Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The iPhone Is Guaranteed To Last Only One Year, Apple Argues In Court (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-they-see-it dept.

Reader Jason Koebler writes: Last month, Greg Joswiak, Apple's VP of iOS, iPad, and iPhone Marketing, told Buzzfeed that iPhones are "the highest quality and most durable devices. We do this because it's better for the customer, for the iPhone, and for the planet."
But in a class-action court case over the widespread premature failure of tens of thousands of iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus devices, Apple argues that the company cannot guarantee any iPhone for more than a year. In a motion to dismiss, Apple argued that "to hold Apple's Limited Warranty substantively unconscionable simply because Plaintiffs expect their iPhones to last the length of their cellular service contracts 'would place a burden on [Apple] for which it did not contract.'"

6 of 435 comments (clear)

  1. Intentionally poor headline by chispito · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    1. Re:Intentionally poor headline by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also missing from the context: "for warranty purposes". Essentially what Apple is arguing in court is that they are not under obligation to repair or replace a device under warranty after a year. That seems rather standard.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Intentionally poor headline by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well if you read the article or the summary, Apple is not saying their devices only last 1 year. They are saying their warranties are 1 year which is standard for the US. But please show me the wide ranges of cell phones that has more than a 1 year warranty in the US. Also you realize that when you enter into a contract with a cellular carrier that is not Apple, that is the legal definition of 3rd party contract. What you are asking for is that your contract with Verizon, AT&T, etc whatever overwrites Apple's warranty to which Apple didn't agree. It's the same as saying when you get a 5 year auto loan for your new Honda (3 year limited, 5 year powertrain) from your bank, your 5 year bank loan should supersedes Honda's warranty and force Honda into a full 5 year warranty.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Intentionally poor headline by Jaime2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By your reasoning, the cell phone carriers should be on the hook for the extra year, not Apple, as it was the carriers that decided to sell a device with a one year warranty along with a two year contract. In that case, this court decision was correct to not hold Apple accountable.

      No, what I'm asking for is a company that claims to make a "durable" product back up that claim. Ironically enough, some auto manufacturers are now offering warranties that are longer than your average car loan or lease (a.k.a. durability), so your example is a rather poor one to use for comparison.

      Apple backs up it's claim of durability with its reputation. Organizations like Consumer Reports rate Apple as a manufacturer with lower defect rates that others in its segment. In theory, a longer warranty is less valuable on a durable product than it is on a shoddy product. If the product was "perfectly durable", then a warranty would be entirely superfluous.

      Also, you mentioned cars. It's quite common for a car to be sold with five year financing (or a four year lease) and a three year warranty. A warranty isn't magic, it simple trades predictability for economy. It's always cheaper (statistically) to not buy a warranty, but some people can't handle the financial disaster that would come along with being one of the "unlucky ones", so they buy the warranty. The length of the warranty has nothing to do with the quality of the product, it only represents the owner's tolerance for risk. The price of the warranty (in the case of phones this is baked into the purchase price) is dependent on the reliability of the product.

  2. Author not Reader by Luthair · · Score: 5, Informative

    Jason Koebler is the author of the article, which is true for all his submissions..... which makes him a spammer.

  3. Re:I don't see it by Daemonik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because a lot of Americans fall into the Libertarian "business transactions are between you and the business, not the government" trap, even when it severely disadvantages them.