Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Law Firm Investigating Potential for Class Action Suit Against Rite Aid and CVS for Blocking Apple Pay

I don't know what they consider the grounds for the lawsuit, but I would think that while each individual store can choose to accept certain types of payment, the fact that they are colluding with each other to block a competitors payment system or forfeit $500,000 seems like antitrust territory.

Also I would think the primary target would be MCX?
 
Never mind Apple Pay. What about the potential damage that their ban on NFC is doing to the MasterCard, VISA and American Express Tap and Go brands such as PayWave? These are not mobile payments so shouldn't be covered by an NFC ban, yet they are, or are they? You could forgive customers for being confused.

There's another aspect to all this. It could be argued that any system that requires a drivers license with limited exceptions effectively discriminates against people with a disability who can't get a drivers license because of that disability.
 
Don't shop CVS or RITEAID.!!! Shop where the stores appreciate your business. Not where you can't pay in the format you want. Screw Riteaid and CVS for degrading the customers that create their bottom line.
Discrimination of payment is a serious matter and 2014 is when companies should pay by losing sales
Privacy and security are the Kings of payment as well as cash
 
charlitos said:
They ACTIVELY disabled a form of payment that has 0 effect on their already existing payment methods and fees just so that they can push for their own solution.
Click to expand...

^^ so what? they don't have to take a competitive form of payment. of course they are going to only support their own solution. this is business.

The issue is, is consortium legally allowed to use its market power to force the disablement of any competing forms or methods of payment.
Click to expand...

Sure. Consumers opt-into shopping at the store. They aren't forced to shop somewhere that doesn't take NFC payments. No different than doctors don't have to accept all insurance plans (forms of payment) even though they have the infrastructure to do so.
 
nostresshere said:
This is insane.

A merchant can opt to accept or NOT accept any of these:

cash
credit cards
PayPay
Bitcoin
Livestock
Produce
Visa but not Amex
checks
credit card with ID
gift cards
etc

THIS IS INSANE

Actually, childish is more like it
Click to expand...

Actually NO. Yes a "merchant" can do all those things. But when a "group" of merchants/businesses conspire together to do what MCX is doing it may in fact be a violation of Antitrust laws.
 
H2SO4 said:
Not quite sure how I feel about this. Americans sure do seem to love a court case though.

How is it any different from not accepting certain credit/debit/charge cards though?
Click to expand...

The Difference between them not accepting certain cards at all and blocking NFC is that they accepted it before and only blocked it to stop Apple pay and limit competition for their payment method with no reasonable reason other than that. It's an anti-competition law suit
 
Radio said:
You guys are sick!

This is a petty lawsuit

I can't even go to mom and pops restaurant without cash

Should we sue them?!
Click to expand...

100% agree. What if Apple sues the pants off every merchant in America because they refuse to accept this form of payment? How would Tim Cook like it if I sue him because he's gay? Where do you draw the line?
 
nostresshere said:
This is insane.

A merchant can opt to accept or NOT accept any of these:

cash
credit cards
PayPay
Bitcoin
Livestock
Produce
Visa but not Amex
checks
credit card with ID
gift cards
etc

THIS IS INSANE

Actually, childish is more like it
Click to expand...

Untrue:

Cash MUST be accepted by law
 
cdmoore74 said:
100% agree. What if Apple sues the pants off every merchant in America because they refuse to accept this form of payment? How would Tim Cook like it if I sue him because he's gay? Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...

You could draw the line at Antitrust laws.

Also, if you read the article, it's not Apple involved in this potential lawsuit.
 
Last edited:
I'm suing for stores not accepting monopoly money. When I bought the monopoly money I thought $5 was the exchange rate for 4 million monopoly dollars. Why can't I use these funds?
 
handsome pete said:
Of course they pay themselves. Out of the settlement resulting from the outcome.

While the settlement may be fairly punitive, the consumers hardly ever win out on these types of lawsuits. It's the lawyers that end up cashing in.
Click to expand...

And I'd "pay myself" working as a programmer if I had taken that job offer last week.
 
This won't turn out well. This is not the approach that should be taken. The only ones who will get the best deal out of this is the lawyers, and will probably be a massive step back in getting Apple Pay (or NFC in general) into stores. Can't really force a private business to accept a payment system that they have to pay for.

To combat it, all they will do is remove the NFC terminals, therefore "solving" the problem.
 
Finally, we can see some of these companies being shut down and their money will be returned to the shareholders. I just love Michael Dell's words.
 
flaw600 said:
Untrue:

Cash MUST be accepted by law
Click to expand...

Untrue. You're like the 900th person in this thread to say this. Sad to say but all 900 of you are wrong.

There is no law stating that my business has to accept cash please stop the misconception. All the stupid thing on the dollar bill means is that it's money. The only law is that I must accept "dollars" not "cash"- the dollars can be in any form, be it, credit cards, Apple Pay, etc.

I can also make you pay in Chickens If I wanted. Do. Your. Research. Please. http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm

Also, try paying Amazon or eBay in cash. Thought so.

Stop posting this please!

Once again, there. Is. No. Law. !!!!

Do your research before you type and spread fake laws throughout the Internet.

I know I may be over reacting but I felt that I've typed this about fifty times in every thread involving Apple Pay.
 
rjohnstone said:
You need to get your head examined if you believe MCX has this level of power over Apple Pay's viability.
Click to expand...
You apparently don't realize that Walmart is often the only retailer in many towns to carry whole classes of goods, since they've driven all their smaller competition out of business 10-20 years ago, right?
 
Their decision for CurrentC might be wrong, but the companies should change the direction on their own, not forced by lawyers.
 
dontwalkhand said:
Untrue. You're like the 900th person in this thread to say this. Sad to say but all 900 of you are wrong.

There is no law stating that my business has to accept cash please stop the misconception. All the stupid thing on the dollar bill means is that it's money. The only law is that I must accept "dollars" not "cash"- the dollars can be in any form, be it, credit cards, Apple Pay, etc.

I can also make you pay in Chickens If I wanted. Do. Your. Research. Please. http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm

Also, try paying Amazon or eBay in cash. Thought so.

Stop posting this please!

Once again, there. Is. No. Law. !!!!

Do your research before you type and spread fake laws throughout the Internet.

I know I may be over reacting but I felt that I've typed this about fifty times in every thread involving Apple Pay.
Click to expand...
That's right. Ironically Apple doesn't accept cash (for iPhones) which upset people.
Here's another explanation:
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/business-career/legal/can-businesses-refuse-accept-cash
 
Last edited:
Meanwhile, we've seen articles about Apple monopolizing supplies to make products and monopolizing Fed Ex and other shippers to deliver those products. Where is antitrust in those instances?
 
FieldingMellish said:
Meanwhile, we've seen articles about Apple monopolizing supplies to make products and monopolizing Fed Ex and other shippers to deliver those products. Where is antitrust in those instances?
Click to expand...
Saturation of the delivery or supply chain is nothing like colluding to cut out competition unless they colluded with fedex (in this example) to restrict supply.
I don't know where you got monopolozing out of these stories.
 
Mike MA said:
Their decision for CurrentC might be wrong, but the companies should change the direction on their own, not forced by lawyers.
Click to expand...

If they are conspiring in a way that breaks antitrust laws, then they shouldn't get away with it.

Lawyers won't force anything because I doubt anyone did anything illegal. These are just lawyers trying to get publicity and more business by exploiting a popular news story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back