Slashdot Mirror
Australian Consumer Watchdog Sues Apple Over iPad Marketing
Fluffeh writes "Australia's competition regulator will today take iconic technology giant Apple to court for advertising its new iPad tablet as featuring '4G' speeds — which are not supported on Australian telecommunications networks. One of the key features of the new iPad is support for 4G speeds, however, the 4G speeds which the new iPad supports will not be available in Australia, with Apple's technical specifications page only listing it as supporting the 700Mhz and 2100Mhz spectrum bands, neither of which are being used by Australian telcos to provide 4G services. The case may be a bit shaky, though, as Apple does state in the fine print: '4G LTE is supported only on AT&T and Verizon networks in the US; and on Bell, Rogers and Telus networks in Canada. Data plans sold separately. See your carrier for details.'"
It's like the release of the Ipone 4GS in the US -- the ads focused on SIRI, but when people complain, Apple then says "It's BETA". That's misleading and frankly dishonest, but probably legal in the USA.
This appears to be just the same: advertise 4G, and in the small print, point out that you will probably never get 4G. It's dishonest.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
The article says that the fine print may make the case shaky:
The case may be a bit shaky, though, as Apple does state in the fine print: '4G LTE is supported only on AT&T and Verizon networks in the US; and on Bell, Rogers and Telus networks in Canada. Data plans sold separately. See your carrier for details.'"
But why can the fine print supercede what's in the main ad? How can an ad for a 4G device in Australia be legal if that device will never be able to work in Australia? They can list the 4G for USA and Canada on the specs page. As another example, if an ad screams "Unlimited 4G data!!!" in large print, they shouldn't be able to write "Unlimited plans subject to data caps that we won't reveal to you and throttling back to speeds slower than 2G speeds" down in the fine print. If it says "Unlimited" in the large print, then it really should be "Unlimited". Fine print shouldn't be able to contradict the main body of the ad.
ABC's Media Watch mentioned this as part of a larger look into media coverage of the new iPad release. Summary doesn't quite make clear that 4G is available in Australia, it's just that the iPad won't support it.
We do have 4G here in Australia, it's just on a band that the Apple iPad doesn't support.
The Crux of the matter here is that 4G is available in Australia, Apple just can't be bothered making the iPad compatible with the Australian Network, yet advertises as if it were, that is false advertising in anyones book.
You never catch me alive
... then, maybe. The target of the advertisement matters in cases such as these.
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
With all their money in the bank, Apple couldn't afford to produce market-specific ads for different countries?
I hope they get their asses sued into the ground for penny-pinching in such a fashion. Given the profitability of the damned things, they sure as hell can afford to use regional advertising!
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Any phones sold as 4G in Australia are LTE phones.
We don't have that problem that US has.
Those phones you see like 'MyTouch 4G' or whatever actually have an entirely different name in EMEA and Australasia.
Even if the radios can, the main problem is the antenna. Specially if you need power efficiency, which is the case of mobile devices. Losing 60% of your output power due to antenna impedance difference is not something you can afford to have. And that is only one of the issues, the first one that poped in my head, actually. I'm sure there are many others.
morcego
The Commerce Comission (equivalent of the ACCC in Oz, or the US FTC) in New Zealand is also considering the same action against Apple (and there are exactly zero 4G networks here)
Commerce Commission investigating Apple iPad 4G adverts after Complaint
The ITU
Indeed. And according to the ITU, HSPA+ is "4G" and you can use the iPad 4G on Telstra's HSPA+ network, thus achieving a "4G" connection.
The problem stems from the fact that in Australia only Telstra's LTE network is advertised as "4G", and it is this network that the iPad is not compatible with. So, technically you can get a 4G connection on the new iPad, but Apple may be in trouble if it is determined that their advertising leads customers to believe that the device is compatible with the Telstra-advertised "4G" network.
Be careful. People in masks cannot be trusted.
By the rest of the world do you mean "The USA" or by the rest of the world do you mean "The rest of the world" ?
Because in Europe, Australia, and Asia 1800 is the standard frequency, with 2600 and 800 being also considered.
In the USA it's 700 and 1700/1900.
Your forgot to add that when it does not work, that it is a major feature.
The US & Canada isn't the "rest of the world," dude. We (the US and Canada) the ones who chose different bands from the actual rest of the world. Apple shouldn't be advertising 4G in Australia if it can't deliver 4G to Australia. It's entirely deceptive.
If I had a company that made the relevant toys, could I advertise them as "5G", or even "6G"?
Who decides what qualifies?
The ITU (International Telecommunications Union), but telco's have co-opted this to the point that the ITU has said, there will be no 5G.
The original ITU 4G specification was 100 Mbps fixed and 40 Mbps mobile, not even LTE can guarantee this, LTE Enhanced (Advanced, cant remember which) would have been the first but US telco's wanted to brand HSPA+ as 4G and the ITU capitulated.
BTW, Ipads and Iphone dont even support HSPA+
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It's not 100% clear that the regulator will have a case on the specific point mentioned-- it is factually correct that the iPad connects to 4G networks. Whilst on one level you might argue that this is playing on public ignorance as far as the *domestic* market is concerned, the iPad is clearly also a product specifically designed with travel in mind. So advertising on the basis of a feature that works somewhere internationally, albeit not domestically, could be argued to be legitimate and that it is up to the consumer to recognise that some features will be relevant specifically to international use.
[If you do decide that this advertising is misleading enough to censor, then you also have the problem of where you draw the line. What about a camcorder advertised as having a "500x digital zoom", but only a ~500 pixel vertical resolution?-- like 4G connection compatibility in Australia, the feature advertised is technically useless but the claim is still arguably technically accurate. If a computer is advertised as having a quad core processor, is the onus on the consumer or the advertiser to be aware/point out that little software will actually benefit from all 4 cores...?]
On the other hand, you could perhaps get into a semantic argument about whether "around the world" is a misleading label for what actually amounts to "the USA and Canada".