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

Lawsuit Over AT&T's iPhone Exclusivity Gains Class Action Status

Why does everyone think that everything apple does should be open source?

I just don't get stories like this. Apple have always had specific carriers in set counties and only recently has this changed in the UK. Apple are:) after all a private company who are free to do deals with whoever they chose. Like any other company you should make your choice whether to buy their products in light of this. As far as unlocking the iPhone stands the only thing I remember Apple saying is that they would unlock the iPod part of the iPhone if you wished to terminate your contract. As far as Apple is concerned I do not think this possition has changed, but if gou wish to 'jail break' your phone that is your prorogative but again Apple are not then responsible for what happens with any future iOS or other updates.:):):)

Spence
 
i just got my old 3G unlocked for free =) THX EU!!!!!

and what's with the diff frequencies BS in the US, thx god we dont have that here either
 
This whole thing based upon some psychotic view that A: everyone has a right to have an iPhone and that B: the iPhone is some unique thing apart from what only about 50 other phones essentially offer duplicate functionality. So fail.
 
Wow as much as I love my country (not so much the prez) we sue for fricken everything. If they win (witch they not likely won't) the only thing they could accomplish is getting out of there contracts. So there spending legal fees to cover I think like 300$. Excuse me if im wrong but this is crazy.
 
iRobertM said:
Nothing tops "I burnt myself with hot coffee, you should of had a warning!"
Click to expand...

Although the actual Liebeck case concerned far more than just a missing label. McDonald's served coffee at 190 degrees, which the woman accidentally spilled on her legs. She got third degree burns and scars after that, and McDonald's offered a ridiculously low compensation. In my opinion, the outcome of the case was far more reasonable, and yet everyone sees it as a bad example of the typical 'lawsuit society' America supposedly has.

I think that the lawsuit is quite understandable, but I despise American class actions suits. Consider the thousands if not millions of people that join the lawsuit, it could hurt Apple or AT&T considerably. However, both firms should consider that not all customers want to stick with a specific operator just because Apple says so. In several European countries, this agreement has led to unreasonable prices in comparison to other non-iPhone data plans. I would love to see more competition between mobile operators. Let's hope Apple drops the operator exclusiveness after this lawsuit.
 
spanading said:
I just don't get stories like this. Apple have always had specific carriers in set counties and only recently has this changed in the UK. Apple are:) after all a private company who are free to do deals with whoever they chose. Like any other company you should make your choice whether to buy their products in light of this. As far as unlocking the iPhone stands the only thing I remember Apple saying is that they would unlock the iPod part of the iPhone if you wished to terminate your contract. As far as Apple is concerned I do not think this possition has changed, but if gou wish to 'jail break' your phone that is your prorogative but again Apple are not then responsible for what happens with any future iOS or other updates.:):):)

Spence
Click to expand...

do you know you cannot use it as iPod with out the SIM in there right?
 
Who wants a 2-year old phone anyway?

I agree that ATT should "unlock" phones after the 2-year agreement.

However, there are no other providers in the US that can work with visual voicemail. Am I wrong?

But most importantly, after what I saw from the iPhone 4 frenzy, no one wants their phone after a year. Everyone wants the latest and greatest. After getting the new iPhone, I retired an original iPhone and wouldn't want to burden any family members with it (no OS4 support; no 3G; no GPS; slow). So are there really a lot of consumers that want a 2 year old phone?
 
batmccoy said:
I agree that ATT should "unlock" phones after the 2-year agreement.

However, there are no other providers in the US that can work with visual voicemail. Am I wrong?

But most importantly, after what I saw from the iPhone 4 frenzy, no one wants their phone after a year. Everyone wants the latest and greatest. After getting the new iPhone, I retired an original iPhone and wouldn't want to burden any family members with it (no OS4 support; no 3G; no GPS; slow). So are there really a lot of consumers that want a 2 year old phone?
Click to expand...

original iPhone is still good for iPod and as a phone, not every one needs greatest and latest ...
 
andiwm2003 said:
Why not T-Mobile? It's the largest carrier with the best coverage in the entire country. They cover about 99% of the area and basically the entire population. My experiences where pretty good with them, high speed, no dropped calls.
Click to expand...

Cause t-mobile stupidly made their 3G network have different frequencies than everyone else so the iPhone wouldn't be able to use it.
 
SO many people here have no idea what this is about... if you signed up for a 2-year contract and got a subsidized phone, then after the 2 years are up you should have the right to take your phone to another network (GSM of course). That Apple will not unlock the phone means you are TIED to AT&T if you want to continue using the phone that YOU PAID FOR through your 2 year contract.

The simplest resolution would be to unlock the phones at the end of a 2 year contract, so you can use it on another network or sell it as you see fit.
 
I wonder how much a monthly contract for wireless service would cost if you didn't subsidize the phone? I still like my phone, but if I keep it longer than 2 years I'm overpaying for my phone subsidizing wireless service.
 
Doesn't mean anything to me, an iPhone user

Yay, lawyers are going to make a ton of money either way! I was part of the class action lawsuit with Verizon and the 175 fee they used to charge. Did I see a penny of the money that was supposed to be dealt out? No, it went to the lawyers. This is such a rigged system.
 
Right on. I'm glad this is coming About. When I fulfill my obligation to AT&T, I should be able to take my phone to another compatible carrier, not back door contracted to AT&T.
 
jlseattle said:
Yay, lawyers are going to make a ton of money either way! I was part of the class action lawsuit with Verizon and the 175 fee they used to charge. Did I see a penny of the money that was supposed to be dealt out? No, it went to the lawyers. This is such a rigged system.
Click to expand...

Well, I can see a couple of things happening.
1. Apple is forced to unlock all iPhones that are at the end of the 2 year contract.
2. We'll find out once and for all how long this exclusivity agreement actually is.
 
thedoctor9 said:
Wow, class action lawsuit for the exclusivity of the iphone with AT&T. Well..... all I can say is, United States of America!!!
Click to expand...
Where else? :p
Cartaphilus said:
Isn't is just wonderful that all iPhone customers may eventually, after five years of litigation get a $5 coupon to buy AT&T accessories for their iPhones, while the class action lawyers pocket millions?
Click to expand...
Totally see this happening..:rolleyes:
 
Off-Topic

bretm said:
Pour McDonalds coffee on one leg and starbucks on the other. McDs still will burn the crap out of you. Im pretty sure it stops boiling right before they hand it to you. I used to think that suit was ridiculous til I realized just how hot it was.
Click to expand...

I know it's off-topic, but the woman who got burned from the coffee received 3rd-degree burns from dropping it on her crotch moving it to the cup holder. It turns out, McDonald's knowingly made their coffee hotter by about 5-10ºC then their competitors because people did not drink their coffee right away. Worse, internal documents indicated that 3rd-degree burns were a possibility but the data was ignored. I agree, when you hear the headline, the lawsuit sounds frivolous. But the details indicate a different story.

I can't judge if it was worth the millions awarded, but the lawsuit was anything but frivolous.

I happen to know the expert witness for this case, hence my knowledge.
 
Very glad

So I got my iPhone 4, going tomorrow to exchange it because guess what: proximity sensor doesn't work. I can't see how the replacement will work, but anyhow.
I asked to unlock my old iPhone 3G, and I was told I can't. So I have a gadget I can't use. That really ticks me off as this is something I bought, fulfilled the contract and now I can't use.
I say sue their behinds!

As for iPhone 4, Apple should recall those pieces of junk that can't be used for making phone calls. Sure they are cute, but worthless! :eek:
 
Dr Kevorkian94 said:
Wow as much as I love my country (not so much the prez) we sue for fricken everything. If they win (witch they not likely won't) the only thing they could accomplish is getting out of there contracts. So there spending legal fees to cover I think like 300$. Excuse me if im wrong but this is crazy.
Click to expand...

What makes you think they are spending anything on legal fees. Lawyers love these cases and take them on "No Win no Fee basis" The lawyers always hit the jackpot, these cases never come to court. There is almost always a settlement of some sort and the only one laughing all the way to the bank is the team of lawyers.
 
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