Apple Sued Over iPhone Non-Replaceable Batteries

UnknowingFool writes "A customer named Jose Trujillo has filed a class-action lawsuit against Apple over the iPhone batteries. According to the suit, Apple did not disclose that the batteries of the iPhone were not user-replaceable. Also the plaintiff alleges that the battery will need to replaced every year. When a battery needs to be replaced, the customer will be without a phone for several days unless the customer pays $29.95 for a loaner phone service. Lastly, the plaintiff alleges that the battery information was difficult to find on Apple's website."

Comments

Re:Stupidest lawsuit ever

[imamac]

Well said. I especially love this: "Also the plaintiff alleges that the battery will need to replaced every year." He knows this since his iPhone is now 1 year old, right?

Re:Maybe Not

[paeanblack]

Every Engineering Department I've worked with would have designed a user-replaceable battery and called it a "common sense" feature.

It's a good thing you don't design pacemakers. It would really suck to fall over and break off the little plastic battery cover.

Wristwatches have forgone user-replaceable batteries for ages. Why does a phone need one? I think your "common sense" is better phrased as "lack of imagination".

Re:Stupidest lawsuit ever

[LWATCDR]

So before you buy the iPhone YOU ASK! I know that it is a strange concept but notice that I don't have an iPhone. Why rush out to buy it if you have unanswered questions?
The iPod doesn't have an end user replaceable battery so why would you expect the iPhone would?
Let's see you rush out and buy the latest toy from Apple with out doing any research. You just can't wait for reviews or answers to your questions. So when it doesn't do what you expect you sue them.
Yea... great..
It isn't like they told you that it had an end user replaceable battery.