Slashdot Mirror
Class-Action Suit Filed Against Apple
AC writes "A class-action lawsuit has been filed against Apple. The plaintiffs allege that Apple failed to fully honor service contracts and warranties, didn't get repair and service businesses properly licensed, stole trade secrets from its own resellers, and sold used computer equipment as new."
Truth be told, if the "apple zealot" level on Slashdot is any indcator, Apple didn't have any users before the iMac G5 (-;
There's probably enough reason for a class action for the iBook logic board issues alone. My first iBook's logic board died before the extension pogram was introduced and Apple refused to fix it without $750 ,so I had to get rid of it. My second iBook, which I still have but don't use often, craps out every six months or so, and my third iBook (and yet I learn nothing) died four times in the first six months I had it. I called them on the third time and told them I wanted a new machine that was outside the defective serial number range, and they said I had to wait for it to die one more time. I figured I could wait a few weeks, and sure enough, two weeks after they fixed it yet again, the logic board failed. I got a brand new g4 model out of it, but that was after a total of three years, as many machines, and a total of 8 logic boards.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a total fanboy, and I want to go down on Steve Jobs just as much as any other fanboy, but after the way Apple has treated large portions of their customer base recently, they deserve whatever it is they've got coming.
This too, will end.
It seems like the resellers are pissed about the apple owned stores. I don't know if charging their own stores less is against the law but if it is, thats nuts. They own the store and the product. Well you be the judge.
TellOnApple.org suggests Apple shareholders demand Apple Computer answer these questions at its upcoming shareholders meeting on April 22, 2004 in Cupertino, California:
1. Is Apple Computer the subject of any governmental probes or criminal investigations?
2. Do the company owned retail stores pay the same price for Apple products as independent Apple resellers when purchasing the same products directly from Apple?
3. Do the uncovered invoices show what the company owned retail stores actually pay for Apple products? Do the company owned retail stores actually pay $2.70 for Apple Care Extended Warranties while most resellers pay approximately $118 to $244 for the same product?
4. Are the company owned retail stores actually profitable if they paid the same price for Apple products as independent Apple resellers?
5. Is Apple misleading shareholders as to the company owned retail stores profitability?
6. Apple has always stated that there was a level playing field between the company owned retail stores and the independent Apple resellers. How does Apple explain the pricing, promotions, and allocation discrepancies between the two?
7. Have Apple sales at the independent Apple resellers increased or decreased year over year? If they have decreased, is Apple simply moving sales from the independent Apple resellers to Apple direct?
8. Five down, 95 to go was Apple's main reason for opening the company owned retail stores. "Apple has about 5 percent market share," Jobs said in 2001. He noted that most of the other 95 percent of computer buyers "don't even consider us." Why has Apple's marketshare decreased instead of growing? And what benefit is there to Apple to eliminate the independent Apple resellers?
9. Has Apple ever intended to put the independent Apple resellers out of business? Would this bring any benefit to Apple or Apple's customers? Is there a future for independent Apple resellers?
10. When Apple first opened its retail stores, it publicly recognized that working with its existing lineup of independent resellers would be a priority. Why has this changed?
11. In Apple's ethics document posted on their website, Apple states, "In some cases, the law may also view our resellers as our competitors when we are actually competing for the same types of customers in the marketplace." Why is Apple competing against their independent resellers? Why is Apple offering special prices to consumers, which can be lower than the independent resellers cost?
just because your a schizophrenic doesn't mean people arn't really out to get you
I also quesiton how much Apple Stores have done to increase marketshare versus just sending the retail profit back to Apple.
I have never been in an Apple Store where the machines weren't in perfect working order and set up for demos. The employees can actually answer questions correctly. The stores are bright and inviting and well-stocked with a variety of Mac software and accessories.
Contrast that with CompUSA, who even after their 'store within a store' agreement with Apple, keep the Apple section in the farthest rear corner of the store (at least in the ones I've been to). The employees have limited, if any Mac knowledge. Many usually badmouth Macs and steer customers toward the Windows machines. I have overheard, and on some occasions corrected, patently wrong answers being given to customers in the Mac section. The demo machines are dirty and/or broken. The Mac software and accessories selection is tiny, and the titles that have Mac and Windows versions on the same disc are buried in the Windows software section on the other side of the store.
(The only retailer I've seen do a capable job of selling Apple stuff is Micro Center, and they only have 20 stores in 13 states. How much do I like them? The nearest CompUSA is only 20 minutes away from my house, but I'll drive for an hour to go to Micro Center when I need something.)
I have no trouble at all believing that Apple's physical stores have contributed to a marketshare increase.
To prevent such undercutting, Apple signed contracts with their resellers saying that Apple stores would not recieve priority shipment of products over other retailers, not would they recieve discounts on products or lower prices than the other retailers. If apple did this, they would destroy their reseller market and most probably destroy their marketshare. As far as Mattel making small doll stores pay more, this is because small doll stores order far less and thus do not recieve the massive bulk prices that larger Wal-Mart and Target recieve. Its not illegal at all, its wholesale and bulk.
If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
If this is for customers, why does it read like it's focused entirely on reseller's problems? While I understand that there are people who have been unlucky with Apple products in the past (such as the G4 MDD problems, iBook logic board problems, etc.), they seem like one of the best companies when it comes to actually repairing and fixing things under warranty. And the reseller gripes leave out an important element -- the Apple stores offer similar prices yet a much better shopping environment. The people there know their stuff, there's very little pressure to buy, and they're happy just letting you use the computers or chat tech with them if they're not super-busy. Nearly every "boutique style" computer reseller takes the opposite approach. I've never been in a small-time reseller that actually felt like I'd want to spend time there and talk to the people, whether they sell Apple or PC products. I know that's just anecdotal, but the Apple stores offer up stiff competition for even PC resellers, let alone Apple resellers. I think the real question is whether the companies like Small Dog and MacMall are really feeling a hit in their business. AFAIK, they're not part of these lawsuits.
The problem is the disproportionate distribution of damage monies. The lawyers will get millions, the actual victims may get $100. Does that really sit well with you?
My parents were part of a class action lawsuit for some faulty pipes in the housing development. They got about $300. Lawyers got a HELL of a lot more. Of course the lawyers had to prepare and argue the case and whatnot, but it really doesn't FEEL right when a multi-million dollar settlement makes a lawyer a million, but the leftovers distributed among thousands are barely pocket change to the actual victims.
They arent supposed to help the consumers that take part in them, they are supposed to punish the offending company
If that is the case, it is a perversion of English common law.
A tort results in a remedy, with an award pf damages to the plaintiff. It has been throughout the history of English law intended to right a civil wrong. Only in extreme cases are punative damages awarded.
Unfortunately class action law suits are generally rigged to reward lawyers, not the victims. It is gross.
tort reform is needed in a much more limited fashion than what Bush is wanting(/being directed to do by contributers): do not do punitive damage and lay out exactly what needs to be covered for true damages. If there is a debilitating problem, pay for all medical bills and maintain their wages that they would have had, pay for all legal crap and leave it at that.
This "pain and suffering" crap is all about getting back at someone. How about it not become the vengeance system and be the justice system again, eh?
Frankly, I could not care less. RTFA, this is not about customers, it's all about the resellers. As a customer, I want to buy products as cheaply as possible and without delays. I do _not_ care where I buy them from.
...
I don't see why there is all the fuss about some tiny resellers closing shop because of Apple's opening of its own retail stores. Apple is a publicly traded company, for God's sake, they have much more of an obligation towards their stockholders than towards their whiny resellers. You tend to make more money for your shareholders when there are fewer people taking a cut.
I understand that it's something of a tragedy for those directly involved, but for customers it is more or less irrelevant. Apple is far to insignificant (market-share wise) to warrant all this attention. Go and buy a Windows PC if you don't like their practices. A company with low single-digit market-share should be legally free to open shops and undercut their resellers as much as they want, all those resellers are free to sell a myriad of other hardware and software products.
Morally, it's questionable of course, but these lawsuits? Please
My mom ordered a Mac Mini as soon as they were announced, and when they came in, there was a bit of a mix-up over which Apple Store hers went to. For her trouble, they gave her a used Apple keyboard.
A few days ago, she spilled coffee on it, and some of the keys stopped working. I told her to run it through the dishwasher and let it dry for a day or two, which she did, and while most of the keys came back, not all did.
She called the Apple store, explained what happened, and asked if the Genius Bar could do anything.
The manager said, "it's really not worth waiting for them. Just bring it in and we'll swap it out for a new one."
As for my own experiences, I'll say that in the year and a half that I've been an Apple customer, they've never done anything but bend over backwards whenever I've had a problem.
I have been using personal computers of one sort or another since I was sixteen; I'm forty two now. Thats right, I started with the TRS80 Model I from RadioShack :)
Since the death of CP/M, I've been a diehard PC user, and not always a happy one. The absence of an assembler and linker in the OS was a harbinger of dark times for those of us who were assembler programmers when windows finally rolled out in a (questionably) useable form.
Late in '94 I found the Internet, or maybe it found me. Within a month I had wiped windows from my box and replaced it with linux (slackware on a 0.98 kernel if you're interested).
As of one year and eight days ago I became the owner of a refurb dual proc 1.25GHz G4.
I can tell you that I am in love with this machine, and I can tell you that while the design of the hardware certainly plays into it, cosmetics are not my first requirement; it's all because of OS/X. This OS is what linux wants to grow up to be. And the spit and polish represented by Aqua/Cocoa/Carbon are at the core of the benefits of OS/X.
As a result of my experiences with OS/X I have made the switch from linux to FreeBSD on my server; and I have to say, as I work FreeBSD on an old wintel box and OS/X on the Mac, the differences are quite apparent; FreeBSD ala Apple and FreeBSD ala carte are very different beasts, the Mac being far simpler and easier both to use and to administer.
The reason I've gone through all this preamble is to qualify my next statement: until about the time of the advent of Panther, which I consider to be first release of OS/X refined enough for general use, Apple simply had it mostly wrong. The insistence on a price point that alone made them a nich market product, the insistence on hardware and operating system software that were not only proprietary but closed, is so backward that were it not for all the substance of it, it would be not unlike the emporor's new clothes.
Sometime recently though Big Steve drank the right cup of electric coolaid. The iPod is a device of sheer genius. Not in its design, its implementation or its pricepoint; these features had all been clearly defined by the market place well in advance of Apple's offering. No, the real power of the iPod for Apple is as a marketing device, where it has introduced literally millions of PC users who would never have considered buying an Apple product to the company, just in time to push the Mac Mini under their noses. This has the potential to be a one-two punch for the WinTel world that should have them all shaking in their boots.
If I haven't made myself clear, I'm really impressed with Apple these days, their products are solid, their support is solid, and they seem to have finally gotten the company on track to become the major force in the market that it should have been all along.
Maybe it has something to do with Big Steve returning home to roost.
Anyway, given the success to date since the advent of OS/X, and the consistently right moves made since with the iPod, iTunes, and potentially the Mac Mini, its a no-brainer that the litigious in the world will spare no opportunity to haul them into court for whatever they can get for it.
All I can say is, go Apple, go Steve, keep up the good work, and don't leave us in the lurch this time.
Peace
ReallyTweakin
Death Dances Only With The Living
This isn't what Apple does...it just sells its products at such high wholesale costs that resellers can't possibly sell below "Suggested" retail price and make a profit.
I don't know how it works in the USA, but in Denmark where I live, that practice is considered anti competitive and is illegal. Not that that is stopping companies like B&O from doing it anyway since it is so hard to prove them guilty of it.
I'm one of the people who had one of those bad iBooks.
Not only did they repair it for me, but when there were problems with the repair which caused the iBook to go back and forth between here and Cupertino one time too many, they decided (without me even asking) that enough was enough, and simply exchanged it for the G4 iBook which I'm typing this on right now.
Best. Warranty. Service. Ever.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
If somebody is "guilty" of something which demands punishment, then it should be done throught he criminal justice system, where their debt to society can be paid to society.
Everything you said about civil suits is bullshit. I've been sent letters inviting me into dozens of them, and while I have not signed on, I have watched what happened. In every single case, ALL OF THEM, the following was true:
1. The case was frivolous. The company in question had crappy service, but didn't do anything that was actually illegal. In many cases (such as my problem with Qwest), they had already offered partial refunds and discounts to partially make up for said screw-over.
2. The case was resolved with a settlement without going to trial.
3. Each person who signed on for the suit got some pittance (free rentals from Blockbuster, two free months of phone service from Qwest, a $50 gift certificate, etc.)
4. The lawyers pressing the case got enormous piles of money.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Actually, the only time I had someone sell me a used computer as new was a reseller. The powerbook came mail order with the box taped back exactly as if new, but once inside it had clearly been returned. I think somehow the tip off was that under everything else they had left the returned receipt with the guy's complete AMEX card number with expiration and what he had paid for it; and when he had returned it. If I had been a tough guy I could have used his card to order a better book. They were lucky I wasn't.
Now, having related this boring story, I do know that Apple has been squeezing the resellers...look at a Macworld from 1994 and look at one now...any difference in advertisement count?
"I didn't spend six years in Evil Medical School to be called 'Mr.Evil,' thank you very much!"