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

Verizon Cracking Down on Customers Still Using Faulty Galaxy Note 7 Devices

I think there are two separate controversies here - legal and ethical. I don't know enough to really say one way or another if Verizon is in the clear from a legal standpoint. I suppose that would depend on what the contract signed in advance says they are allowed to do, but I honestly don't care. From an ethical standpoint, I think Verizon is doing the right thing. Ethics in this case should take precedent. If I heard about someone stealing one of these phones from an idiot who was using it in public to try and protect people, I would praise the thief, even though he/she would obviously be breaking the law by doing this. My take on that doesn't change if the vigilante is a company instead of a person, especially when the company in question is partially responsible for this phone being out in the wild in the first place.

Releasing a firmware update to purposefully brick the phones was the right thing to do. This new step is also refreshingly clever and sensible. These fanboys meet a literal definition of insanity in that their mental state has made them a danger to themselves and others. It makes every bit of sense for the rest of society to come together to try and stop them.
 
tann said:
Sorry but I don't get why this is still relevant for Macrumors, there will be people using this phone until they die. They're idiots but why does it matter to us anymore.
Click to expand...
Page views and slow apple news day. Agreed I'm wondering why mr post these none apple other than for bumping up traffic.
 
andiwm2003 said:
I'm confused by this. I can understand that Verizon recalls subsidized phones.

But was it possible to buy the phone outright and run it on another carrier? In that case who can simply say you have to return your property (even when keeping it is stupid). They can ban you from having it on a plane or in public places but they shouldn't be able to destroy your property even if they have good intentions. There are thousands of cars out there that are not street legal anymore but I still can own them. I can't drive them on public streets and it's probably stupid to try. But what would you say if BMW recalls your vintage M1 race edition and forces you to give it back because it's dangerous to drive?
Click to expand...
In support to your point, a lot of the vehicles out there are recalled for the Takata airbags which could potentially kill you and your passengers. Yet, it is not illegal to drive around in one of those vehicles.
 
AppleScruff1 said:
IMO, they shouldn't lift the ban. I know they aren't going to make the announcement forever, but there will always be a few people who will think nothing of bringing one with them on a plane.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I think the ban should always exist. Because there's probably likely someone who will jeopardize safety or cause some major lawsuit if they bring one onto a plane. Then which would result in the FAA dealing with legal ramifications and or scrutiny. Unless every carrier/Samsung can confirm that every Note 7 has been recalled, which we all know won't happen.
 
Flood123 said:
They will upgrade the first time they try to fly with those phones. Every Flight I have taken this year ( and there has been a lot of them) they have announced that the Galaxy Note S7 is not allowed on the aircraft.
Click to expand...

I'm probably assuming too much when I expect most of them to know their explosive collectors item is prohibited onboard every airline. I just hope the airlines/TSA agents are diligent and one doesn't end up causing problems on one of my flights. Again, I'm probably assuming too much.
 
I don't think the damage to Samsung has been done because they made mistake, everyone makes mistakes (remember the iPhone 4 antenna problem) i think it's because Samsung recalled those devices, and sent out a second batch that was suppose to have been fixed, clearly they wasn't and it resulted in more issues and more damage to the brand name.
 
DevNull0 said:
It most certainly is still my property. They sold it to me, I paid for it. They have zero right to ask for it back. And sending an update to kill it is deliberate destruction of property which they do not own or have a right to destroy.

If people had the right to recall property, can a new and struggling artist sell you a painting for $100. Then 30 years later when he's internationally renowned and his paintings are worth millions, he can "recall" his earlier works by issuing a refund of your original $100? Once a sale is complete, the seller can't reverse it without the consent of the buyer.
Click to expand...

Unless it's a mandatory recall on safety grounds. Then they do have the right to demand it back. I don't know whether Samsung issued a mandatory recall though in this case.

Regardless of the legality it's irresponsible to use a Note 7 in public where you could put other people at risk.

B4U said:
In support to your point, a lot of the vehicles out there are recalled for the Takata airbags which could potentially kill you and your passengers. Yet, it is not illegal to drive around in one of those vehicles.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of that particular recall but the difference here seems to me that I can make a conscious decision not to get into one of those vehicles. I can't make a conscious decision not to get on a plane that someone else has taken a Note 7 onto without my knowledge (unless I resfuse to get onto any plane).
 
fulles2000 said:
I can't make a conscious decision not to get on a plane that someone else has taken a Note 7 onto without my knowledge (unless I resfuse to get onto any plane).
Click to expand...

Mr T approves!

IMG_6498.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: fulles2000
It's their phone, they've paid for it and Verizon agreed to sell it period. The only problem I have is that those devices are dangerous for the owners and the public.
Maybe some of the retailers should offer a free upgrade instead of trying to lure N7 customers into outdated phones when the next generation is close to being ready
 
frankgrimes said:
It's their phone, they've paid for it and Verizon agreed to sell it period. The only problem I have is that those devices are dangerous for the owners and the public.
Maybe some of the retailers should offer a free upgrade instead of trying to lure N7 customers into outdated phones when the next generation is close to being ready
Click to expand...

What Samsung should do is offer a full refund, here in the UK I'm pretty sure people can insist as it's the law, under the sales of goods act anything that isn't fit for purpose must be replaced or a full refund given. Not sure if the same rules apply to other countries, but Samsung should be refunding people.
 
They should just send out a notification to them all - as you're not being responsible, we're going to blacklist your phone's IMEI on X date. After which, it will no longer work on any US carrier (not sure if there's still that global GSM blacklist or not).
 
Good. People are dumb if they keep a hazardous phone instead of getting a refund and some credits. Also it's a terrible phone anyway. Was going to switch out my 6s plus before all of this happened and thankfully I didn't. Wouldn't want to be stuck with another junk android phone.
 
fulles2000 said:
Unless it's a mandatory recall on safety grounds. Then they do have the right to demand it back. I don't know whether Samsung issued a mandatory recall though in this case.
Click to expand...

Manufacturers do voluntary recalls. The government issues mandatory recalls.

In neither case does the consumer have to comply.

In fact, many never do. In Australia, for example, only half of recalled items are ever returned, and I think that's par for the course everywhere else.

The fact that almost all Notes have been returned, is actually quite amazing for a recall.

... I can't make a conscious decision not to get on a plane that someone else has taken a Note 7 onto without my knowledge (unless I resfuse to get onto any plane).
Click to expand...

If that worries you, then you should stay off planes altogether., because any Li Ion powered device... including iPhone... is a potential or past fire source. And smartphone batteries are smaller sources compared to tablet and laptop batteries.

A battery fire in the passenger cabin is not what you should normally worry about anyway. It's a fire in someone's inaccessible checked luggage that would be more difficult to fight. (Or perhaps one in the cockpit, on top of the instrument panel, with accelerants nearby.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TechGeek76
tann said:
Sorry but I don't get why this is still relevant for Macrumors, there will be people using this phone until they die. They're idiots but why does it matter to us anymore.
Click to expand...

I agree, it doesn't really pertain here anymore...this is really clean up, but somewhat interesting. Now the Head of Samsung getting indicted on corruption charges (since its the main iPhone competitor) not getting covered here (that I saw) is relevant and surprising that Rumors didn't post it.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...est-of-head-of-samsung-in-corruption-scandal/
 
Sasparilla said:
Now the Head of Samsung getting indicted on corruption charges (since its the main iPhone competitor) not getting covered here (that I saw) is relevant and surprising that Rumors didn't post it.
Click to expand...

He's accused of using bribes to friends of government officials, to talk them into allowing the merger of Samsung's holding company and Samsung's Construction division.

Basically it's as if Alphabet wanted to remerge with Google to become one company.

In that part of the world, such bribes to grease the regulatory wheels are still not uncommon. Here in the more "civilized" Western world, we've graduated from offering direct monetary bribes, to more subtle under the table offers of future employment 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechGeek76
ugh said:
Why would someone continue to use a device that's likely to burn down your house/car/work? Imagine someone gets killed, you get charged with negligent homicide?
Click to expand...
Given the number of such serious incidents and the number of sold items (I believe, just a couple, in millions of devices sold), it's mathematically extremely unlikely to burn down your house/car/work. If you look at the incidents themselves, most just burned a contour in the carpet or night stand, not anything as dramatic as cars or buildings.

The most likely explanation is that these remaining Note 7 customers see their devices working just fine, they probably fly very rarely, they believe there's a very low chance the remaining phones will develop battery overheating issues (likely true), and probably like their Note 7 very, very much, since they've proven immune to all attempts to change or refund.

I'm not saying I approve, if I had a Note 7 myself I'd have demanded a refund, but there's an explanation and it's not idiocy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McCool71
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