[hiredgun469]

Well didn't you put me in my place. Ha. First of all their call analogy's. Don't get all technical. Second, I have a 1998 350 engine, tell me wise one, what I need to do to take E85? Oh, and not everyone can afford a modern car, so why should they (I'm included) not have the opportunity to help the environment?
OS X on a Dell... So I could just pop the disk in and install it? Oh, Oh, Oh, I know the answer to this one!! It's a big fat NO! Sure you can hack it to work. you can hack your blender to go twice the speed if you wanted to, but does it give you the right to sue if the thing spins off and goes in your eye? "well there isn't a label that says don't modify speed to go twice as fast or... bla. bla, bla" But the sad thing is, someone would probably win the case.
TV's? Hello, they were made that way from the start. Who has ever said you had to use just this t.v. on this companies service? It's a t.v. It just shows a picture. Not much to protect there. What's going to happen in a year or whatever when everything is going digital and analog is out? We may all have to buy a converter. I shouldn't have to do that should I? Should I sue?
I didn't say Apple created the iPhone from sand. Just like a dunkin donuts, they made something we can all enjoy, from things that were already discovered. But could you go into your kitchen and whip out and exact match to dunkin donuts or some other famous brand. Nope. Did they create that flavored donut for them selves to eat or for us to enjoy. Yes, they're in business to make money so part of the answer is for them. But they could have just thrown some flower and water and whatever together and made an edible donut to sell and make money but they want us to enjoy it.
What did you invent? Was it something just for you? Only for you to enjoy? I would like to know when it's for sale so I could buy one. I want to modify it to my liking whatever it is. And I hope I can do so or I'm going to need $1.2 Billion from you.
My previous employer once got sued because a man got killed by not following the directions he had printed in his manual. In the manual it repeatedly said in bold type with graphics on both sides, to never use lag screw to mount this door. Alway use bolts of this size and they must go through this frame. They did not listen. They felt they could modify it the way they wanted to and now a life is gone and guess what? Yep, he got sued and had to pay out. He created something that was a convenient, helpful, time-saving, etc. and he got bent over and screwed. I have several inventions sitting in a folder and to be honest, I'm scared to even try to make them public, because I don't want to lose everything I've worked for.
You know, it's not like the iPhone is the only phone out there and Apple and AT&T are making you buy it. That would be monopoly (please don't give me the definition of monopoly), but how many phone could you buy today at the same price as the iPhone? You could spend all night trying to figure it out and discover you are only half way there.
If my grandma put cookies out on the table and she said I could have ONLY ONE and I took two, I expect to beeaaatch slapped. FOLLOW THE RULES!!!!

[lkalliance]

Quote:

---

Why are there so many toxic waste dumps in New Jersey and so many lawyers in Washington DC?
New Jersey got first choice.
The Devil approaches a young lawyer at a bar convention and tells him "if you give me the souls of your wife, your children, and your parents, brothers, and sisters, I'll make you a full partner in your law firm."
The young lawyer thinks for a second and then asks "sooo, what's the catch?"
What do you call it when you have a dozen lawyers buried up to their necks in sand?
Not enough sand.
Why won't sharks eat lawyers?
Professional courtesy.
Why ISN'T the joke of "what do you call 20,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea? A good start" truly a good start? Because the laywers would then represent all the fish in a class action lawsuit.
What's the difference between a lawyer and a catfish?
One is a slimy, bottom dwelling, scum sucker. The other is a fish.
Thank yoouuu! I'll be here all night!

---

I'm imagining much of that in the voices of Garrison Keillor and Julia Sweeney. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Hocko]

Quote:

---

Wow, me thinks there are sour grapes.
This is win win for those of us that don't want to be told who our provider is. No one tells you who to buy DSL or cable from, no one tells you what gas to put in your car, no one tells you that you have to use an iPod to play your Mp3's.
But--Apple tells you that if you want OSX, you have to use their equipment, if you want an iPhone, you have to use a provider that gives them percentage. What's next? Strike a deal with an automaker and make you use an "I"product in your next car? Install a Pioneer or a Sony and your car wont start.
That's B.S.
If you are OK with a manufacturer telling you how to use the product that you have bought, then maybe you have a point. I don't see that. I see a bunch of Apple fans backing their team, and their team just happens to be on the wrong end of an argument.
Monopolistic behavior is wrong. So when a company gets to be big they can just do what they want? Trample on the public? Start dictating terms? I don't think so.
Vivre La Revolution.

---

Now let's see if I'm getting this straight ... you don't like the way that Apple and AT&T have conducted their business within perfectly legal bounds ... in your infinite(simal) wisdom, you've deemed Apple a monopoly ... and not buying/using an iPhone isn't an option for you. Does that about sum it up?
While we're on this train of thought, I've got a real problem with Earth. You know how this planet of ours pretty much dictates that everyone has to breathe air, what with it's proprietary atmosphere and all? Well, I still want to live here, but I don't want to breathe air anymore. I'd like to try some alternate gases or gaseous mixtures (aside from that methane mixture, which we all sample on occasion). This planet won't accommodate me and, if I ever find out who created it, I'm going to file a class-action suit to change things.
And, trust me, you don't even want to get me going on that damn Law of Gravity.

[Kurtster]

Quote:

---

Noone ever said you could... Why do you feel entitled to it?
You have to BUY your ringtones. That was clear from the start.

---

Why do I have to buy ringtones without an option to use music I wrote myself, while my wife on the same family plan I'm on, with a FREE phone, can use whatever music she wants? If tthat sounds okay and fair to you then I want some of whatever you're smoking.
I see nothing frivolous about this suit.
We could make a thousand analogies that aren't the same, like the car oil filter analogy above but it won't change the facts of this case. You could be upset (thanks, lame Maccentral censor that won't let me use a common word here..) that Honda won't let you use a Toyota oil filter on your Civic, but AT LEAST HONDA WON'T REMOVE THE STEERING COLUMN from your Honda when you bring it in for service with your Toyota oil filter attached. That's what Apple has done here. They set out to nail people for being creative because they couldn't get a revenue stream out of their creativity so they intentionally broke their hardware. It's just plain wrong.

[tigglet]

Quote:

---

Apple maliciously and intentionally with pre-mediation BROKE THEIR OWN CUSTOMER'S $600 (or $400) piece of hardware. They can claim that hackers damaged the software but I'm betting the court will prove that they sought to intentionally cripple phones. You should be outraged at Apple, not calling their customers stupid.

---

Let me get this straight:
People bought a first generation product from a company just entering a new market with little real experience in that market. They said from the get go that they're locked to AT&T and that the software on the phone should not be modified. Now, they create an update that conflicts with the unlocking software and breaks the phone, intentionally or not.
Now, from where I'm sitting there's some willful ignorance going on here. If you didn't read the fine print or if you didn't reach the necessary conclusions to be smart about being an early adopter, how is that Apple's fault?
Apple makes great products. But as with all of their products, any first gen app/hardware is going to be updated frequently in the beginning as they roll it out to the masses and the masses find issues and corner cases that they just didn't think about. Many of those corner cases may require changes to the underlying software that may break your hacks. That's true of ANY company with a new, first gen product. If you don't like it, wait a few months or a year until the technology is a little more mature (release 2 anyone???).
All that said, Apple still has the right to protect their contract with AT&T (I wouldn't be surprised if they were REQUIRED to protect the exclusivity of their contract). IANAL but common sense says that these folks should take responsibility for their actions and own up to the fact that they took risks with their $400/$600 new toy that didn't pan out. Ooops.
tigglet

[153957]

Only in the US... /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[saxguy]

"Apple maliciously and intentionally with pre-mediation BROKE THEIR OWN CUSTOMER'S $600 (or $400) piece of hardware. They can claim that hackers damaged the software but I'm betting the court will prove that they sought to intentionally cripple phones. You should be outraged at Apple, not calling their customers stupid."
A lot of colorful words, but still no point or meaning. You have a very unsupported argument here. If you hack an iPhone, is it really an Apple Product anymore? Or is it your own frankenstein creation? The impatience of people in this world is ridiculous. HANG ON MAN! Apple will do it 'their' way, which always seems better when it comes, right? Apple doesn't want to simply "open" the phone to the third party apps. Just think of all the crappy apps that'll give Apple a bad rep, or even worse, somebody will be able to easily screw up your phone, better than Apple can ever fix. Which brings up my next question: Is Apple supposed to TAKE CARE of the Hackers' applications, unlocks and whatnot when considering to update their product? I don't think so. The software may have broken the phones as a coincidence, who's to say whether Apple knew all of what was out there and deliberately wrote code against it. ALSO, Apple never did this intentionally, they released the update as a completely optional update, for which YOU can choose what you wish to do with it, receiving warnings IN BOLD concerning the possible eventual status of your phone.
Concerning ringtones, there are artist and label rights being violated here. A ringtone is a format, like a cassette or an LP. If you already own the song on CD, you're essentially saying that you have the right to be given the LP for free. Consider that the ringtone also serves a different function than the actual song, we use it to identify, rather than to listen to. It's an entirely different product altogether. Although I admit that it would be a nice feature to turn your own songs into ringtones, it would also be nice if I could turn my iPod into a Lamborghini, but I exaggerate. Now, of ALL of the ringtone services available, the Apple 'plan' seems to work out best, in that for less than the cost of a single pre-recorded ringtone (from elsewhere), you not only get the ringtone, but the song as well AND you can pick out where in the song you'd like the ringtone to start, which is VERY nice.
Sometimes you MUST ask why people do what they do, when you find the answer, the world suddenly isn't chasing after YOU anymore.

[djgamble]

Yeah look I smashed my screen with a hammer because Apple said you couldn't scratch it. It also bricked my phone, Apple are a bunch of bastards who just want to make my life miserable and just want to make money.
I'm gonna sue them for 1 billion dollars.

[scotts13]

Quote:

---

What's next? Strike a deal with an automaker and make you use an "I"product in your next car? Install a Pioneer or a Sony and your car wont start.
That's B.S.

---

Little behind the times, friend. My (German) car already comes with a factory stereo, and if you want to use a third party head unit, you have to make modifications that are not compatible with the dealer's diagnostic hardware. If you fail to put it back to factory configuration before service, you can "brick" the dealer's computer.

[Terrin]

How come people like you do not understand two different concepts are at issue? Concept number one: the right to hack your phone. Concept number two: Apple's obligation to support your phone. I think most people would agree that you have a right to hack your own phone. That is your business, and it effects few people but yourself. However, thinking Apple is obligated to support you once you hacked your phone is absurd, and I have never heard of any other company being expected to do this. To comply Apple would have to make itself aware of every possible hack out there, and design its software updates around those hacks. Keep in mind some of the hacks are hardware hacks, so I guess Apple would just have to replace those iPhones all together. That effects Apple, and me, because I have to foot the cost through the increased price of the product. Heck if I purposely throw my iPhone into a brick wall and break it, I can just go into an Apple store and claim I hacked my phone, and I demand Apple support it.
Moreover, Apple made no secret about the terms under which you were buying your iPhone. Everybody knew Apple would only support phones using AT&T. Everybody knew Apple didn't support third party applications. Yet, people bought the iPhone anyway. If people didn't like Apple's terms, people simply should not have bought the phone. There are a million other choices out there.
Anytime you buy an product, the warranty sets out conditions upon which the manufacturer is agreeing to support the product. Every warranty requires a product to not be significantly altered to be eligible for a warranty.

Quote:

---

Apple & AT&T is wrong on this. I hope they lose BIG! They are doing what MS does. No, they are worse. Manufacturers may not be able to install linux under their MS contracts (probably can nowadays) but if I install it, that's MY RIGHT. Just like you should be able to install whatever you want on the iPhone. It's yours! not apples, not AT&Ts (especially since they are not subsidized)
What if GM said they're car will only run on BP gas, but you want to use Marathon because you feel it's better gas, your car works just fine and then one day over OnStar they send out an update to not allow any other brand but they one they require! Intentionally Broken on purpose AFTER it worked just fine. This is exactly what apple is doing.
At least the Macs can install linux and it's software if you want.

---

[Kwi-Chang]

A sensible lawyers point of view...
http://www.pointofla...ives/004387.php

[IronChef3]

Thank you MacWorld for posting this news story. An entertaining read with my morning coffee. Oh, the passion of the posts and analogies with a dash of US-Europe relations. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
This lawsuit has nothing to do bricked iPhones but everything to do with an opportunity for some individuals to make some money from the success of Apple using the court system to file a piece of paper, instead of just plain old hard working for your money.
A billion dollars? Wow that's a lot of money. You would think with a lawsuit for that amount of money there would have been loss of life or a environmental disaster involved - like the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

[Kwi-Chang]

For those who don't want to click on unknown links this is from PointOfLaw.com...
Apple iPhone lawsuit
Roger Parloff reports that Apple is faced with a billion-dollar-plus lawsuit against Apple alleging antitrust violations over its software restrictions on its iPhone product.
Antitrust? you might ask. Doesn't that only apply to monopolists? How can Apple have market power when they have less than 1% of the market for cell phones? The plaintiffs get around this by claiming that Apple iPhones are a market in and of themselves, and that Apple has a monopoly over the sale of iPhones. This raises the question why Apple had to reduce the price of its product by $200 shortly after introducing it if it didn't face any competition. But who says the legal system punishes innovators?
Note also that the suit is brought as a class action on behalf of all iPhone owners, even though people with common sense knew when they bought it that they were restricted to Cingular/AT&T phone service and software, and made the decision to buy it regardless. The class even absurdly includes people who will buy the iPhone in the future.
The suit makes no economic or legal sense, but it's been brought in California, home of the Ninth Circuit, which has countenanced the irrational theory of leverage before in such cases as Image Technical Serv., Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co.

[Terrin]

First, courts do not prove anything. They make decisions based on what lawyers either prove or do not prove. Some courts just make decisions because the judges feel like it, but that isn't suppose to be how it works.
Second, why should I be outraged at Apple? When I went to buy the phone I knew unlocking it and installing third party applications were activities that could void my warranty. Before, I installed the update in question, I was warned again that installing the update may disable iPhones that were hacked. If I had hacked my iPhone, and proceeded to install the update, I broke the Phone not Apple as I was warned 1) when I bought the phone, and 2) before I installed the update.
Third, let me throw out a possibility at you. Apple rushed the iPhone to market, which is evidenced by 1) Leopard being delayed, and 2) some obvious features being missing. Some of the hacks that allowed third party applications and the unlock to work in fact relied on bugs in Apple's software. Bugs by nature are things that companies generally tend to want to eventually fix because they are security risks. Apple when it released its update was merely adding features, and fixing bugs. In the process of doing this, why would it be so hard to believe those hacks were unintentionally broken? I am sure everybody would agree, everytime Apple releases a software update for OSX, some program or OSX feature experiences some unforeseen consequence. This is with the benefit of a third party developer program, which the iPhone does not have.

Quote:

---

"Apple maliciously and intentionally with pre-mediation BROKE THEIR OWN CUSTOMER'S $600 (or $400) piece of hardware. They can claim that hackers damaged the software but I'm betting the court will prove that they sought to intentionally cripple phones. You should be outraged at Apple, not calling their customers stupid."

---