to view this content on, would you prefer to order the SD version of ****?"

    I think that would get pretty f'in annoying after about a few rentals/purchases.....
  14. Carmenia83 macrumors 6502

    Feb 25, 2012
    You guys are missing the point. "Millions of people...paid a $1 premium" which means the attorney bringing the case would be entitled to a sizeable portion of the multimillion dollar class action suit as legal fees. Good return on his $1 investment.
  15. vmistery macrumors 6502a

    Apr 6, 2010
    I'm sure he is just doing it to provide us all with entertainment for an evening. Or free publicity
  16. nutmac macrumors 601

    Mar 30, 2004
    What's next? Sue Macy's for shirts that do not fit instead of returning them for refund?
  17. lolkthxbai macrumors 65816


    May 7, 2011
    Oh snap! Lets sue Netflix because I pay just as much as my friend and he gets HD movie streaming on his 40" HDTV but I don't on my 10 year old SD TV... Oh wait...
  18. odedia macrumors 65816

    Nov 24, 2005
    I actually agree with this one for a change. It's a classic "lets try to get away with it" scenario. The vast population wouldnt notice the fact that they paid the extra for no reason. And HD sounds like "It's much better!". These are millions and millions of dollars apple makes without giving the customer the premium product he paid for.

    Sometimes class action lawsuits are just a way to get companies to fix their mistakes.

    And for some lawyer to make a bucket of money, ofcourse...
  19. Wurm5150 macrumors regular

    Apr 28, 2010
    He should sue himself for renting a movie to watch on 3.5" screen on one count and another for renting an Adam Sandler movie.
  20. kaldezar macrumors regular

    May 28, 2008
    London, England
    Oh what a great idea, send this to the lawyer for a percentage of the settlement LOL:)
  21. nagromme macrumors G5


    May 2, 2002
    Apple screwed up, no question, and should return the extra dollar to everyone who made this mistake--nay, they should DOUBLE that amount as penalty. Even if that's many dozens of people. Then add legal fees.

    (Assuming Apple refused a refund, which I've never known them to do. It's been downright painless, even when the mistake is mine.)

    Not entirely true, I don't think: if you rent on a Mac/PC iTunes, you can transfer TO an iOS device. You can also transfer from one Mac/PC to another. But you cannot transfer a rental FROM an iOS device, last I knew. (And I think you should be able to.)
  22. ablashek macrumors member

    Apr 30, 2005
    The only crime i see here is that apple is charging people to see an Adam Sandler movie, they should offer it for free and be glad that a fraction of the population would willingly watch his movies.

    Sorry that was a low punch, sandler is decent and big daddy along with happy filmore and billy madison are decent flicks.
  23. Lancer macrumors 68020


    Jul 22, 2002

    I wouldn't sue, especially if it was for renting 'Big Daddy' :rolleyes:

    This is right up there with suing because your coffee is too hot!
  24. koruki macrumors 65816


    Aug 16, 2009
    New Zealand
    thats like a angry fat woman suing a shop that only sells small dresses. DON'T BUY IT FFS. Whose to say the low definition copy isnt the same price, I know for one thing my baby girls shoes cost just as much as mine
  25. rmwebs macrumors 68040

    Apr 6, 2007
    Back up a second, we have a bigger issue.

    Apple expecting $12.99 for Big Daddy in HD?! You are joking? It's in the £0.99 bargain bins in the UK (and available for free on Sky and Virgin TV on-demand).

Share This Page

136 July 8, 2013