https://fossbytes.com/woman-sues-apple-for-hiding-notch-in-iphone-xs-xs-max-ad/
What does everybody think of this?
Last edited by a moderator:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Other Woman Sues Apple For ‘Hiding’ Notch In iPhone Xs And Xs Max Advertisements
- Thread starter STOCK411
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What does everybody think of this?
Advertising is advertising.
There was somewhat of a rational point there to it all in relation to advertising -- although not in the sense that something illegal has been happening -- until the whole nonsense about trying to splice in that another device is better or superior and how some pixels shouldn't be counted all that. Way to undermine something that at least had some rationale to it with some subjective frivolousness.
There was somewhat of a rational point there to it all in relation to advertising -- although not in the sense that something illegal has been happening -- until the whole nonsense about trying to splice in that another device is better or superior and how some pixels shouldn't be counted all that. Way to undermine something that at least had some rationale to it with some subjective frivolousness.
Last edited:
She will not have a leg to stand on. Clearly shown on Apple's site and I have seen ads with the notch clearly visible.
It's the same stuff as when Apple was trying to hide the antenna lines and camera bump for the 6/6s. Nobody sued for that.
But even more so, the notch has been there since the X. Unless she's been living in Iran or North Korea for the last year she can't claim ignorance.
I expect her case to be thrown out with prejudice.
I interested to know what she thinks the damages are. In any lawsuit, you have to show damages, otherwise it should be thrown out.
Had Apple refused to accept a full return because she didn't like the notch, then she'd have a point. But somehow, I'm guessing that this isn't the case here.
Had Apple refused to accept a full return because she didn't like the notch, then she'd have a point. But somehow, I'm guessing that this isn't the case here.
Not sure how she can prove any damages. I mean she can just return the phone if she doesn't like it, she's not out anything. A minute or two of research before spending a grand on a phone would have saved her a lot of hassle. She's likely expecting a quick settlement. Some people have more time than they have common sense.
After reading some of the negative posts about the notch, you would think there were damages
Notch, hard to win. It's pretty obvious when you unbox and use the device.
Pixel count, much easier to win. It's not something consumers would easily notice within the 14 day return period. But it was clear from day one the iPhone X has a lower true pixel count and was less sharp compared to iPhone 8 Plus. I'm surprised Apple didn't have a disclaimer about the subpixels on their marketing material.
Pixel count, much easier to win. It's not something consumers would easily notice within the 14 day return period. But it was clear from day one the iPhone X has a lower true pixel count and was less sharp compared to iPhone 8 Plus. I'm surprised Apple didn't have a disclaimer about the subpixels on their marketing material.
Seems like when it comes to pixel count that's not quite the reasoning that was being used in the accusation.
It is. If you read the statement of claim, it goes into great detail about subpixels, Pentile, RGB stripe, etc.
https://www.scribd.com/document/395721345/Apple-Lawsuit
"The iPhone X Product is advertised as having 2436×1125 pixels, but in fact does not use true pixels with red, green, and blue subpixels in each pixel. Instead, the Product has only false screen pixels, with just two subpixels per false pixel (2436×1125×2 = 5,481,000 subpixels), and it does not actually have any subpixels at all in the notch at the top of the screen or in the display-area corners. In contrast, the iPhone 8 Plus has a higher quality screen than the Product, with more subpixels than the Product (1920×1080 pixels×3 subpixels per pixel = 6,220,800 subpixels). In contrast to the Product, the iPhone 8 Plus does not have a notch at the top of the screen or rounded corners of the display area."
Maybe the iPhone would overheat without the notch
I can’t say there would being any relation to a notch with a GT 350, it certainly would never look like that.
They should fine her and her shyster lawyer for frivolous lawsuits.
Apple has a very generous refund policy. Why couldn’t she just return it?
This is part of what’s wrong with the US. People like this, crying wolf for no reason at all, make the lawsuits that should actually exist be dismissed.
I honestly cannot decide what’s worse - if it’s this lawsuit or the other one where they were trying to blame Apple for some dude FACETIMING WHILE DRIVING.
What’s next? I’ll sue BMW because some dude decided it was OK to do 150mph on the freeway and crashed into me? I’ll sue Whirlpool because someone threw a refrigerator at me on the sidewalk from the 10th floor and clearly they should have imagined someone would do that and prevented it?
Damn.
This is part of what’s wrong with the US. People like this, crying wolf for no reason at all, make the lawsuits that should actually exist be dismissed.
I honestly cannot decide what’s worse - if it’s this lawsuit or the other one where they were trying to blame Apple for some dude FACETIMING WHILE DRIVING.
What’s next? I’ll sue BMW because some dude decided it was OK to do 150mph on the freeway and crashed into me? I’ll sue Whirlpool because someone threw a refrigerator at me on the sidewalk from the 10th floor and clearly they should have imagined someone would do that and prevented it?
Damn.
Or why can't Apple just make a good looking phone again, like they use to?
did you hear about the lawsuit regarding dimensional lumber like a 2X4" actually being 1.5X3.5"
that one didn't get very far though at least...
"I don't like the way the phone looks" isn't a winning argument in a lawsuit.
Oh man that confused me so much when I first started doing home improvement/maintenance projects.
Playing devil’s advocate. If all she saw was the first ad, and made her choice based on that ad, you can’t see the notch and she’d be right. She could have placed a pre-order with that assumption. Apple would be at fault in that case.
I think the case is still frivolous, but I can see her side.
I think the case is still frivolous, but I can see her side.
Judge will say she should have returned it for a refund. Case dismissed.
C’mon chicks. Every phone has notch except samsung these days. The woman just woke up from dinosaur age.
While I do have a seething hatred for all the frivolous lawsuits these days and all of these knee-jerk-litigious people, I can see her point. At least attention is being brought to the possibly deceptive advertising. I absolutely believe it was in an effort to minimize the visual impact of the notch and make the device more appealing in marketing. I don't think it was truly deceptive, as anyone spending an additional five seconds researching the phone would see it. If anything, Apple does deserve a slap on the wrist. Monetary damages? No.
As for the pixel count (and even screen size), I completely agree with that.There should be a disclaimer about the reduced pixel count and something about not being a full 5.8/6.1/6.5" viewable area.
As for the pixel count (and even screen size), I completely agree with that.There should be a disclaimer about the reduced pixel count and something about not being a full 5.8/6.1/6.5" viewable area.