Slashdot Mirror
Apple to Refund iPod Levy for Canadian Customers
The Hobo writes "According to this CBC report, Apple Computer will be starting a refund program for those who purchased their iPod product during the year that a levy of $25 per iPod over 10 GB was collected. The levy was in effect from December 2003 until a year later, when a Federal Court overturned it. Previous CBC coverage here."
But shouldn't the Canadian Government be doing the refunding? They mandated it, they probably took the money from Apple as it was collected, seems like Apple gets screwed twice, along with Canadian citizens.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
""According to this CBC report, Apple Computer will be starting a refund program for those who purchased their iPod product during the year that a levy of $25 per iPod over 10 GB was collected. "
They didn't have to do this, but they did. So I guess Apple is cool again?
Will this have liability ramifications for music copying using the iPod? I don't know very much about the law behind the levy here in Canada, but I do know that it is meant to compensate the middlemen^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H artists for fair-use copying that does not provide revenue. So if the iPod is in some way not covered by this levy, does that somehow expose iPod users?
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
Someone has to be made accountable for this flipflop and pay for the costs involved in the refund.
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
Apple is a master of customer relations. I don't think you can find any other computer company (maybe the now-defunct Amiga) that engenders the kind of appreciative customers that Apple does. Especially under Steve Jobs, they pull little stunts like this here and there that really bring in the herd.
But why, then, do they not focus more on also getting the technology right? Many Apple loyalists are happy to overlook some deficiencies in Apple products, but some things like the iPod battery issue are hardly ever resolved to satisfaction.
I really like Apple, and though I don't own any Apple products, I see them as a very significant counterweight to Microsoft hegemony. They keep Microsoft on its toes, which can only lead to improved products for everyone down the road.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Shouldn't Apple instead be giving them 25 iTMS downloads? After all, court decisions always result in vouchers -- not cash!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Especially if the refund can be redeemed for a higher amount at iTunes. Than they actually refund nothing at all. Slick. But still quite nifty.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
That way, since I've already paid for crimes I might commit, I can freely go ahead and commit them to my heart's content. Sort of like buying an indulgence.
Maybe because I'm from the US, I don't understand the Canadian system or whatever. But how can a court impose a tax on goods? In America, only the legislative bodies can impose taxes and only the executive bodies can enforce them. The courts decide if they have merit or not. I'm a bit confused as to who should be paying whom. Sounds to me like the Canadian government or perhaps this radical IP group should be paying the buyers back.
Levy = Fee administered by a private organization
Tax = Fee administered by a government
There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
(You are) Hardly one to comment on the "deficiencies" of the product, especially if you don't even own one.
I am not a soldier, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on the war.
I do not own an American car, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on their quality.
I am not an African American, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on racism.
I don't use Windows, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on its features.
I have never been in a terrorist attack, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on terrorism.
I have never eaten rat poison, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on its dangers.
I have seen this type of argument a lot lately, especially on this site where we would expect the level of argument to be a little higher than somewhere like FreeRepublic or Indymedia. It's a bad argument. Stop it.
Canadians pay a levy every time they buy certain types of media. They have already paid for the sin, individually and repeatedly.
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
Mind, the interest might barely cover the costs of processing the tax both coming in and, now, going back out.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Now what? Where do I get my money? :(
Death by snoo-snoo!
I hadn't thought of this, but you're right. We should sin as much as we goddamned please. Hey, maybe my neighbor's wife would be up for a few lines of stolen blow and a dick in the ass after i kill her husband.
Why is apple in charge of this refund?
:P
Shouldn't it be comming straight from the government?
P.S. if you want to round up a bunch of American IPod UID's or whatever I'll send $15 CND each
James 2:14-26
The gist of it is that without works, faith is dead.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
It seems the iPod was mis-classified by its ability to be used as an external hdd. The iPod isn't sold as blank media. It's marketed as a portable media player. It has an OS w/ the ability to dual boot to linux(ipodlinux.org) software, RAM, hdd, audio support, display and input device. It's closer to being a PDA, configured to be very good at playing audio files, than just a blank hdd/cd/dvd and anything else covered by that canadian tax that I know nothing about.
"The tariff was...for non-removable memory"
Depends on how non-removable you consider the ipod memory? There was a post many months ago about removing the microdrive from another audio player and could be used with cameras and PDAs that use microdrive, I think the price of the player was less than that of the flash memory.
"The CPCC got the levy instituted in the first place because it successfully argued that iPod users were making illegal copies of songs, so money should be collected on behalf of the copyright holders."
So one could make that claim, but what about the people with well paying jobs who can afford to and do purchase all the music they own. I have no idea where recording off the radio fits in. Good idea Kanuck RIAA, treat all those high paying customers like criminals. iPods cost a lot more before Dec2003 when the taxation was in effect.
If it were up to me, fortunately for them it's not, I'd make them match the tax refund with an itunes gift card. Their member corporations get more than their share of songs sold on itunes that it wouldn't be a total loss.
F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
Will Creative be sending refunds to those that bought their players?
Will both people that bought Dell DJs be getting refunds?
Hmm, that's a good question. Why isn't it OK?
Because Christians don't think logically like that when it comes to their faith. Let's disregard the other reply to this post, because as I understand it, most Protestant forms of Christianity allow you to be saved by faith alone, irrespective of your good works. And even Catholics, who believe in faith and good works allow you options like repenting when you're near death, I think.
The paradox is similar to that of the old puritan belief of the elect and predestination. They believed that, from birth, everyone was either going to heaven or going to hell, and nothing you did could change that. From a logical perspective (assuming your actions are ultimately dictated by how your afterlife will turn out, as is the case from the Christian perspective), then, you might as well do whatever the fuck you want, because it's not going to change anything that really matters.
Of course, this didn't happen, because the puritans spent their lives trying to prove to each other that they were part of the elect, even though it doesn't really make any sense to do so, from their perspective. Of course, that was a reasonable thing to do, because people want to go through life with a certain amount of comfort, and being part of the elect got you power in Puritan society.
So, if you believe that Jesus dying for your sins is all that it takes to get into heaven, then, yes, you might as well go sin as much as you want; you're covered. However, that won't get you very good standing in the Christian community, and may get you out-and-out killed, depending on what you do. It seems that most people understand, unconsciously at least, that having a good time in 'this life' is important (no matter how much they profess otherwise), so they block out such a paradox, or try to rationalize around it, or do whatever so that they don't feel silly doing the opposite of what is the logical conclusion of what they believe.
Of course, if you're inclined to think about things in this way, odds are you aren't Christian, so you're screwed from the get-go. Then again, your morality would also probably be based around something other than fear of hell, or bribery of heaven, so none of this would really apply to you anyway.
I've come for the woman, and your head.
I have something in common with you. At the moment I complete this sentence, I won't know what's next in the writing. But, though my agreements hurt inside, I must say...I'm not hurting. See, were you trying to be funny or insightful/interesting? I think both. Yours was a funny comment on the typical leniency of the courts in civil cases against large companies...letting them repay with vouchers and not cash. Still pushing out their products into every home. Guess most moderators don't agree with me...they thought it was more interesting. Me, I always go with funny, even when things are interesting, just because people, deep down, I think, would rather be called funny than smart or insightful. Now...chimeras are nasty. Don't zap one over to me any day this standing time.
Here is something that really annoys me. These levies go to the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) because they lobbied the government -- and are still actively influencing the Heritage Minister -- to try and convince them that implied theft of Canadian content should go back to the association that represents them.
This is an abomination of facts on multiple levels. First, the CRIA does NOT represent the majority of Canadian artists. They might represent the largest percent of mass music sales, because they have the largest commercial artists but the CRIA does not represent the majority of Canadian musicians. Many artists are independent of course.
Second, the CRIA is basically a Canadian flagged arm of the RIAA. If you use the wayback machine's history to look at www.cria.ca before they removed the logos, you'll see that the majority of the artists are under large American labels - Sony, BMG, Warner etc.
So here is basically what has happened. The American recording industry has opened a wing in Canada, slapped on a Canadian flag, claimed to represent Canadian musicians, pressured government into forcing levvies for implied theft and then stolen that money.
Dear Sir or Madam,
You are not a customer. You are a criminal sir (or madam)! I'll take your money AND I'll call you a criminal. Who are you to disagree? We have a United Nations backed copyright treaty behind us, support of world governments, and millions of dollars to lobby your government (our government) and pay for lawyers.
There is no way to argue, we wrote copyright law and we shall amend it as required. Copyright allows us to strictly protect intellectual property for many years after an artist's death, even though even patents for the greatest inventions in the world can only last a couple decades. Copyright is King!
If you don't like it then I suppose your only recourse would be to refrain from purchasing anything supported by our industry such as audio CDs, but please don't do that because our profit margins are already very weak and we can not survive. Plus we will just claim that you have been stealing the CD content and collect even more cash from you to compensate us for your evil theft!
We're real assholes that way. What can you do? Pay up, bee-atches. Just remember to keep buying our stuff. Do not ever buy or sell used CDs, the secondary market is theft too!
Sincerely eh,
CPCC
CRIA
RIAA
CPCC should be returning the money and passing the buck onto Apple is their second screw. They punished Apple by extorting the money in the first place. Returning the money will cost Apple another pretty penny that the CPCC should pay. Apple will have to pay the administrative costs of the refund and bear ill will generated by CPCC record keeping mistakes.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Now... let's place some bets.
How many iPod owners will...
a) be aware that this refund exists; and
b) be motivated to fill out a form and address an envelope.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
actually that's not the worst part. the bad thing is there is no reduced price for upgrades.
imagine paying 30 bucks for version 5 then when 6 comes out not too long after, they ask you for another 30... it's a freaking player/transcoder, 5-10 dollar upgrade for heaven's sake.
Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
I live in B.C. and got a 40GB iPod from Future Shop in December 2004. When I read about the levy being repealed (I think it was here on /.) I headed over to Future Shop with my reciept and got $25 charged back to my card with no hassle at all. I figured that the retailer would handle something like this (as they did in my case).
Yes, because buying CD-Rs is illegal, just like speeding...
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Apple's original ads gave the impression that the iPod would play for 8 hours for the life of the iPod, thus misrepresenting the life of the batteries. There was a class-action suit (of course) as a result.
Apple has proposed a settlement for the class-action suit. More info here.
Apple's decision to forego the battery door, while it makes it a pain to open, also makes the whole device seamless, which is part of its charm. It's a design compromise, but it's not unique to Apple. My PDA also has an integral battery, for example, and PDAs are a very similar product category.
Personally, I would prefer an easily replaceable battery, but I have some design experience, and I really like the way the lack of doors and flaps gives iPods the feel of being organically complete.
--Mike
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _>8
Too many errors in one post (make fewer).
You should check out PresentMovie. It's a shareware application that lets you play Quicktime and mpeg files full screen. If you're using windows you can use Qucktime Alternative which also supports full screen playback. Wow, I didn't know slashdot put the URL in brackets for you after links, I always thought people were just being considerate. Sorry for being a n00b, this is my first post.
If people continue to abuse this feature, I will have to remove it. - Slashdot Comment Box, 1998
It puts the URL in brackets if it thinks you are a troll, at least that's the way most people's accounts are set up.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
There are 2 perspectives.
1. They assume you're a criminal and fine you in advance through the levy.
2. The law permits you to copy all the music you want without paying the copyright holder. To ensure there is still an incentive to create the government pays the copyright holder a small amount to compensate them for their work. The technical means to achieve this was a levy on blank audio media.
#1 is not possible as no crime has been committed.
So, if you believe that Jesus dying for your sins is all that it takes to get into heaven, then, yes, you might as well go sin as much as you want; you're covered.
But if you think that way, you don't really believe.
Belief is not just "oh yeh, that's right, Christ-died-onna-cross". It's integrating that and everything it implies into the way you think, and if you really do it's not conceivable you'll "go and sin as much as you want".
This is a function of your settings. If you look in your preferences on the "Comments" tab, near the bottom of that page is a section called "Display Link Domains?"
The settings there dictate whether or not you see the domain of a link in brackets after the link in a comment. Note that this is not about comments you post, it's about comments you view.
-BK
Chemical Blog
That's the problem with Apple worshipers. They overlook Apple's problems to the point that they think Apple is perfect and Apple has no incentive to perfect their product.
I think this is a rather broad brush. And contradictory. In one sentence, Apple fans overlook problems in search for approval that Apple has the best "all around" product. In the next sentence, they're perfectionists.
why do people irrationally ignore the problems and attack anyone who is critical of an apple product?
If you were to look at fan-boys vs. detractors in terms of anxiety assumptions, Apple fans tend to have a big need for constant approval. My take: smaller market share, especially in the early to mid 1990's, led to a trend of knee-jerk attacks against anything "Apple" as bad / weird. This was prevalent in IT departments, and still is to some degree. People had their preferred platform, and felt sneered at.
I've seen this trend with OS/2 fans, I've seen it with Linux fans -- anyone who attaches emotional worth to their technology purchases tends to get anxious about the market share.
Now, this probably wasn't actually happening on a grand scale, there are a few vocal detractors in any community, and that probably just stoked a shared anxiety.
Now, Apple detractors (often alpha geeks, free software worshippers, or marketshare-obsessed capitalists) are that they exhibit perfectionist tendencies: they find one or two faults in the product or in the company that somehow makes the whole thing useless.
Now after a year of infrequent use, I get about 2-4 hours. This doesn't last me even half my day. I would NOT have bought the ipod mini if I knew this - competing similar products advertised battery lives of close to 20 hours.
Of course, these other products have no better battery life expectancy, they'll degrade all the same. Perhaps it will be more useful because they started at a higher level. But there is often a trade-off: the Dell DJ for example has much higher battery life but is VERY heavy. And then there the other features / bugs. For example, I have a friend that is pissed he didn't buy an iPod because his DJ locks up on him all the time, he has to carry a paper clip to reset it.
Anyhow, back to the battery issue. All batteries degrade: watches, cordless phones, mobile phones, laptops, PDAs, etc. There is a market for replacements. Some require professional service (watches?!). First gen iPods had worse batteries, but I wonder how many other hard drive MP3 players from 2001 are doing , battery-wise.
FWIW, my 1st-gen iPod from Autumn 2001 is still in use , with the original battery, and has just under 2 hours of battery life, and is used daily (I gave it to a friend, it fits within his commute). I use my 1st-gen iPod mini fairly regularly since Spring 2004, and its original battery life (8 hours?) is down to about 6 hours.
-Stu
and you've paid for how many of them?
And apple has extended that recall voluntarily how many times?
I've also seen them replace smoke-damaged top decks on several ibooks that were sent in for logic board replacement, again for free.
BTW, you were probably not on your toes with your reading either. Three "covered repairs" means you are entitled to a NEW LAPTOP. Complain and you WILL get a new ibook G4. Failure to be an "informed consumer" means you're just bending over and taking it.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
I wonder which I'll get first... my Apple refund or my 40 acres and a mule.
Finance tutorials and more! Understandfinance
even if I was a realy bad man, I know I'm not going to go to hell 'cause I've got my potato. ("The Truth" Terry Pratchett)
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Your concept of indulgences is grossy misconstrued. Here is a good place to start, quickly followed by this.
SYS 64738
Is that $25 Canadian?
It's not still legal, it is a right explicitly codified in law, which means it's not just permitted by some grey area like in the US. What pisses me off is, the same CRIA(A) that lobbied for copyright reform now lobbies to revert the law they forced on us, because we get something in return for the money.
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
Bill C-60 was introduced a few months ago now, and it changed a lot of what Canadians took for granted as far as copywrite laws go. I reccomend reading up on the aforementioned Michael Geist website, or googling for bill c-60 for more information. The whole point of this bill was to make Canada's copywrite laws more similar to the US, so that the *IAA can get all lawsuit happy up here too.
General
Infringement generally
27. (1) It is an infringement of copyright for any person to do, without the consent of the owner of the copyright, anything that by this Act only the owner of the copyright has the right to do.
Secondary infringement
(2) It is an infringement of copyright for any person to
(a) sell or rent out,
(b) distribute to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright,
(c) by way of trade distribute, expose or offer for sale or rental, or exhibit in public,
(d) possess for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c), or
(e) import into Canada for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c),
a copy of a work, sound recording or fixation of a performer's performance or of a communication signal that the person knows or should have known infringes copyright or would infringe copyright if it had been made in Canada by the person who made it.
So there it is - pretty much, if you don't make money off of copying, it's OK. This was the old-fashioned interpretation of copyright, before the days of cheap and easy reproduction. I don't understand why paragraph (b) doesn't apply to file-sharing across the internet world-wide, but hey, smart lawyers (?!) have successfully argued it doesn't. What isn't forbidden is allowed.
I have heard that the technical Canadian interpretation is - if I lend you a CD and you copy it, that's Ok. You had temporary possession and made a copy. If I make a copy for you, that's not OK. I'm distributing.
The argument is - what is file sharing? Am I lending you the song by hosting it, or am I copying it for you? If I just put it up for share, it's still a passive act. You intiate the download, you are doing the act of copying. Hence, you are "copying something I lent you". Legal as weasel stew...
"and you've paid for how many of them?"
I paid about a week each.
"And apple has extended that recall voluntarily how many times?"
They did the repair extension when threatened with a class-action lawsuit. I'm not impressed.
"Three "covered repairs" means you are entitled to a NEW LAPTOP. Complain and you WILL get a new ibook G4. Failure to be an "informed consumer" means you're just bending over and taking it."
I asked Apple Customer Relations the 3rd and 4th times, and they refused.
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
> He said he could never eat Canadian beef again,
> after watching them load all those heifers onto railcars,
> one after the other...
Was he talking about the cows, or the women?
Perhaps I'm just dumb, but I rtfa, both of them, and I can't figure out how to access this money?
Has anyone else found the forms yet?
Also try VLC.
www.clarke.ca
So, what battery technology should Apple have used for the iPod that doesn't degrade over time?
I just recently upgraded my iPod (5GB, no gen-nothin') from the factory 800mAh to a NewerTech 2100mAh and it's great - 10+ hours. I've had the thing for 3+ years, so no big deal.
It was pretty easy and cost me $30, shipped.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I should be suing the crap out of Nokia & Samsung as well. My cell phone batteries don't last very long. It's outrageous! I don't get anywhere near the talk time that I'm supposed to. How dare they! Why don't they resolve the issue to my satisfaction!
On the other hand, my iPod is 2 years old and I have no battery life problems at all. I very easily get 10 hours of battery life out of it. I listened to my iPod during a trip from SFO -> PHX -> JFK and the battery was just fine.
I have several iPod owning friends. None of them have noticed an battery issues.
I'm sorry, but the people that are bitching about the iPod's battery are simply stupid idiots that can't think of anything productive to do with their time. What an overblown "issue."
"It's integrating that and everything it implies"
That's rationalization, not faith or belief. I can believe all I want that someone died on a cross. Doesn't necessarily make any difference to me unless you have some notion that that person was not human, an alien or some sort of supreme being.
I choose not to rationalize that way (or better said be irrational in that way).
Does the penalty of law put in place by the government if you don't pay your rent but don't move out make rent a tax?
Does the penalty of law put in place by the government if you sneak into a movie theatre without paying make movie tickets a tax?
Does the penalty of law put in place by the government if you break a contract make every contract a tax?
You don't like taxes - we get it. That doesn't make every fee you don't like a tax, though.
I can believe all I want that someone died on a cross. Doesn't necessarily make any difference to me unless you have some notion that that person was not human, an alien or some sort of supreme being.
Then the belief you're talking about isn't faith (in the sense of the word that is translated into English as "faith" or "belief") in Christ.
If you believed in Christ, if you had faith in Him, then you would be called to behave in a way that was consistent with that. If you're not called to behave in that way and if you care about your salvation, you should reflect on that.
I'm assuming from your comments that you don't consider yourself a Christian, that you don't care about your salvation, that you consider salvation irrational or impossible, and that's just the way you are.
The thing that I find surprising is the people who claim to be Christians and claim to believe in Christ but who don't act in a way consistent with that belief, in the sense that the Bible uses the term.
Ouch! and agreed on both accounts. I do not consider myself a 'christian'. I find that the term and widely accepted generalization as what a christian is, as absolutely revolting to me.
"The thing that I find surprising is the people who claim to be Christians and claim to believe in Christ but who don't act in a way consistent with that belief,"
I find your insight there a relief. I wish more people recfognized that and could take a step back from their 'beliefs' and see what kind of nonsense they were projecting.
As far as my salvation. That is between me and my god. Even according to the much heralded biblical scriptures, that is the way it should be.
BTW- like your site, http://www.taronga.com/~peter/ , Is that a recent picture of you, wildman?
Is that a recent picture of you, wildman?
My hair's longer and my beard's grayer now, but I look about as wild.
Ipods are silly and cost way to much. I prefur style, comfort, reliability, cost-efficiency, long-battery life, radio already inside, just enough memory, and did I mention battery life? Ipod is going down as bunch of non thinking consumer bought product of the century. As for the levy thing, Canada is mean for putting levies on products. Why can't they be more like the U.S. and have there indivual region-states control product taxes and a low federal tax. 25$ is crazy. I have no idea what a levy is besides it is a type of tax.
OT but great reply :)
You look a bit like Jesus yourself :)
hawk
Furthermore, if the works are done to be works, rather than coming from faith, they are "dead works," not works, and achieve nothing anyway.
Which makes Luther's whole distinction pointless: both the Catholic version and his stated that works *would* come from faith. When A=>B, arguing whether it is A=>C or (A AND B)=> C is merely semantics . . .
hawk
paid about a week? (sorry units of time don't work well to answer questions of cost)
Almost all companies hold out for the results of the class action lawsuits, of which almost half are unsuccessful. Apple volunteered the REP before the class action went through. What more did you want? You sound like you're upset with them but don't know why.
If you asked and didn't get it, you asked the wrong person or something. Take a look at the warranty paperwork you got. It's in there. Three covered major repairs gets you a new or refurbished replacement. (usually new) If you would have pointed that out to them, you'd be sitting in front of a new ibook g4. Can't blame them for you not exercising your options. They are not your lawyer, and are not required to advise you of your rights.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Hmmmm... not so sure I agree with that.
I'm currently in my sixth week of chasing Apple for a refund of £540 ($1000) which they charged me in error.
For the curious, basically I bought a new machine with a defective video card; they eventually sent a replacement and I sent the defective card back (as agreed). They received the card, and charged me for the replacement. Obviously this was an error, and they agree.
I'm at the stage of looking into suing Apple for my money. There's no question of whether they should have charged me - the answer is no - and they have agreed a refund. However, this is now six or seven weeks of chasing and still no money.
What we have here is a case of a Big Company (Apple) stomping all over the Common Man (me) with absolutely no consideration of the fact that this is (for me, as it would be for many) a considerable amount of money to simply have 'vanish'. They put up excuse after excuse for the non-refund, and yet it goes on and on and on. What makes it worse is my lack of foresight in paying for the original machine on a debit (as opposed to credit) card. This means that the first I knew of the payment was when the money was already gone.
Banks being banks, they're taking a very slow and ponderous stance on this. They would act more quickly if it was a wilful fraud - which in all fairness to Apple it isn't - so I am left with this long wait for my money. EVen despite Apple being in breach of UK consumer laws!
After around ten phone calls and a written complaint, I'm hoping this will get resolved soon. Maybe they'll also send me a free iPod or an iBook. That'd be a satisfactory end to this ordeal. Seems a lot to expect, but they've basically created a Whole World Of Financial Stress for me this past couple of months. Or would have done if I wasn't covered by my savings....
Anyway, I'm glad I got this off my chest. Apple, Master Of Customer Relations? No way!