Apple Sued For Dividing Final Season of Breaking Bad Into Two On iTunes

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Sued For Dividing Final Season of Breaking Bad Into Two On iTunes

Posted by samzenpus on Monday September 9, 2013 @02:22AM from the heisenberg-is-not-happy dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Last night's episode of Breaking Bad was one of the most intense in series history, but for those who haven't seen it yet, don't worry, I won't be putting out any spoilers. You see, today's Breaking Bad news has nothing to do with Walter White's slow transformation into Scarface, but rather with a legal suit filed against Apple by a Breaking Bad fan. In a lawsuit that many saw coming, an Ohio man named Noam Lazebnik recently filed a class action suit against Apple upon finding out that the $22.99 he forked over for a 'Season Pass' of Breaking Bad was only good for the first 8 episodes of the show's final season."

20 of 458 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Why is Apple the one being sued? by ArcadeMan · 2013-09-09 02:25 · Score: 5, Funny

They didn't make the Breaking Bad series, they're not the ones who decided to split up the season in two. What's next, suing Apple because the new pop music album is crap?

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
1. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by tverbeek · 2013-09-09 02:28 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  One of the cardinal rules of litigation is that the list of defendants includes everyone involved (in any way) who has money.
  
  --
  http://alternatives.rzero.com/
2. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by jonwil · 2013-09-09 02:29 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Apple did not split the new season in 2 parts but they ARE the ones that sold it as a "season pass" and didn't say anywhere that the "season pass" is not good for the entire season.
  To me its a fairly simple case of misleading advertizing.
3. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by Xest · 2013-09-09 02:32 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  No but they are the ones who are selling a season pass for half a season.
  Maybe things are different in the US, but in the UK at least the onus is on the retailer to make sure the products they sell are correctly advertised.
  If it's genuinely not Apple's fault, then Apple gets to sue onwards to the provider of the product to recoup their costs, but either way the consumer's purchase contract was with Apple, so the consumer is right to take it up against Apple.
4. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by gorzek · 2013-09-09 02:41 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Indeed. AMC's official stance is that this is one season of 16 episodes. For Apple to make the decision to consider it two "seasons" as far as "season passes" are concerned--well, I hope they've got some good fine print on that, otherwise they're boned. To me, "season pass" means "season pass," not "half a season pass." If Apple doesn't like it, they should take it up with AMC.
  
  --
  Check out my world simulator thingy.
5. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by ChromaticDragon · 2013-09-09 03:03 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There are couple of problems with your quip. First, it seems this chap isn't going after money. The article suggests he is seeking only a refund... for all he deems swindled by this. Second, he doesn't seem to have sued more than his immediate interface in this chain of commerce. That is, he's simply trying to hold Apple to their apparently declared obligation.
  Actually, however, there are a number of reasons to sue multiple parties in many cases regardless of the amount of money sought. Sometimes it's pretty clear who did you wrong. Here it seems rather clear that Apple made a particular promise prior to a proper appreciation or understanding of the intent of AMC. But often it's not entirely clear. Next, suing all involved parties forces them all to get their act together (individually and collectively) since if any party doesn't show at court judgement may default against them regardless of actual guilt/responsibility. Sadly, it seems litigation is often required to get multiple bureaucracies to work together... or against each other. Which brings us to another reason - getting your opponents' lawyers to do your work for you as they endeavour to show the other defendant guilty.
6. Re: Why is Apple the one being sued? by gbjbaanb · 2013-09-09 03:55 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  why is Apple being sued even if all they did was set down a box and say "hey consumers, good stuff will be in here" and "hey producers, stick your stuff in here". You'd think with that kind of setup they're doing nothing but acting as a middle man bringing consumers and producers together so they could engage in a transaction of goods for money.
  However, they didn't do this - to each side they said "we'll handle this", and charged a tidy sum for the privilege, Consumers don't see who produces the goods, and producers don;'t see who purchases them - Apple sticks a great big wall in between so that they, and only they, are the ones taking the big fat cut. As a result, the consumer has no-one else to sue - his business was with Apple.
  now, Apple might well decide to sue the producer in turn for not supplying the described product, but I fear that Apple, in their greed simply set up the box like I first described and left them to it - in order to make as much money as possible with the least amount of effort. And this is the result, no-one to blame but themselves.
7. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by roc97007 · 2013-09-09 04:15 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  There are couple of problems with your quip. First, it seems this chap isn't going after money. The article suggests he is seeking only a refund... for all he deems swindled by this.
  ^^ This is insightful?
  Are we supposed to believe that this guy is undertaking the effort and expense of litigation all in the name of recovering his $22.99?
  NO!
  There is an army of lawyers here, FUNDING and waiting upon the outcome of this case before launching similar class-actions that will net them millions of dollars and all the "swindled" customers a free season something.
  Good god man. Wake up. Read between the lines.
  Shrug. Sometimes it's a matter of principle. As the OP said, he's apparently seeking a refund for a product he purchased and didn't receive. Going after the retailer for this is entirely reasonable. If the retailer was unknowingly selling half-full boxes of product, it's then the retailer's job to sue the manufacturer. In the IT industry it's called "one throat to choke". When you deal with a distributor, the distributor is ultimately responsible to the customer for the product matching the description. In this case "season pass" for half a season is clearly receiving a half-full box.
  
  --
  Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
8. Re: Why is Apple the one being sued? by Midnight+Thunder · 2013-09-09 04:48 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  why is Apple being sued even if all they did was set down a box and say "hey consumers, good stuff will be in here" and "hey producers, stick your stuff in here".
  I would argue that the customer shouldn't have to dig to find out who is responsible. From the customer's point of view Apple sold him the content and was the point where the text was presented. Now whether it is Apple or the publishers behind, is for Apple to decide whether they pass the buck.
  In the example of Best Buy the relationship between the box and the store is a bit clearer, but if Best Buy has an advert saying something that incorrect and it has the Best Buy logo on it, then it is Best Buy's responsibility, even it was the publisher behind changing the offering.
  
  --
  Jumpstart the tartan drive.
9. Re:Why is Apple the one being sued? by msauve · 2013-09-09 05:08 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Well, if you go to the AMC website, you'll find videos from the second half labeled "Season 5, Episode 13" and such.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
10. Re: Why is Apple the one being sued? by spire3661 · 2013-09-09 06:08 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  If I go into Best Buy and through their advertising they inform me that I can get all of season 8 of breaking bad on DVD for $X. If I then take the box home and only find HALF of season 8 in it, im going ot go back to Best Buy and say 'WTF'
  
  --
  Good-bye
Amazon, others doing it too by XxtraLarGe · 2013-09-09 02:27 · Score: 4, Informative

From what I understand, other vendors are doing it as well, and it was due to a decision by AMC. Besides, if they charge $2.99 per HD episode, and the season pass was $22.99, wouldn't it seem peculiar to give such a big price break for 16 episodes? Not trying to excuse Apple, just trying to introduce a little reason into the debate. I think the fault ultimately lies with AMC and the way they decided to break up the season into two parts.

--
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
As usual, the legit users get punished by Powercntrl · 2013-09-09 02:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

Meanwhile, the people who just download the series through torrents have no such problem.

--

---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Counterpoint by schneidafunk · 2013-09-09 02:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

If the price is $3 per episode, why bother paying $23 for 8 episodes... to save $1?

--
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
Re:First World Problems by gl4ss · 2013-09-09 02:36 · Score: 5, Informative

*I seriously doubt this was apple!s decision. Wrong party to sue.*
well apple sure was the party that sold the season pass... even if apple wasn't the party to decide that the final season is actually two seasons.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Some thoughts by Cowclops · 2013-09-09 02:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

Obviously, its a problem when "Season Pass" doesn't actually get you the whole season. If I hadn't RTFA'd I might have presumed that the guy was complaining that he didn't get access to either all 16 episodes including the ones that weren't even played yet (that would be absurd) or that he didn't get access to the first 8 + the ones that have been played already (not absurd but I wouldn't be on his side)
If Apple's intention was that buying a season pass to season 5 of breaking bad would get you the first 8 episodes now, and the last 8 episodes when they were released to dvd/bluray/download, it would just be a matter of patience and I'd still be on Apple's side on this one.
Except from the sounds of it, Apple was selling a season pass to "Season 5" and not listing it as "The first 8 episodes of season 5." They had no intention of ever giving him access to the last 8 episodes of Season 5 for that price, making it "Not really a season pass." Clearly this is a problem and the guy just wants his money back for misleading advertising. If I were him, I'd be ok with a gift card in the amount of the price of the first 8 episodes, since the second 8 will presumably be priced the same anyway, effectively getting me what was advertised. The whole season for one price.
Better Call Saul! by bradgoodman · 2013-09-09 02:48 · Score: 5, Funny

...for a lawsuit like this!
Re:AMC split season 5 by Bill+Dimm · 2013-09-09 03:32 · Score: 4, Informative

Perhaps someone at Apple made the mistake of thinking they were two separate seasons.
The studio sure seems to be encouraging that mistake. They are selling DVDs saying "The Fifth Season" on the packaging with no hint that it is half of a season
Re:AMC split season 5 by jollyreaper · 2013-09-09 04:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

Piracy means never having to deal with this kind of BS. Hint to companies: don't make piracy easier/better than watching legally. We have choices we never had before.

--
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2013-09-09 08:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

Comment removed based on user account deletion