Slashdot Mirror


DHS Seized Aftermarket Apple Laptop Batteries From Independent Repair Expert (vice.com)

Louis Rossmann says US Customs and Border Patrol seized $1,000 worth of laptop batteries, claiming they were counterfeit. From a report: Earlier this year, Louis Rossmann, the highest-profile iPhone and Mac repair professional in the United States, told Motherboard that determining "the difference between counterfeiting and refurbishing is going to be the next big battle" between the independent repair profession and Apple. At the time, his friend and fellow independent repair pro, Jessa Jones, had just had a shipment of iPhone screens seized by Customs and Border Patrol. Rossmann was right: His repair parts were also just seized by the US government.

Last month, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized a package containing 20 Apple laptop batteries en route to Rossman's store in New York City. The laptop batteries were en route from China to Rossmann Repair Group -- a NYC based repair store that specializes in Apple products. "Apple and customs seized batteries to a computer that, at [the Apple Store], they no longer service because they claim it's vintage," Rossmann, the owner and operator of Rossmann Repair Group, said in a YouTube video. "They will not allow me to replace batteries, because when I import batteries that are original they'll tell me the they're counterfeit and have them stolen from by [CBP]." CBP seized the batteries on September 6, then notified Rossmann via a letter dated October 5. Rossmann produced the letter in its entirety in his video.

242 comments

  1. Seems like easy rules could fix by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To prevent this, you could just have the protection lasted as long as the product was being sold/supported by the company.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finding an easy fix is not the hurdle.

    2. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Easier, don't buy Apple (or other manufacturers) that pull this kind of stuff with products they sell to consumers, by pushing mandatory obsolescence.

    3. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      asier, don't buy Apple (or other manufacturers) that pull this kind of stuff

      You're right. I'll avoid computer companies that do this.

      Of course, that means I guess I'm sourcing the batteries, motherboard, screen, etc. all separately.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, I'm typing this from my last Apple product ever.

    5. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or you could stop buying illegal products... but that doesn't fit the "Evil Big Corporation" narrative.

      An important detail about Apple batteries is that they have the Apple logo on them, and that's precisely why they were seized, as explained in the letter in TFA. They may have come from the same manufacturer as actual Apple batteries, or even been part of a batch made under an Apple contract with Apple designs, but they still have the Apple logo on them. Since Rossmann isn't buying the batteries (even indirectly) from Apple, nor is he himself allowed to use the Apple logo, it's indeed illegal to use the Apple logo on them. That's precisely the purpose of a trademark: to identify that a product came from a particular vendor.

      Now, the Chinese manufacturer could have relabeled the batteries with their own logo, and said they're "compatible with Apple" (or similar wording), and everything would have been legal, and Apple would still be equally unhappy. Since they didn't actually do that, it's an illegal use of the mark.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    6. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      considering Louis didn't show the batteries, since he doesn't have them, no photograph of the batteries was included, and no other image of a replacement battery, not an apple original battery, was shown.
      It's only assuming that the batteries were seized because of this said logo/trademark infringment.

      Though It is probably the most likely reason for the batteries being seized,

      the timing is a bit awkward for the very fact that there was a recent CBC documentary shown on tv, which was made some time ago.

      anyway, removing the logo would be an easy fix without any detriment to the functioning of the battery, but that would make apple again unhappy.

      I doubt there is any win in this for Louis, but there's always hope.

    7. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're assuming that the batteries are counterfits. If they were counterfeited in China, why bother adding the logo? Why doesn't the "used and recovered" battery story hold water? Or, given the e-Recyclling that used to take place, harvesting the cases from discarded laptops and replacing the cells.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    8. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exactly. Buying second hand goods should be illegal. It is the same as stealing from the benevolent companies that make it possible to buy anything in the first place. You shouldn't be able to fix your own car, change your own oil, or pump your own gas from a third party vendor. You should do everything at the dealership, using the trained, honest and fairly priced personnel available there. Or go to jail.

    9. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Prove to me that the manufacturer you contracted with did not manufacture additional inventory for sale to the local and international market while under contract to manufacture product for Apple, and thus did not have the full authorization to mark said inventory with the trademark and resell it or export it to the US under both Chinese and US law.

      "Those parts are not licensed for sale abroad.".

      Your contracts do not work that way.

      Your manager is a slave-driver deserving prison time for not just making the accusation. No, we involved the dept of homeland security through political connections to pull this off.

      That DHS. Formed after 911. Who handles terrorism.

      He and his product are innocent until proven guilty; Apple has a ridiculously high proof of burden to meet here that they did not file a false report. They have to prove international trade law doesn't apply and show their contracts in court.

      What's the prison time for filing a false report? Its a Felony last time I heard. Not knowing the law is no excuse.

      They need to push not just for civil charges, but also criminal. Punish them where it hurts.

      BTW, I Fully get the danger of batteries, and fully appreciate why there's a public interest for repair parts. Fully get the Chinese interference here as well and their tenancy to sell whatever they want however they want marked. Lots of fake batteries for laptops on amazon with fake UL stickers and batteries with printed and copied labels all with the same serial#.

      But you don't handle it THIS way.

    10. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you have ANY idea how stupid you sound right now? Because your argument is about as fucking pants on head retarded as saying if I change tires on my Ford its now a fake as it still has the Ford logo on the grill!

      News Flash Sparky...these are REFURBS, where they take the original batteries, remove the dead cells, and replace them with new cells. They are NOT being sold as new batteries, just as that used Dell you pick up on eBay isn't being sold as a new dell product despite having a Dell logo, its a used unit that has been refurbished.

      What Apple is trying to do is simple...make $3k+ hardware that is completely disposable as you simply won't be able to get any parts to make it work! You can't even give the "just take it to Apple" horseshit excuse, because just try that with something like a first gen Macbook Air and see what they tell ya...hint they'll tell you to throw it away as they will no longer service them at ANY price!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    11. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why doesn't the "used and recovered" battery story hold water?

      Because those wouldn't be any good. At best, these are refurbished (the cells have been replaced). As such, they should have been labeled as refurbished over the top of the Apple logo.

    12. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Aliexpress, ebay, and practically any local repair shop has practically every component ready to go to replace what you broke.

    13. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by humptheElephant · · Score: 1

      They were not counterfit, they were probably from other Apple laptops. Evidently, Apple will not sell any third party repairmen the replacement parts. Perhaps they would rather sell you a new laptop and trash the old one adding to our e-waste. You can go to Lous youtube channel where he talks about it.

    14. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It would seem Apple won't sell you, the owner of the old "vintage" laptop, the battery either. If Apple had their way, there'd be NO source for replacement batteries for "vintage" machines, leaving only choice to buy a new one.

    15. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppose you have a factory manufacturing Duracell batteries. You end up with some surplus pallets/lots that you sell to some wholesaler. That wholesaler then sells to some electronics store. Is that counterfeiting?

      Suppose Apple has a supply of batteries for newly manufactured laptops as well as replacements. Some warehouse has spares of the batteries either due to overproduction or when Apple killed off the models. Repairers could buy these batteries and keep the laptops functioning. Is that counterfeiting?

      Apple wants to be in full control of its products, even after they are sold. Eventually they'll probably create "smart batteries" with DRM chips to ensure both only authorized batteries are used and that a dead product stays dead.

    16. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by iive · · Score: 2

      They may have come from the same manufacturer as actual Apple batteries, or even been part of a batch made under an Apple contract with Apple designs, but they still have the Apple logo on them. Since Rossmann isn't buying the batteries (even indirectly) from Apple, nor is he himself allowed to use the Apple logo, it's indeed illegal to use the Apple logo on them.

      Your argument sums up to that only Apple could sell goods with Apple logo.

      Do you understand how far this reasoning could be applied to? For example, you will not be allowed to sell your old iPhone, or iMac to somebody else, because it has Apple logo and you are not Apple and you are not allowed to use the Apple logo.

      If these batteries has been sold as part of Apple product, then removed and then sold second hand, they are definitely not counterfeit. (To be honest, this doesn't seem to be the case here.)

      If parts are bought from manufacturer who has contract with Apple, then their status would depends on that contract. It is very likely that Apple would explicitly forbid the manufacturer from selling these part to others. And that would make them counterfeit.
      (Still, you never know with the Chinese.)

    17. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [AC to preserve moderation]

      It's perfectly legal to sell third-party replacement batteries for vintage Apple laptops, as shown by this top-secret underground sales site:
      https://smile.amazon.com/Repla...

      You just have to not advertise them as being Apple batteries.

    18. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Do you understand how far this reasoning could be applied to? For example, you will not be allowed to sell your old iPhone, or iMac to somebody else, because it has Apple logo and you are not Apple and you are not allowed to use the Apple logo.

      There isn't a line that connects those dots. Used equipment from an OEM is not at all the same thing as new generic parts with a trademarked logo slapped on them.

    19. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you not read the headline? Itâ(TM)s not just Apple. These are packages specificity being shipped to the repair shops. Itâ(TM)s low hanging fruit for customs officials to seize since counterfeit phones and their parts are easy bomb making materials.

    20. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Uberbah · · Score: 2

      Do you have ANY idea how stupid you sound right now?

      Do you?

      Because your argument is about as fucking pants on head retarded as saying if I change tires on my Ford its now a fake as it still has the Ford logo on the grill!

      Let's fix your analogy by making the Ford a Shelby GT-500 you bought used. It still looks like a Mustang, handles like a Mustang and may have a perfectly nice refurbished engine - but not the 500 hp cast iron block from Shelby, despite having all the Cobra decals. Which was one of the main reasons for making the purchase in the first place.

    21. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You donâ(TM)t have to rebrand refurbished parts. This is just nonsense border behavior meant to catch counterfeiters. I buy used things all of the time and this is no different. What is silly is their Apple logo products must be shipped from Apple. Itâ(TM)s silly to think they would need to work around it by scratching out the logo.

    22. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      To be fair, there is a legal line connecting those dots, and there is a legal reason it doesn't matter.

      The key is that the resale of like-new products is fine because it's not going to cause any brand confusion. The old iPhone you're selling is still an iPhone, and (assuming everyone plays by the rules) still has Apple's hardware inside the case. Legally, you're just selling an intact product (as you're entitled to under the first-sale doctrine), and you're not claiming to have changed its value in any way.

      However, once you do something that changes the product's value, you have to be absolutely clear what that change was. If you replaced the battery or otherwise refurbished the product, you're supposed to declare that, so customers know exactly what they're buying. You could upgrade or overclock some components, and call it "modified", and even charge more for it. That's all fine, as long as you're making effort to say "this isn't exactly what that label might make you think".

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    23. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by mustafap · · Score: 1

      >Eventually they'll probably create "smart batteries" with DRM chips to ensure both only authorized batteries are used and that a dead product stays dead.

          ink jet cartridges...

      --
      Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
    24. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      To clarify, Apple won't sell anyone the replacement parts, and that's fine. That's their right (through a rather roundabout path leading back to free speech).

      However, they can't stop other companies from making similar parts (even using materials salvaged from other Apple products) and selling those parts as "compatible"... unless the part manufacturer is stupid enough to leave the Apple logo front-and-center on the parts, so it looks like Apple made them. Then Apple can claim misuse of their trademark, which is exactly what's happening here.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    25. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or even better / easier: don't buy Apple products. Or products from companies that do not give people the choice to repair their products themselves or send them to the manufacturer.

    26. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% of counterfeit products are garbage (just ask anyone with a Louis Vuitton bag or a 2000$ Shoe) there is no safe way to counterfeit consumer electronics, and there never will be. So those fake batteries will always result in fire.

      Lest we all forget about exploding batteries on airplanes.

      Now counterfeit product makers produce things that only work long enough to get your money. Then you have no recourse.

      Now they would have you believe that these batteries are better, or even the very same (eg defective batteries from the real factory (Same thing with shoes) and theyâ(TM)re just cosmetic defects. The reality is that some factories just create overproduction with the intent of making their production goals, and any overproduction is supposed to be destroyed, but instead to reduce waste disposal costs, the waste recovery company loots these things.

    27. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which you would still be able to legally sell.

      Can take any car body and put any parts you want inside.

      The company that originally made the body has no right to stop your sale on the used market unless you are advertising the car as being a new original whatever the body is.

    28. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Xenx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, their analogy is much closer to accurate than yours. Apple is a brand, Ford is the car brand. The Shelby would be a very particular car within the brand. Your analogy would only hold if they're trying to sell refurbished Apple batteries that don't actually meet the original specs.

    29. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...except if these are recycled shells and interface boards with new cells, how does Apple have any say?

      Otherwise Ford could stop you from selling your Mustang if you replaced the engine with an aftermarket one, since it still looks like a Ford Mustang on the outside and has the same trademarked logos.

      - WolfWings, too lazy to login to /. in way too long.

    30. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      GP said "avoid manufacturers that do things like that." My response was a "I guess I have to build my own laptop". Because, they all do.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    31. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Otherwise Ford could stop you from selling your Mustang if you replaced the engine with an aftermarket one, since it still looks like a Ford Mustang on the outside and has the same trademarked logos.

      Technically... they could try. Then the question would be whether there's enough indication that the engine was replaced, so a consumer would know they aren't getting exactly what's obvious on the outside. For example, having a nice big logo when you open the hood is a good sign (pun only half-intended). Listing the car as having aftermarket upgrades would also help.

      Trademark law is based around fraud protection. If it's obvious that you aren't trying to defraud anyone with your sale, you'll generally be fine.

      ...except if these are recycled shells and interface boards with new cells, how does Apple have any say?

      The shells have an Apple logo on them, but Apple says they aren't Apple parts. If there was documentation along with the batteries (like the description field on the customs paperwork) that says they're modified, reclaimed, or otherwise non-Apple parts, that'd probably be fine. If it just says "Apple batteries" (or even just "batteries" with the Apple logo prominently on the front), though, that's illegal.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    32. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Because your argument is about as fucking pants on head retarded as saying if I change tires on my Ford its now a fake as it still has the Ford logo on the grill!

      Oh, I do love a good car analogy. However, that's not a good car analogy. Let's improve it, and make it relevant to the case in point.

      Let's say, hypothetically, you're selling tires to a used-car dealership. Naturally, they'll need to occasionally replace tires on a car before they can sell it. Now, you're trying to sell the dealership a set of Ford tires, to put on their Ford cars. You know they're Ford tires, because they say "Ford" right there in big letters on the sidewall, and you bought them from a vendor who said they took them off a car that rolled right out of the Ford factory.

      The problem is that Ford doesn't make tires, and says they certainly didn't make those tires. Legally, you're out of luck. There's no proof that the tires are a genuine Ford product, even if you personally are absolutely certain they are. Even if you can prove that Ford has made similar tires in the past, you have to show that the ones you're selling were indeed taken off that factory-fresh Ford. If you can't prove that, you don't have any legal grounds to be (re)selling a product with a Ford trademark.

      News Flash Sparky...these are REFURBS, where they take the original batteries, remove the dead cells, and replace them with new cells.

      It's important to note that TFA does not say the batteries are refurbished.

      If they are actually refurbished... So they completely replace the important part, leave the logo on the front, and try to sell it as being an Apple part, implying that it meets Apple's quality and design standards? That's pretty much a textbook case of counterfeiting.

      They are NOT being sold as new batteries, just as that used Dell you pick up on eBay isn't being sold as a new dell product despite having a Dell logo, its a used unit that has been refurbished.

      If only there was some evidence of this on the batteries, just like my refurbished laptop has a big sticker on the bottom that says "refurbished by X".

      What Apple is trying to do is simple...make $3k+ hardware that is completely disposable as you simply won't be able to get any parts to make it work!

      Apple can try all they want for that, but they absolutely cannot prevent anyone from making compatible replacement parts. All they can do is prevent others from using their logo.

      You can't even give the "just take it to Apple" horseshit excuse, because just try that with something like a first gen Macbook Air and see what they tell ya...hint they'll tell you to throw it away as they will no longer service them at ANY price!

      And that's fine. Apple has the right, like any American legal entity, to refuse service to customers for nearly any reason. Third-party shops are still able to operate, and they can use those compatible replacement parts mentioned above. Just don't stick an Apple logo on it, and it's all perfectly legal.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    33. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      '...because just try that with something like a first gen Macbook Air and see what they tell ya...hint they'll tell you to throw it away as they will no longer service them at ANY price!"

      Yet you can still get batteries and other parts for them used, refurbished, or OEM Stock from _legitimate_ sources like OWC. I just put an OWC battery in my old 1st Gen Air so, get this, I can _give_ it away as a slow, (2GB), but functioning machine to somebody who otherwise can't afford a new one. Many little Shops can do this for you if you can't do it yourself. But...
      The Charger that I bought off of eBay for it was dangerous shit; luckily I found an original in a Thrift store a couple of weeks back for $7, still with the silly end caps on the connectors. (All Air Chargers come with outer cable insulation that degrades, but this is more cosmetic than anything else; the Shield "Floats".)
      Counterfeit products, especially for high margin gear like Apple, are a major headache, and you can be pretty certain that if it is sold on eBay, it is crap by definition, and it is illegal, especially if it carries the Apple Logo. I don't have this problem with Craigslist... yet.
      Frankly, I don't give a shit about counterfeit Waterford Crystal or Louis Vuitton bags. The originals are often rarely any better. But something that given to a kid that can catch fire, explode or electrocute them is another thing entirely.

      Rossman blew his credibility with this:
        "Your logo is for brand recognition. Using it as a weapon is misuse of the law."
      No. If one of Rossman's batteries blows up in a Kid's face, the first thing the Parents will do is get a Lawyer to sue Apple. It is Apple's Logo that was on the Battery, not Rossman's. Rossman has just admitted to knowingly contracting for and selling Counterfeit goods. OWC puts their own label and logos on the batteries that they sell for this very reason, and Rossman is slime to try to wiggle out of getting caught this way.
      Screw him, ruin his "business", and smear him across the Internet. Or better yet, force Rossman to sit down with an expert on Trademark Law, and explain to him just why it is this way.

      There are legitimate grudges against Apple that I won't contest, _especially_ when it comes to degrading Macbook Charger outer insulation. I got a replacement for another more recent Charger for a more recent Air by holding it up at the Genius Bar, with insulating shredding and dust bunnies caught in the shielding, and mentioned something about would they allow their kids near this in a loud and obnoxious voice. Immediate replacement. I could easily re-sleeve the old one and keep it as a spare, but they insisted on keeping it for some reason.

    34. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      So if my blue oval was sun faded, I can only get a new one from Ford?

      There seems to be an awful lot of them on eBay and Amazon.

    35. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by irving47 · · Score: 1

      It's a fair bet Apple is behind the seizure at least semi-directly. There is a form to complain about a particular individual/company doing the importing on the CBP website. I think it's linked via the video Rossman made about this issue.

      --
      I had a sucky sig.
    36. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by irving47 · · Score: 1

      If you read the comments and information on his video the batteries actually had the apple logo on them because they were refurb'd or recovered from otherwise dead macbooks. The sellers USUALLY BLACK OUT the Apple logo so they won't be flagged as counterfeited logos/products. This shipment, they forgot.

      --
      I had a sucky sig.
    37. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's not assumed, they said counterfeit which means, by definition, that they contain some type of branding which is being used in a non legit fashion.
      Without the brand mark they're not counterfeit.

    38. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were not refurbished batteries. They were Apple manufactured batteries removed from Apple products that we broken.
      There are people who buy broken things so they can sell the individual parts separately. They do this a lot with Apple products because Apple refuses to sell parts.

      So if the batteries blow up, it's apples fault.

    39. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They were Apple manufactured batteries removed from Apple products that we (sic) broken."
      We don't know this; you certainly don't. What we have is Rossman's claim to this, and the examination by Customs, who are surprisingly good at this, that the Batteries were Counterfeit. In any event, they gave Rossman several venues to pursue the authenticity issue, he chose to bitch on the Internet instead.
      It is entirely possible that Rossman ordered the batteries in good faith, and was screwed by his supplier. You are aware of the Chinese Black Market in Apple Parts?
      https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/10/09/rampant-chinese-iphone-repair-fraud-forced-apple-to-develop-countermeasures
      Instead he raises the Great Apple Conspiracy. If he doesn't follow through on the authenticity issue, Customs will destroy the goods, another thing that they are surprisingly good at, and we will never know for sure.

    40. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      > If they were counterfeited in China, why bother adding the logo

      To sell them to home repair laptop owners, to third-party repair vendors, or even on Ebay to uncautious people who believe the vendor and the trademark.It can even be common to replace legitimate orders with illegitimate, counterfeit components and charge full price. I've never encountered this with laptops, but I've encountered it with video cards and RAID controllers. An intern who worked with me sought to keep a purchase order under the price where he and i would have to submit extra paperwork, and made just such a mistake on several orders. I understood the intern's desire to fulfill corporate economy to always the lowest bidder: we had to have a long talk about how to manipulate the bids to ensure that only _reliable_ vendor's bids were seen by the penny pinching accountant who was always insisting on the lowest possible bids.

    41. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by cb88 · · Score: 1

      Strange that you seem to think that isn't already a thing... Dell's for sure do this for quite some years.

      I don't know if I would call it a DRM chip.... but the batteries do communicate thier state to the PC and it can decide if they fast charge or not, etc... I have a reburb in my Dell and it's a bit wonky doesn't always charge quite right but it does work for the most part...

    42. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Xenx · · Score: 1

      Aside from referencing Ford, I don't see how that relates to my comment. However, in answer... Any company that licensed the Ford logo for that purpose would be able to legally sell a replacement. If they recovered it from a wrecked car or other licensed source, I assume it could be sold. Aside from that, it would depend on exactly how Ford handles their trademark.

    43. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go home, shyster. No one here wants what you're selling.

    44. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 1

      Everything you say is ONLY true if--IF--the batteries are actually counterfeit.

      On what basis are you determining that they are counterfeit and not second-hand originals? That a counterfeit market exists? So does a legitimate second-hand market. That CBP made the determination? They hardly have a perfect track record here.

      I don't see where you have any special insight, yet you seem really confident that Rossman is a conman.

    45. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot is like the last stronghold for Apple fanboys like yourself. Even here the majority of comments are saying Apple is in the wrong. How many times can blindly defend a company that is doing stupid shit? I hope you are at least getting paid for your astroturfing.

    46. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by iive · · Score: 1

      To be fair, there is a legal line connecting those dots, and there is a legal reason it doesn't matter.

      The key is that the resale of like-new products is fine because it's not going to cause any brand confusion. The old iPhone you're selling is still an iPhone, and (assuming everyone plays by the rules) still has Apple's hardware inside the case. Legally, you're just selling an intact product (as you're entitled to under the first-sale doctrine), and you're not claiming to have changed its value in any way.

      However, once you do something that changes the product's value, you have to be absolutely clear what that change was. If you replaced the battery or otherwise refurbished the product, you're supposed to declare that, so customers know exactly what they're buying. You could upgrade or overclock some components, and call it "modified", and even charge more for it. That's all fine, as long as you're making effort to say "this isn't exactly what that label might make you think".

      You see, you are claiming first sale doctrine, but then you are completely undermining it. Once I buy something it is completely mine. Every part of it is mine. I can do whatever I want with it. Including reselling it.
      You are talking about changing value and declaring it. What is the legal authority I should declare these things to? What is the law that mandates I do that? What even "value" means in this context!!

      If you as consumer accept such erosion of the first sale doctrine, soon there will be no first sale doctrine.
      The moment you remove the product from its wrapping, its "value" is diminished.
      Apple may not allow you to resale product with diminished "value" that bears the Apple logo.

      If you don't fight such interpretation, soon they will become the norm.

      I can buy iMac, take its battery out and sell it.
      All I have to do is say that it is a second hand.
      Been second hand means I have bought it legally, I own it, and its "value" is diminished.

      There is something more. The batteries are not visible part of the product. You cannot find out what is the logo on the battery of a working MacBookPro. You have to use special screws to open it and look inside.
      The brand recognition is completely useless if it cannot be seen.

      The only reason these parts have Apple trademark logo on them, is to claim counterfeit if they are been resold.

    47. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If they were counterfeited in China, why bother adding the logo?

      You do understand the point of "counterfeiting" right?

    48. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could stop having our law enforcement be nothing more than jack-booted thugs for corporations.

      US Marshals, CBP and a host of other LE agencies are nothing more than corporate enforcement agencies and do not serve the people.

      numbnuts

    49. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone likes Apple jizz a little too much.

      numbuts

    50. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Counterfeit implies that it is supposed to pass as the original, which would mean it would need the logo on it... But as you say, it's not clear if that is what these are.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    51. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you ever actually considered the idea that these are apple batteries, made by apple? I'm going to take a guess here, but they're being sold as *refurbished*, not new. They were made by apple with apple components, all dues paid in full to apple. This is apple wanting to have its cake and eat it and it's just plain piracy.

    52. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Since Rossmann isn't buying the batteries (even indirectly) from Apple, nor is he himself allowed to use the Apple logo, it's indeed illegal to use the Apple logo on them.

      This isn't true.... If the batteries were made by Apple and being re-sold, then Apple REQUIRED their logo be on it when Apple had it manufactured, and the markings
      remain when other people are re-selling Apple's product with or without Apple's blessing -
      If Apple originally sold the unit, then it's Trademark Fair Use for people recovering and reselling the old Apple parts to continue using the logo --- even if the batteries had been reconditioned by a 3rd party in China.
       
      It would be illegal for Rossman to use Apple's Logo in trade -- marketing his services, but he doesn't do that; in fact, when a reconditioned (or new) replacement battery pack with the Apple outer shell gets installed in a laptop ---- all the markings are concealed inside the machine, so the consumer never even gets a chance to see markings on the battery - they are not being used in trade: only because Apple made sure they were put there originally.

    53. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by mysidia · · Score: 1

      that says they're modified, reclaimed, or otherwise non-Apple parts, that'd probably be fine.

      Who says they've been "modified" or "reclaimed" ?

      The parts very well could have been never-used OEM parts that come off an Apple manufacturing line and/or waiting unused in storage to be ordered. These might have been stolen parts that were supposed to have been delivered for distribution to Apple service centers or stock or left-over units that were supposed to have been installed in new laptops, But that wouldn't make the units counterfeit.

    54. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem was that the products were no genuine Apple products but used the Apple logo and trademarks on them. Rossman acknowledges this on Reddit.

    55. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I do have special insight, going back to the "Tiger Team" era of the DOE. There were too many accidents, and I was on one of the committees to figure out why. That is when the issue of Counterfeit parts first cropped up for us, although the FAA had been dealing with this for years before. Back then it was just Bolts and Lifting Eyes and 4-0 Copper Cabling , and Stainless Steel that wasn't Stainless and was barely Steel. Only later on did we start seeing Chips that were restamped with higher Specs.
      My own experience with Customs was fairly mild; back then they were under Treasury, and their main concern was collecting Taxes and Duties, and everything hinged on Declarations, that Imported Goods were of the value stated, nothing more. Imported Counterfeit Goods were but part of a whole; Counterfeiting flourished within the US for decades, and Customs simply didn't care. For instance: Automobile Body Parts. This was quite the scandal at one time, replacement Front Fenders could be sourced from say Ford at a high cost, or salvaged cheaper from a junkyard. But replacement Fenders started showing up that simply didn't fit, the contours were wrong and the bolt holes didn't line up. They were Counterfeit, and they were made in the USA.

      Perhaps you missed this in an earlier post:
      https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/10/09/rampant-chinese-iphone-repair-fraud-forced-apple-to-develop-countermeasures
      In 2013, Apple Warranty costs on just iPhone products found to have been tampered with, to extract valuable resale parts, was TWO BILLION DOLLARS. This is not Mom and Pop Counterfeiting, this is not about some little Repair shop in NYC not paying Due Diligence to the Provenance of the Parts that they order, this is massive Fraud on an organized scale, and at least in the US, it is the US Importers, usually or often US Citizens, who facilitate this, in order to save a Buck or two. China here just supplies the product on a no-questions-asked basis. (FWIW, much of the "Bad Metal" that we got back then from Grainger or McMaster-Carr was traced to Eastern Europe and India; Global Markets shift...)

      I was pretty much on Rossman's side on other issues up to now; he does champion the FIY ethos. But Customs traditionally sided with Importers on this issue; if somebody wants to relabel a $10 bottle of Scotch as a $20 bottle of Scotch, and pay the difference in Duties, so be it. (I also have quite some experience in Bonding and Bonded Warehouses; if a High Value component is Imported and put under Bond, say a Klystron from Germany, the Warranty doesn't kick in until it is taken out of Bond and taken out of the Warehouse and put into service. This system actually works very well; it keeps everybody honest.)
      If Customs found that the Batteries that Rossman Imported were Counterfeit, that is, not of stated Manufacture, Quality, Value, and/or Origin, it is almost certain that this is so. Customs traditionally bends in the _other_ direction, and lets Civil Courts sort out these matters. Fraud here has to be pretty blatant to arouse Customs' suspicions.
      (BTW, you are allowed to purchase and import Counterfeit Goods on a Personal, not Commercial, basis as long as this is Declared, usually while at the Airport, while waiting in a long line. You can bring in One Gucci Fake. You cannot bring in two.)
      The thing is, Rossman went off the deep end; he charges Customs and Apple as being in collusion, and this might possibly be true. But his case rests on the Logos on the Batteries, and his deep misunderstanding of Trademark Law. A Logo "is for brand recognition. Using it as a weapon is misuse of the law." in his view, and this is either naive or disingenuous. He is admitting that these Batteries are not marked as stated; and that in his view Trade Markings are mere Marketing, so this is OK.
      I don't mean to gang up on you here; there is still too much that we don't know, and we still have to hear from the Apple and Customs Lawyers. So let's just have some pertinent Fun.

      In Wibberley's "The Mouse That Roared", the D

    56. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually worse than this. If you design a bag that appears very similar to a high priced bag but without the logo, customs may still seize the material arguing it's trivial to stamp them as the higher priced bag. Ie, there's a certain degree of implied guilt if you import a lot of knock-off bags even if you never intend to sell them as anything but knock-off bags. That leaves you to petition customs to try to get your shipment back from their seizure and hope that you get your stock back in something remotely resembling a reasonable time frame without having to pay whatever they demand.

      As for the e-Recycling part mentioned by the GP, you can go on eBay and find tons of sellers from China selling all sorts of Core 2 Duo chips from $1 to $20 (free shipping). I doubt they're all counterfeit CPUs. I know at least some of them are clear original from Macbooks as noted by some Core 2 Duos only being used in Macs and some only in mobile Macs. Definitely there's a real risk of counterfeiting of other things, and I totally support customs putting in the effort to verify something is what it claims to be. But if it all comes down to the word of Apple saying they didn't authorize a shipment, then there should be a standard mechanism of restitution from the trademark holder if goods are shown to not be counterfeit.

    57. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      They were physically tested and found to be counterfeit. End of story they are illegal and very likely dangerous. Given the price paid I doubt they used Apple's formulation.

    58. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course apple is behind this. The company is scum.

    59. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      If the parts had Ford OEM markings you could not legally sell the car as you would be committing fraud.

    60. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by spongman · · Score: 1

      Rossi am repeatedly states that there are original apple batteries, that he has purchased from this supplier before and given it a high rating - which presumably means they ship what they sell.

    61. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Problem is they were marked as OEM Apple batteries. if there not that illegal. If you bought a new ford alternator and later found out it was a refurbished used unit you would be pissed because you would have been defrauded.

    62. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      note there is no actionable claim here the buyer has not been damaged. His only claim would against the seller.

      Products don't have rights. They can be assumed counterfeit until proven genuine. That's actually how international shipping works. The paperwork is required.

    63. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those batteries were not counterfeit tho.

    64. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone likes Apple jizz a little too much

    65. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were physically tested and found to be counterfeit.

      The story doesn't say that at all, the letter said nothing about that either. You are just making shit up.

    66. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by belmolis · · Score: 1

      Where does the article say that they were "physically tested"? I see nothing in the article that indicates that these batteries are any different from the batteries originally supplied by apple.

    67. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      A CBP spokesperson told Motherboard in an email: “CBP officers and trade specialists detained the shipment and submitted samples to CBP’s Consumer Products and Mass Merchandising Centers for Excellence and Expertise (CEE), the agency’s trade experts, who determined the batteries to be counterfeit."

    68. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      OWC has no issues importing batteries for 10 year old mac's. because the don't buy knockoffs.

    69. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because every non-apple battery is dangerous?

    70. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you n1ggers

    71. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You _get_ this, although your grasp of English Usage needs some finessing.
      But a bit of further clarification is needed.
      A Counterfeit Rolex is branded a Rolex.
      A Knockoff Rolex is branded a Rolexx. (Substitute Apple for Rolex if you wish... except fake Rolex parts don't have a reputation of spontaneously combusting...)
      What Rossman is claiming is that his Rolex Parts are Genuine, with the Genuine Rolex Logos and IP. He quite clearly states that Rolex has _no_ rights to their own IP, yet Rossman does. It's in, again, that utterly incriminating statement:
      "Your logo is for brand recognition. Using it as a weapon is misuse of the law."
      Law needs to bite Rossman in the ass.

      Of all of the utterly damn stupid things to say, he went and said it. Rossman is guilty of obstinate Stupidity, if nothing more.
      If _Customs_, who have a long and lucrative Tradition of looking the other way, found that Rossman's Batteries were Counterfeit, and this means by fairly strict Legal definitions of Counterfeit, they pretty much are. Go ahead, look up where Customs has been found _Wrong_ here. I actually went and searched this very thing; Customs is batting a Thousand. (Disclaimer: I have had my own run-ins with Customs, but this is a certainty: Their required Paperwork can be Soul-Sucking. Man Up, stagger through it.)

      Now as for OWC, I have a pretty major beef with them. I don't like some people associated with them, and they don't like me. That's fine, this is Personal, not Business. As a Business, they are scrupulously honest, but as for some of their Management... the recent Political Concept "Deplorable" applies. But note this: They keep their Politics out of their Business.
      This is why Utopian Socialists like me will still do Business with them.

      Captcha: defects

    72. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      Batteries like this are removed from recycled machines. The cells inside are replaced with new cells and the power management chip is zeroed so they start counting cycles again. In my experience, the aftermarket manufacturers don't intentionally put Apple logos on parts precisely because of the trademark infringement causing goods to be seized. On the other hand, they haven't really had to remove existing logos until now. It's only recently that CBP has started aggressively confiscating shipments of refurbed parts like this.

      I know of another anecdote of an American based in China who operates an aftermarket parts business. He buys recycled phones and laptops in bulk from the US and has them shipped to China. There, his company strips the components and refurbs consumable parts. Then they ship the components back to his business the US. He's had multiple shipments seized, despite the fact that he's quite literally shipping parts that he owns to himself.

      One thing that Rossmann's colleague Jess talks about is how when a shipment is seized, CBP keeps everything in it. Not just the items they claim to be contraband but everything in the shipment.

    73. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Not end of story. They were physically looked at and found to contain Apple logos, therefore CBP assumed them to be counterfeit.

    74. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Do you understand how far this reasoning could be applied to? For example, you will not be allowed to sell your old iPhone, or iMac to somebody else, because it has Apple logo and you are not Apple and you are not allowed to use the Apple logo.

      Nope, the courts have ruled many times that you have the ability to resell anything you own. (It's called the Doctrine of 1st Sale. Look it up.)

    75. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Aliexpress, ebay, and practically any local repair shop has practically every component ready to go to replace what you broke.

      Yup. Including those for Apple. WYFP?

    76. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were not counterfit, they were probably from other Apple laptops.

      So what exactly do you mean by that? Already used batteries from old laptops? Or new batteries from unsold Apple stock that somehow "dropped from a truck"? Is that the kind of stuff Louis "CK" sells as new replacement parts?

    77. Re: Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rossi am repeatedly states that there are original apple batteries, that he has purchased from this supplier before and given it a high rating - which presumably means they ship what they sell.

      But if Apple doesn't sell them to anyone - how did they get them?

    78. Re:Seems like easy rules could fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they only have Ford markings because they were originally made by Ford, and you disclosed the refurbishment work you had done on it, then you would be fine, as there would be no misrepresentation, and therefore, no fraud.

  2. Free Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    This is the free market. It will correct.

    1. Re:Free Market by Revek · · Score: 4, Funny

      It will also trickle down.

    2. Re: Free Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And declare itself a genderqueer tranny

    3. Re:Free Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is the free market. It will correct.

      What color is the sky on your fucking planet? Because it sure as shit isn't blue.

      This is overweening government using rules created by regulatory capture to protect powerful entrenched interests.

      It's most assuredly not anything close to being free market.

    4. Re:Free Market by Tokolosh · · Score: 1

      Please mod up.

      --
      Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    5. Re:Free Market by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > What color is the sky on your fucking planet? Because it sure as shit isn't blue.

      As long as there isn't some blatant cronyism involved, someone will step up. It's against human nature to leave money on the table.

      Actually, the original article is a pretty good example. The only reason there is even a problem now is because of blatant cronyism.

      The market is being interfered with by government. Shameless corporate boot lickers are cheering on the nonsense.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:Free Market by mustafap · · Score: 1

      >The market is being interfered with by THE USA government

      there, corrected that for you.

      --
      Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
    7. Re:Free Market by Xenx · · Score: 1

      In this particular cases, it would be the US government. However, the problems jedidiah mentions are not unique to the US government.

    8. Re:Free Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember! The Gov only regulates what their rich donors want them to regulate to give the big boys market advantage.

  3. Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Companies like Apple use "intellectual property" laws to circumvent prohibitions on tying.
    It's illegal to require me to buy my battery from Apple just because I bought my computer from them.
    And what's happening here is even worse: trying to make it illegal for anyone to sell batteries for computers Apple wants their customers to replace.

    1. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      And Customs overreaching their authority.
      These are legitimate replacement batteries. Not knockoffs. Taxes paid. Not Customs job. Not DHS job.

    2. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If apple no longer makes those replacement batteries, then how can they be legitimate apple branded batteries? Presumably these were just manufactured and not 'new old stock'.

    3. Re: Abuse of the law by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      It all depends on if they were new or used. If they were used, they're probably legit. If they were actually new, then it explains why Mr Rossman uses sarcastic language instead of direct language. He complains that DHS doesn't consider that maybe the batteries were removed from used devices, but that's not the same as saying "the batteries were in fact removed from used devices."

      I can't say I'm liking or trusting either side on this one. Two assholes having a fart competition.

    4. Re: Abuse of the law by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      If apple no longer makes those replacement batteries, then how can they be legitimate apple branded batteries? Presumably these were just manufactured and not 'new old stock'.

      If they were used, or new old stock.

    5. Re: Abuse of the law by dnaumov · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but you donâ(TM)t get to use the Apple logo when you donâ(TM)t actually own the trademark

    6. Re: Abuse of the law by Calydor · · Score: 2

      At the point where he is repairing computers that Apple WILL NOT repair themselves I don't care if the batteries are legit or counterfeit. He is not costing Apple anything.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    7. Re: Abuse of the law by sjames · · Score: 1

      Why is that presumable?

    8. Re: Abuse of the law by iive · · Score: 2

      At the point where he is repairing computers that Apple WILL NOT repair themselves I don't care if the batteries are legit or counterfeit. He is not costing Apple anything.

      Every repair of old Apple product is a missed sale of new Apple product.

      It's the Broken Window fallacy.

    9. Re: Abuse of the law by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Who cares if you care, though? How does that impact the situation, or the analysis?

      If the story was, "DHS encourages people to avoid local swap meet" then it would matter. But the story is about something else.

    10. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      says who?
      we donâ(TM)t know if they are fake
      we donâ(TM)t know if the factory made extra without apples permission to use there trademark
      it seems very dumb that his sell and himself wouldnâ(TM)t remove the logo...
      unless he was charging people extra for the battery being genuine

    11. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple doesn't even make batteries. They buy these batteries and silkscreen an apple logo on them.
      These are the exact same parts. Not knockoffs.

    12. Re: Abuse of the law by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > If apple no longer makes those replacement batteries, then how can they be legitimate apple branded batteries? Presumably these were just manufactured and not 'new old stock'.

      They don't have to be "branded". They only have to meet very basic physical characteristics.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    13. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      made more batteries in case apple changes the order and wants more batteries

    14. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same has happened to other people previously with screens. https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/evk4wk/dhs-seizes-iphone-screens-jessa-jones

    15. Re: Abuse of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Revisit the rule of separation of church and state once again. The Cult of Jobs is taking up way too much of the federal government's resources.

    16. Re: Abuse of the law by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      Rossmann is an extremely sarcastic person. These batteries were certainly refurbished using components that were at one point removed from recycled laptops. The best type of aftermarket parts you can get are actually the refurb components assembled in this fashion. The battery shell and power management circuitry were built by Apple. When the parts are recycled, the battery cells are replaced and the cycle count is reset to zero. This is ideal because the electronics and the casing dimensions are still Apple spec and you don't have to worry about incompatibility or a poor mechanical fit.

      This is also true for phone displays. When a display breaks, generally the LCD is perfectly fine even when the glass is shattered. With the proper tools and techniques, it's not difficult to remove shattered glass and adhere on a new pane of glass. Then the display can be sold as refurbished and you know that the software and electronics in the part will work exactly as intended. This is as opposed to displays that are built from completely new parts. In my experience, it is these displays which have issues with color accuracy and touch detection because they really are cheap knockoffs. Interestingly, in some countries there's a high demand for cheaper replacement parts than there is for the more expensive refurb parts, even if the cheaper parts don't work as well.

      Louis calls his batteries new because they were as close to new as you can get while still getting a part that matches Apple's specs. The only Apple-original, un-remanufactured parts that you could buy from anywhere would have to be stolen. I know for a fact (I've been a customer of Rossmann Group) that if a customer asks what kind of parts are going into their device, Louis is honest that they are either refurbished (batteries, screens) or taken from recycled machines of the same type (microprocessors, cables, etc). There's a big push in the US culturally and legally to ensure that our electronics are properly recycled, both because disposing of them completely is an environmental nightmare and also because of the intense resource consumption that goes into making them. The best way to "recycle" a battery is to replace the consumed electrolytic material and use it again. It's disgusting that companies would selfishly cause more waste like this by trying to ban refurbishment and repair.

    17. Re: Abuse of the law by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The thing is, when you're introducing a word like "assembled" then it is no longer clear that it is a used device, or a new device made from recycled parts.

      Rossmann's position is very hair-splitting, and when there are always these words that reduce clarity, instead of presenting the actual facts, then it makes me suspicious.

      You've got lots of apples and oranges there; when I buy a new-old-stock phone display to use with my microcontroller projects, it is literally as good as new; an old battery is not as good as new. It might even explode when you try to charge it. So getting hand-wavy about parts in general doesn't even fit the circumstances, and it doesn't even purport to be actual facts about the situation.

      You use the words "were certainly" where the truth seems to be, "I'm guessing". Those are not at all equivalent.

    18. Re: Abuse of the law by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      I use the words "were certainly" because I'm familiar with Rossmann Group's work, having been a customer in the past. If you're taking the pack casings and gas gauge from an old battery to assemble a new battery with brand new cells, then that's at minimum a refurbished battery. I'd personally still treat it like a new part as you've replaced all the consumable cells and the gas gauge circuitry doesn't wear down or suffer from use. That's certainly not an old battery anymore. It's equivalent to the result you'd get if you were a battery factory making brand new batteries out of charging circuitry and the exact same brand new cells.

      In Apple repair world, there's absolutely no such thing as legitimate new-old-stock replacement parts. Any parts manufactured by Apple that anyone is trying to sell you are either used, refurbished, or outright stolen.

  4. linux batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    keep you warm at night when you open their source

  5. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tim Cook is that you?

  6. Louis is great guy, but... by NuclearCat · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Main concern that this batteries should not have apple trademarked logos and names. Louis suppliers should take care about scrapping off or covering that marks and names.
    Because if batteries will start exploding, it will have impact on Apple reputation, and they will have to spend lot of PR money fixing that.
    And the refurbished batteries from China are most likely to fail with the fireworks, as grey market manufacturers squeeze the last drops from the lithium elements, setting crazy values in the controller. Also, this elements might be "rejects"(didn't passed Q&C) from various manufacturers, including those who make batteries for Apple.

    1. Re:Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is assumed that if something has that Apple logo on it, it must be counterfeit," Rossmann said. "It couldn't be that someone who has these batteries sold them to me. It couldn't be that someone took these batteries out of machines that were on demo in storesâ¦.machines that they owned, packaged them up and sent them to me," Rossmann said. "No, they must be counterfeit. There's no other explanation for it."

      He's right. I agree. That couldn't be. These are refurbished or counterfeit. They should not have Apple logos. Also, this is why making a sarcastic argument is bad. If he has a point, it isn't clear what it is.

    2. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These were official Apple batteries. They were not knock offs.

    3. Re:Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful


      Main concern that this batteries should not have apple trademarked logos and names.

      The claim is that the ARE Apple batteries. Apple claims they "can't be" because they no longer support these products. Supplier and Louise claim they're original apple equipment, just taken from store models, unsold merchandise, overstock, etc.

    4. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by guruevi · · Score: 0

      How can they be official Apple batteries if Apple isn't selling them? If you go to China and buy "Apple" batteries that Apple Inc. doesn't sell, then they're by definition knockoffs.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      How can they be official Apple batteries if Apple isn't selling them?

      Do they morph into a different unit once it's certain for the universe that Apple won't sell them? Or do they keep the same design, dimensions, parameters, manufacturing line, hands of workers assembling them...?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "How can they be official Apple batteries if Apple isn't selling them?"

      Trivial: They could have been acquired while apple was selling them. Then they sat somewhere.

      For example, there's fairly brisk trade in laptop parts for certain popular discontinued laptops (including Apple) where the replacement parts are being recycled from units. e.g. the screen from a unit with a dead mainboard, or the mainboard from a unit with a dead screen... i repaired my old clamshell macbook for years with genuine apple parts you could no longer purchase from Apple.

      Counterfeit product is a real issue as well, to be sure. But it's overreaching pretty far to assume that just because apple won't sell you X that X is counterfeit.

    7. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They get taken out of machines not worth repairing.

    8. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The term commonly used for vintage car parts is "new old stock" (NOS).

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    9. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that. I was trying to think of the term; lots of vintage / collector stuff is available like this... toys especially.

      You can easily buy lego sets new in the box that lego hasn't sold for 20+ years; and they aren't "counterfeit". :)

    10. Re:Louis is great guy, but... by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      If they're "refurbished" then they are "used" and were merely repaired, and they're allowed to have their original labels. I don't know what country the things you said are true in, but it isn't the USA. Here, once somebody buys it, they own it and can resell it without restriction.

      If you don't like it, don't put your trademark on the item, just sell it is a white-box generic.

    11. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Informative

      The principle is "first sale." Once Apple has sold it, then the buyer owns it and can resell it.

      If they're being produced on contract, and the contract ended and they have surplus units that have never been sold, those are "counterfeits" if they make their way to the market "somehow." What matters is when the rights holder sells the item.

      The trademark doesn't tell you what factory it came from, it tells you which company placed it on the market.

      Worrying about if it is functionally the same, that is a concern for fungible goods, not branded goods that trade on their mark.

      The real problem with the story is the lack of clear facts about what the items really were; new or used.

      Even "new old stock" is only legit if it was sold to a distributor who then warehoused it. It has to have been sold legitimately at some point to still be legit now. But once it was sold, they can warehouse it as long as they want.

    12. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      It's a good thing that the universe doesn't care about legalese and only about laws of physics. Imagine then how the history of technology over centuries would have looked like if it did.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:Louis is great guy, but... by Misagon · · Score: 1

      Louis Rossmann's supplier usually covers the Apple logos with a sharpie, but for some reason they did not do that in this case.

      --
      "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    14. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by guruevi · · Score: 1

      So they're not "new" batteries like the guy's repair website is claiming then. Batteries degrade if they sit in a warehouse, depending on the type, the chemistry actually destroys unused or empty batteries.

      He is either selling old batteries as new and ripping off his customers or selling knock off batteries as branded batteries and ripping off his customers.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    15. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by guruevi · · Score: 1

      The problem with batteries is that you can't "keep" batteries warehoused and then claim they're "new". They discharge themselves and once empty, they could even short themselves out.

      The other problem is that if they were manufactured but never sold, they likely never went through QC. There is a lot that goes into producing quality products, if my manufacturer started selling my stuff, not only would that be trademark infringement, the customers would get a much inferior product.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    16. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you buy a used Dell laptop from eBay? Do people black out the logo when selling used equipment? When I buy a used Ford from a Chevy dealer, it still says Ford.

    17. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So is apple then if they are selling old laptops that sit around in a warehouse with batteries that have degraded. Should apple be selling these machines at a discount because the batteries are not fresh. After a year should the discounts begin? Or is this just a double standard.

    18. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      When it comes to batteries, the most likely case is that these were refurbished units. The consumed cells were replaced with new cells and the power management circuitry was reset so the cycle count reads zero. Many repair shops will use the term "new" to describe these refurb batteries because it's as close to new as you can get while still matching Apple's specs and not having been stolen from Apple.

      Believe it or not, a refurb part like this is actually always much higher quality than a true newly manufactured aftermarket part. That's because anyone trying to build new parts is always cutting corners and they won't match the original specs exactly. There was a notable incident earlier this year where people who had their iPhone displays replaced by cheaper parts lost the ability to use their phone after a software update. The microprocessor firmware in the screen wasn't fully compatible with the updated iOS version.

    19. Re: Louis is great guy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a lot that goes into producing quality products, if my manufacturer started selling my stuff, not only would that be trademark infringement, the customers would get a much inferior product.

      I don't get that argument - it's the same physical product. Surely you mean:

      if my manufacturer started selling my stuff, not only would that be trademark infringement, I'd be missing out on my 96% profit margin.

  7. Lawyer up. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The CBP and Apple are wrong.

    They are not counterfeit. They are what they say they are.

    LR needs to lawyer up and sue.

    Wasn't there a recent case in Europe with exactly the same situation?

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:Lawyer up. by _bug_ · · Score: 5, Informative

      They are not counterfeit. There is a growing market in China of refurbishing old hardware. Essentially taking old and broken Macbooks and either repairing them or parting them out and reselling the components. This includes batteries.

      The batteries he had purchased were refurbs taken from old Macbooks.

      Not counterfeit.

    2. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your explanation does not make sense. My car doesn't become counterfeit when I cross a border. Counterfeit would be that you applied the logo onto a product without having the right to do so.

    3. Re:Lawyer up. by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

      you can't buy vintage Apple hardware anywhere.

      Can you explain what you mean by that statement? Vintage Apple hardware is available all over eBay, and plenty of other stores. You can find used and new-old-stock Apple hardware on Kijiji, Craigslist, etc.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    4. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He mentioned at the end of his video about this matter he intends to sue and would be happy if every $1 of his legal costs is matched with $100,000 of Apple's legal costs.

      He's being far too optimistic about the costs, it'll probably work out the other way, but I wish him the best!

    5. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clearly all counterfeit.... every last bit... or else...

    6. Re:Lawyer up. by Dorianny · · Score: 2

      A 10+ year old li-ion battery would hold less the These were most certainly aftermarket parts. Apple probably requested enforcement because they were marketing their battery repairs as "original equipment" and marked as such, which would leave Apple open to liabilities if they caught fire.

    7. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im surprised apple has not sent their police squads to round up all this hardware and arrest those involved. You know; for security reasons.

    8. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The lack of details looks suspicious. No supplier is shared, and neither is the description of what was supposedly shipped. The guy is talking around the source of the batteries in the video like CBP shouldn't assume where the batteries came from... period. I'm willing to listen to a good story, but he's not providing any significant details. He's just trying to stir up outrage and rake in sympathy donations. A shipment of "new" Apple laptop batteries for old laptops coming from China is very suspicious.

      Why would someone order a bunch of used batteries from China, sourced from what would likely be old recycled or used laptops? More likely is that those 20 laptop batteries for $53 each including shipping are "new" higher quality counterfeits.

    9. Re:Lawyer up. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      That there is a growing market in China of refurbished old hardware does not actually tell us if in this case the batteries confiscated were used batteries, making them real and legal, new counterfeit batteries, or legal new old stock. However, Apple's supply contracts probably regulate any unsold items, and when it comes to this stuff a foreign contract is basically law from the perspective of the US courts; so new old stock would probably have never had a legit "sale" that would let it onto the US market now.

      Do we know if the batteries he had purchased were refurbs taken from old Macbooks, or do we only know that somebody wrote that on the product listing or import paperwork?

    10. Re:Lawyer up. by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For items manufactured in the US, the manufacturer is open to liability if they hurt somebody.

      For imported items, the importer is the one who is open to liability if they hurt somebody. That's Mr Rossmann in this case, not Apple.

      Thanks for throwing shit at the wall declaratively, though.

    11. Re:Lawyer up. by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      It does if it made it out of the factory overseas and was never sold by the company whose trademark is on it!

      For example, if the factory accidentally made an extra one, and accidentally sold it to you, and then you imported it, it went from "unsold trademarked goods" to "counterfeit" as soon as you crossed the border.

      OTOH, if the mark holder sold it to a distributor, and then they sold it to you, then it is all legit and importing it can't make it counterfeit.

    12. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He mentioned at the end of his video about this matter he intends to sue and would be happy if every $1 of his legal costs is matched with $100,000 of Apple's legal costs.

      He's being far too optimistic about the costs, it'll probably work out the other way, but I wish him the best!

      This is Rossman, he's been kicking Apple's ass in court for the last several years over Right To Repair among other things, there is even video of him by the Canadian Broadcast Channel showing Apple employees straight up lying about something he diagnosed and repaired in less than a minute.

    13. Re:Lawyer up. by jythie · · Score: 1

      Refurbished batteries are counterfeit. They keep the 'Apple' case but replace the cells.

    14. Re:Lawyer up. by jonwil · · Score: 2

      If I take a gearbox out of a Ford (one that's got a Ford logo stamped into the case) and replace a bunch of warn or broken gears inside with new gears made by a third party before selling that gearbox as refurbished (and being totally open about the fact that its a refurbished job and what was done to it) should Ford have the right to stop you just because its got a Ford logo on the case?

    15. Re:Lawyer up. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      The customer would still walk into the Apple store demanding repair and the media would likewise have their heads.

      It's not just about legal liability, a lot goes into manufacturing a quality product. The worst thing is that this low-life didn't even NEED to manufacture Apple parts. You can buy battery cells and solder them into place OR you can buy a third party battery that's not labeled as being Apple products.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    16. Re:Lawyer up. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      No but you can't go claiming you're a Ford dealership selling factory parts.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    17. Re:Lawyer up. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      That is second hand and it's clear that it is second hand. You're buying from the first owner. In this case, this guy is selling "Brand New" batteries and claiming they are Apple manufactured and he somehow has a connection to the Apple factory and they make custom runs of vintage hardware for him.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    18. Re:Lawyer up. by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Are the people using these "refurbished" batteries in any way claiming they are genuine unmodified Apple parts or lying about what has been done to them? Or are these people claiming they are somehow authorized Apple service providers?

    19. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just were are you getting this bullshit from? I dont see Louis claiming anything is new. Louis is a honest guy trying to help people out. apple is a terrible corporation making tech worse for everyone.

    20. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should he? It's all about fraud. So long as he was not being defrauded and he didn't defraud his customers there isn't a case here. Trademark law is about fraud. It's not about protecting a brand's reputation.

    21. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The customer would still walk into the Apple store demanding repair and the media would likewise have their heads.

      You mean like that one time CBC took a laptop to Apple, who wanted $1200 to fix it and then Rossman fixed it in front of the camera in all of 2 minutes? The video is in youtube, on Rossman's channel. You should watch it, and some other of his videos.

    22. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    23. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does Apple's boot taste when you lick it?

    24. Re:Lawyer up. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. That's what this guy was claiming at least - to have access to brand new Apple parts, he's selling these batteries for $150-300 claiming to be genuine Apple replacement parts.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    25. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Id would trust the low-life trying to help people instead of the low-life like you who is blindly cheerleader for an evil company like apple.

    26. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have proof of this or are you just another apple ass kissing liar?

    27. Re:Lawyer up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that logic if you have a 10 year old car sitting around you have to junk it since it may be a liability with an OEM logo on it?

      Disclaimer: I'm an EE and design hardware. New old stock is a common thing for hard to find parts (and sorry LiIon batteries are no exception).

      Tell me: How's the health plan at Apple? Is it good?

    28. Re:Lawyer up. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Look up the guys business. He has a website with pricing.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    29. Re:Lawyer up. by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1
      1. Apple requested enforcement because they want 100% control over the repair market. Apple is a control freak. I own a software company that makes software to configure iPhones for business use. Apple does not make software that offers even 15% of the features that ours does, yet they are constantly threatening legal action against us and our customers because of the "not invented here" mentality that their leadership takes.
      2. I guarantee you that the seller of the batteries in China did not market or claim that these batteries were original equipment. The only way to get original equipment from Apple as a third party seller is to have stolen them. These aftermarket parts companies also have tons of experience with customs giving them shit. They didn't used to have an issue selling refurbished parts, the enforcement has clearly become more aggressive. I don't think it's a coincidence that our crappy government in service of it's crappy trade war has been making noise about how China is violating our intellectual property rights. Unfortunately, this is an instance of legitimate business being crimped by bad actors
      3. Reputable repair shops will be upfront about what kind of parts are going into a repair. I've personally been a customer of Rossmann Group and they were honest that replacement batteries are going to be refurbished and many components like ICs and cables will come from recycled machines. The phone kiosk in the mall, however, may be inappropriately claiming that the refurb screen going into your phone is "new." Or worse, they may be actually using a completely new screen. These are actual knockoff parts and they are much much lower quality than an original display that simply had its cracked glass replaced.
    30. Re:Lawyer up. by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      I've personally been a customer of Rossmann Group and that's not what they claim at all. If you ask, they're honest that consumable items like batteries are going to be refurbished and other components like ICs and cables come from recycled boards.

    31. Re:Lawyer up. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      But they're neither refurbished or recycled Apple pieces. I've looked at him in the past too for repairs and using weasel words like refurbished/recycled when you're just selling third party Chinese parts is lying.

      You CAN buy refurbished Apple parts, you CAN buy refurbished Apple batteries and all the Apple parts he says he has on his website, Apple has a webstore with those parts. You can go to an Apple Store and get a price list. This guy ISN'T doing that, he's selling third party, Apple-branded parts which is what got him in trouble.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    32. Re:Lawyer up. by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      What the heck are you talking about? You can buy a refurbished Mac from Apple, that's about it. You cannot buy parts for any product from Apple. This is Apple's refurbished page. Note that they only sell refurbished computers, not refurbished parts. On a completely different tack, a product does not need to be refurbished by the OEM to be justifiably considered refurbished. As someone actually familiar with his work, I'm going to assert that Rossmann is absolutely NOT selling "third party, Apple-branded" parts. There are some sellers who do sell these parts and serious repair shops know to avoid these channels like the plague, as you'll be getting the absolute lowest quality parts which probably means your repair won't hold. Considering Rossmann and other reputable shops have to offer warranties, they definitely don't want to do be doing work that doesn't hold.

  8. Re:Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And here we find the Apple lover.

    Your mouse is broken, that will be $500 please.

    Your Mouse pad needs replacement, that will be $125

    Your charger is broken, that will be $250

    Your screen is dirty, that will be $50

    Your "Apple" key is sticky, that will be $125

    Your drive is full, that will be $1200

    heck, might as well chuck it into the trash and buy a shiny new one, you like shiny new stuff.

    That's like the tires on my car being worn, and the manufacturer saying, well, just buy a new car! duh!

  9. Second reason not to buy Apple by DarkRookie2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You can't repair them
    Same with Microsoft.
    Same with Amazon
    Same with all phone manufactures
    Same with consumer laptops. (You can generally repair desktops and business laptops.)

    --
    http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
  10. Re:Rossman can suck it by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    I don't buy Apple products myself; but when I took my neice's puppy-destroyed laptop charger to an Apple store to find out the price of a replacement, they just gave me one for free.

    Base unit still overpriced, but excellent service in my experience.

  11. Easy Fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just Post a revised Price List:

    Diagnostics - Bad battery on unsupported model $100 diagnostics fee + free entry into nearest dumpster

    Still cheaper than the Apple store, and just as effective.

  12. Apple users get what they deserve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is only funny to me because it's not something I use or care about.

    If you buy apple, you buy it knowing you're getting ripped off at every single step of the way and you are OK with that because it's Apple.

    If you're not OK with that, you dont buy apple products. It's simple.

    I can't really relate to the kind of person who wants an apple product but isn't into their culture of overpaying for hardware. I thought if you were stupid enough for the first part, you'd be a shoe in for adopting their culture as well. Maybe there's some kind of confusion in the messaging when it comes to the poors, which I'm convinced they only started selling devices to in order to curb the theft of devices from their intended customers and to reduce the second hand market that they dont get a piece of.

  13. Apple Cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple should design cars, think of it.

    -after a set number of fuel-ups, the performance decreases to save fuel economy
    -after a set number of fuel-ups, the car can no longer function, because the gas tank is non-replaceable
    -if the tires wear down, you must purchase a new car
    -if the windshield wipers need replacement, just replace the whole windshield assembly
    -refilling the wiper fluid will cost $250
    -the floor mats are non replaceable
    -if you blow a headlamp, purchase a new car
    -if the remote keyfob battery dies, purchase a new car

    1. Re:Apple Cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the walled garden is comfy, don't you think?

    2. Re:Apple Cars by MiniMike · · Score: 0

      Apple should design cars, think of it.

      As they would only run on special iRoads, I doubt the cars would get much wear.

    3. Re:Apple Cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And of course the warranty will be void if any of the liquid indicators went off.

  14. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 1337 go hackintosh, triple boot partitions ftw

  15. Re:Rossman can suck it by rworne · · Score: 1

    And here we find the Apple lover.

    Your mouse is broken, that will be $500 please.

    Your Mouse pad needs replacement, that will be $125

    Your charger is broken, that will be $250

    Your screen is dirty, that will be $50

    Your "Apple" key is sticky, that will be $125

    Your drive is full, that will be $1200

    heck, might as well chuck it into the trash and buy a shiny new one, you like shiny new stuff.

    That's like the tires on my car being worn, and the manufacturer saying, well, just buy a new car! duh!

    Apple Mouse: $79.00 or $99 for Space Gray
    Apple Mousepad: They don't sell them, and generally you don't need them
    Apple Charger: $19 5W iPhone, to $79 87W USB-C
    Screen Cleaner: Not sold. Genius bar will do it for free if you ask nicely.
    Stuck keys: Warranty makes repair free for next 4 years. Otherwise it is a hell of a lot more than $125
    Full drive: Delete porn stash - Free

    --
    I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  16. Seems incredulous by DaphneDiane · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are aftermarket batteries for vintage models that do not copy apples logo, such as the Rayovac ones for the original MacBook. The statement about batteries from demo machines running in stories is incredulous. Seriously suggesting that customers want repairs with batteries that have been trickle charged while continuously running, as would be the case for batteries from demo units, just fails Occam's razor. Story sounds like someone that is complaining after they got caught or at least should have done more research into their supplier.

    1. Re:Seems incredulous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      incredulous: unwilling to believe something is true; skeptical; doubting

      You may be incredulous, but a statement cannot be. The word you're probably looking for is "incredible", or perhaps "inconceivable".

      That said, it's not that hard to believe. I wouldn't want a years-old battery as a replacement, but if batteries have been reasonably well-treated for only four years or so -- long enough for Apple to consider them "vintage" and refuse to sell new ones -- it's not inconceivable that they could still be in decent enough condition to be worth putting in a computer that you think you'll only be using a couple more years. And in a population center as big as China, it's certainly conceivable that there could be enough such batteries to warrant selling in quantity to shops like Rossmann's.

      You may be incredulous, but the statements of events, especially given Apple's increasing assholery over the last several years, are very credible. I love my Macs, but they're all well into "vintage" age because newer-generation offerings are, bluntly, more than a bit crap and growing more so with every new release.

    2. Re:Seems incredulous by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      These batteries were most likely recycled and had the cells replaced. There aren't any good quality "factory new" replacement parts for some of the more recent Apple laptops, as everything since the ancient 13" Unibody MacBook Pro design all has exotic battery designs that get glued in. It's been my experience in hobby repair (I used to be an AASP technician but that was a long time ago) that refurb components are always better than new components. A refurb screen is simply a cracked screen that had the glass replaced. A totally new screen is always made to be cheaper than the refurb, and there are often problems with color accuracy or touch sensitivity because they're never made completely up to spec.

  17. CBP can claim whatever they want on imports by BLToday · · Score: 1

    The rule for importing “branded” items is pretty clear.
    If you bring something that you claim is by a brand you better have a license with that brand. Else CBP will just assume it’s counterfeit. You could claim it as a replacement part for a device but the moment you say that part is original, you’re in trouble. You could go into a Gucci store in Italy, buy 10 bags and ship it to yourself, CBP will stop that shipment and claim it’s counterfeit even if you show the original receipt.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/cf...

    1. Re:CBP can claim whatever they want on imports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah, bullshit.

      Everything is branded. If I pack too much on vacation and ship some stuff home to avoid too overstuffed luggage, my Hanes(tm) branded underwear and Nike (or whatever) socks are going to be intercepted and confiscated because I don't have a license with every company who's clothes I own? Oh CRAP! My luggage has some kind of brand name, I better hide! LOL

    2. Re:CBP can claim whatever they want on imports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading the text, it doesn't look like that applies when the trademark was originally applied to the products under the authority of Apple, unless the goods are "physically and materially different" than those normally sold in the US.

    3. Re:CBP can claim whatever they want on imports by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      You could go into a Gucci store in Italy, buy 10 bags and ship it to yourself, CBP will stop that shipment and claim itâ(TM)s counterfeit even if you show the original receipt.

      I call BS on this one.

      it would seem that it MATTERS if you mail to yourself for personal use or to yourself as a business, with intent for resale.

      personal use is what seems to be the thing that breaks your assertion. can you cite that even personal use would mean the good you mailed to yourself are considered counterfeit?

      similarly, your link talked about greymarket and many of us regularly buy (or bought) cameras that were greymarket and they most certainly did make it to BH, adorama, etc - and are not stopped at the border.

      so, I call BS on this. personal use is OK and greymarket is NOT automatically illegal. Nikon would like to think so (and that's why I stopped supporting nikon) but its not ILLEGAL to import or sell greymarket goods, as long as its marked as such (ie, no US warranty or local post-sales support from the US support org)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:CBP can claim whatever they want on imports by BLToday · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You could go into a Gucci store in Italy, buy 10 bags and ship it to yourself, CBP will stop that shipment and claim itâ(TM)s counterfeit even if you show the original receipt.

      I call BS on this one.

      it would seem that it MATTERS if you mail to yourself for personal use or to yourself as a business, with intent for resale.

      personal use is what seems to be the thing that breaks your assertion. can you cite that even personal use would mean the good you mailed to yourself are considered counterfeit?

      similarly, your link talked about greymarket and many of us regularly buy (or bought) cameras that were greymarket and they most certainly did make it to BH, adorama, etc - and are not stopped at the border.

      so, I call BS on this. personal use is OK and greymarket is NOT automatically illegal. Nikon would like to think so (and that's why I stopped supporting nikon) but its not ILLEGAL to import or sell greymarket goods, as long as its marked as such (ie, no US warranty or local post-sales support from the US support org)

      You're welcome to try mailing 10 Gucci bags to yourself for personal use if you don't believe me. Hell, you don't even have to mail it to yourself. Just try to land in LAX with more than 5 new Italian bags. Even if you declared it and paid the duty on it, they're going to give you a hard time. I've had a friend had a box of returned merchandise get seized at LAX. His friend had a thrift store in some Asian country, bought items from here, but couldn't sell it and had him bring it back to be returned to the manufacturers here. Fully documentation on the shipment, CBP claimed that he intended to sell counterfeit merchandise and confiscated the items.

      One of my ex-gf does graymarket import/export for a living. Generally depending on the port of entry and port of departure, you have 1% to 10% chance of inspection. If you're unlucky and your shipment gets inspected, you better have a license from the trademark holder for that shipment. What probably happened is Apple complained to CBP and Rossman's shipment was flagged for inspection. If it has an Apple trademarking on it and he didn't have a license from Apple to import, then his shipment is going to get seized.

  18. Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Rossmann group recovered data from an iPhone my wife dropped in the water. Of course Apple was unwilling to help me, but Louis was! It's insanity to think that a product you purchase can be held hostage by a company for the entire time you "own" it. I'm done with Apple. They suck, a cancer in the tech arena. Tech is beginning to suck everywhere because of this type of bull$h1t. It's time for me to purchase a new car and I am actually considering purchasing a 1960's to 70's vintage restored vehicle to avoid all the nasty tech involved .. and I'm a IT professional!

    1. Re:Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dropped in water only needs a trip to the vacuum dry machine at staples.

    2. Re:Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Already went that route- though not quite back to the 1970s and 1980s. I replaced near everything in my 2005 Honda Accord with 170,000 miles. The body is in acceptable shape. No significant rust. Paints a little bit of an issue due to peeling. Once it becomes more of a problem I'll deal with it. Then I also bought a 2002 Jeep with 130,000 miles. Body is in good shape. Vehicle runs great. There are a few things that need fixing still, but nothing major. I mainly am looking to avoid the tracking built into newer vehicles. Even the older 1990s era vehicles though are a concern to me. I don't know what the devices they use to tap into the system (like during inspection) are doing. I know cars of this era log some shit. I doubt they log location data, but still. I don't know what happens to the data they pull from my vehicle during inspection. I don't know what they can pull. I don't know what vulnerabilities might exist.

    3. Re:Apple sucks by antdude · · Score: 1

      Why no back ups?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    4. Re:Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, I know. Backups are on me. I set the wife's iTunes up to perform backups but she was not doing it. Also, the phone fell into a swimming pool. By the time it was pulled out the screen was flashing all kinds of random pixels. Could not turn it off. Of course, COULD NOT PULL THE BATTERY (thank you Apple) so it just burnt itself up. No amount of "drying" would fix that phone. I was amazed that Rossmann group was able to retrieve the data.

      I bought an Android phone for my son and he is showing her how she can perform everything she needs on Android vs iOS. Her next phone will not be Apple. No new products in my home will ever be Apple again.

    5. Re:Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear ya. I can purchase a fully restored late 60's to early 70's vehicle for around 30 to 35 thousand, in many cases less than today's fully loaded tech nightmare monsters. I'm not too old school though, It will need to have been upgraded to electronic ignition at the very least and throttle body/fuel injection if possible. Manual door locks, window cranks, non-power seats and no A/C simply means less to fail. Hell, I even have some of my late uncle's 8-track tapes in a box. So bring on the 8-track tape player!

    6. Re:Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have missed the "I'm a IT professional" part.

  19. Re:Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh is that what happened to you? Does that 'fair universe' make you an obsessive piece of shit who catalogues the minutiae of some fat idiot's life? For several years, day in, day out? Like the lonliest creature ever? Kind of hard to end up looking more pathetic than a fat retard who collects anime.

    It does seem fair though.

  20. Re:Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A few replacements are build in to the original cost of apple products.

  21. No wonder people hate apple so much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If apple spent 1% of the time they spend on policing others and designing planned obsolescence devices maybe they would actually innovate something.

  22. Remember the Basel Network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Basel network would say this is China shamelessly exporting electronic waste to the US, where barefoot children will breath harmful fumes from the open fires they lit to harvest small amounts of metal.

  23. Stop Lying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > you can't buy vintage Apple hardware anywhere

    Obvious shill is obvious, and obviously lying. I can sell you an 8 year old ipod. It's not a counterfeit; it's an 8 year old ipod. I'm sure your paycheck makes you believe that it's a knockoff if I wrap new cells in an old case, but that's not meaningfully different than leaving the ford symbol on the block of a rebuilt ford engine.

    1. Re:Stop Lying by guruevi · · Score: 1

      As long as you don't sell me your 8y iPod as "new" simply because you put different cells in it. That's the difference, you can't buy "new" vintage Apple hardware which is what this guy is claiming he's doing.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    2. Re:Stop Lying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you keep repeating this lie and hope people start to believe it? You have no proof Louis is claiming these are new batteries.
      apple is the only party in this store that has continually lies to its customers.

  24. Re:Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "Genius" will report that the mouse is broken because an unsupported mousing-surface was used. Lucky for you, they have an apple approved surface!

    the "Genus" will report that the charger is water damaged, not covered by warranty. Dog slobber counts as water.

    The Dirty Screen can only be cleaned by authorized apple repair centers, otherwise the water damage sensor gets flagged.

    Stuck Keys, you are not using an apple aproved typing finger protector, lucky for you, we have a product for that.

    Space, you need to use an apple provided hard drive, with an apple provided cable, with an approve provided power adapter, using an apple approved file manager.

  25. Re:Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Despite the heavy sarcasm on the OP part, mouse / trackpad in the laptop will probably cost about that much

  26. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone dual boot any more?

    With computers being as cheap and powerful as they are now, and virtual machine software being so advanced, I'd think the "1337" would be running virtual machines. Dual booting means having to save everything, shutdown, boot up, taking care not to miss the boot menu timeout to the default OS, or having no timeout and finding the computer waiting for someone to push a button before finishing the boot up.

    I'm thinking dual booting is for losers.

  27. Magic marker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For all we know the batteries actually are counterfeit and buyer is oblivious.

    Regardless problems are easily solved by having sender cross out Apple markings on batteries before sending and tell Apple to make sweet sweet love to a cheese grater.

  28. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tim Cook is the one who likes to suck it.

  29. don't tell the printer companies by renegade600 · · Score: 1

    could we soon see all third party ink cartridges be declared counterfeit if apple is able to get away with this.

  30. right to repair laws need to fix this! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    right to repair laws need to fix this!

  31. Counterfit means you claim to be made by Apple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An item is only counterfeit if you're claiming to be manufactured by the brand in question (Apple in this case). As long as the batteries don't claim to be *made by Apple* they are NOT counterfeit... And I would think the court would agree...

  32. Kikes protecting their faggot golem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a shock!

  33. Don't buy Apple products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They cost 3X as much as comparable market items with no real benefit from the cost increase.

    Then they do stuff like this.

  34. They are not "illegal products". Apple is bad. by gavron · · Score: 2

    You're not a lawyer, and your glib description of "illegal products" is nonsense. Even the legal expert cited in the original article wrote:
    > “This strikes me as an abuse of trademark law by Apple,” he added, “one clearly designed to maintain its stranglehold over the repair market and, ultimately, to force customers to buy new hardware.”

    So now we have a real legal expert who says that Apple marked products sold by Apple manufacturers to a third party are not an abuse of trademark law. Secondly laws don't cover products, so there's no such thing as an "illegal product", "illegal battery", "illegal gun", etc. There are violations of the law that people can do... such as violate trademark law, import laws, customs laws, which our heror here did not do.

    Hero: The guy trying to service "vintage" laptops by replacing batteries in devices Apple and their "genius" people won't touch. NB: Apple has nobody on their staff with the IQ to be a genius.
    BadGuy: Apple for using a US Government agency to help them promulgate their exclusionary practice of stopping 3rd party repair, even if it's for products they themselves refuse to repair.

    Winner: Apple. It cost them nothing to do this.
    Loser: Everyone using an Apple device that is either now or one day will be unilaterally declared by Apple to be "vintage" and non-repairable.

    Please don't play lawyer on slashdot. Or anywhere. UPL is a violation of the law.

    Ehud

  35. Re:They are not "illegal products". Apple is bad. by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

    You're not a lawyer, and your glib description of "illegal products" is nonsense. Even the legal expert cited in the original article wrote:

    That's cute, but you don't actually know anything about my credentials, and "legal experts" are not necessarily lawyers, either. The one quoted is a professor, who doesn't seem to have been a practicing lawyer for 10 years.

    Still, let's actually read the rest of his quote, written about a different (but similar) case:

    “Assuming that: (1) the cable bearing the Apple mark is a genuine Apple product, (2) the cable used on these screens is the same as the one Apple uses in the U.S., and (3) the importer/seller clearly communicates that the screens are a non-Apple aftermarket product, then Apple’s case for treating these as ‘counterfeit’ goods is very weak,” Perzanowski said in an email. “Refurbished or repaired products are generally permissible under trademark law’s first sale doctrine, so long as they are clearly labeled as such.”

    (emphasis mine)

    The key detail is that the parts have to be labeled accurately. In the case of batteries, if the cells are replaced or anything is done that makes them not the original Apple part, they can't carry the Apple logo, making these an illegally-marked part.

    You might like to cast Apple as the Big Bad Corporation, but they're the ones following the law here. The Chinese company who didn't follow American product-marking laws when exporting a product to America are the ones actually at fault for this.

    As for your "hero", he's a very noisy importer who gets a lot of attention for playing the victim, when he could try just a bit harder to ensure compliance and have no problem (and no fame, either). My company imports materials (whole and parts) from other countries on a daily basis, and we rarely have any customs issues. We do have to contractually force certain suppliers to put their own logo on their parts, rather than the well-known American brand, though.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  36. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He doesn't want to fix Apple products. He wants to and does fix other items/brands. It's just Macbooks break so often that it has taken over his business.

  37. Re:Seems like easy rules could fixThe shells have by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    But it does seem like they are Apple parts. They're third-party refurbed (which was known when they were purchased). But they were original Apple shells with different chemical cells.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  38. to fix this don't buy apple products! by jerryjnormandin · · Score: 1

    The market can alter dumb decisions like Apple's fight to prevent you from fixing your own hardware. Simply only buy hardware that you can service or other companies service. You should be able to use third party components to fix your own device if the component has similar or better specs. This is the reason why I dumped Apple. I have a MacPro late 2013 black can desktop with the Dual D700 GPU failure problem. There are no third party replacement boards. I fixed it alright. I built up an Intel Hades Canyon NUC, used 32GB Dual Ranked memory, 500GB internal NVME SDD. It works fine with my external thunderbolt JBOD (home directory, /opt ). I installed Ubuntu Bionic Beaver 18.04. Steam works great. It's faster than my 6Core MacPro. Cheaper. I've got an NVIDIA GTX970 connected via thunderbolt 3 to use for video rendering and my experimentation with OpenCV and Tensorflow. It's better. Also when Apple dropped OpenGL for their own Metal API, it was a no brainer to dump apple. A lot of the code I write is based on OpenGL and OpenCL.

  39. Re: Seems like easy rules could fixThe shells have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there's a significant enough modification then the logo has to be removed during the refurb.
    Also, rules around importing can be more restrictive than rules regarding reselling when the parts never leave the country.

  40. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arenâ(TM)t you the guy who canâ(TM)t afford to retire? Shouldnâ(TM)t you be working on that?

  41. Re:They are not "illegal products". Apple is bad. by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

    The key detail is that the parts have to be labeled accurately. In the case of batteries, if the cells are replaced or anything is done that makes them not the original Apple part, they can't carry the Apple logo, making these an illegally-marked part.

    This is wrong. The simple presence of an Apple logo doesn't make them "illegally marked". If I put a new aftermarket engine in my Ford, I can still sell it without removing the "Ford" badges on the car. If I put new laces in my shoes, I can still sell them without removing the Nike swoosh from the side. As long as it's made clear to the purchaser that the battery is refurbished then it doesn't matter if the Apple logo is on it as the seller isn't representing it as an Apple product. In fact, it sounds like from the article that these aren't even refurbished batteries, they are unmodified second-hand batteries (or at least the subject implies that they are):

    "It couldn't be that someone who has these batteries sold them to me. It couldn’t be that someone took these batteries out of machines that were on demo in stores.machines that they owned, packaged them up and sent them to me,” Rossmann said. “No, they must be counterfeit. There’s no other explanation for it.”

    In the US it's long been the law that you are free to sell any property you own. If I own it, I can sell it to another person if I wish. The First Sale Doctrine has been the law for a long time. Here, let me quote a little of the Wikipedia article for you:

    In trademark law, this same doctrine enables reselling of trademarked products after the trademark holder put the products on the market. The doctrine is also referred to as the "right of first sale," "first sale rule," or "exhaustion rule."

    Please do some further research on the above terms before spouting off with your "illegally marked" rhetoric. If what Rossman alleges is true (these are demo pulls or other legitimate Apple batteries) then he is perfectly within his rights to buy and sell them. Even if they are refurbished it's perfectly legal as long as that's made clear to the buyer.

    --

    Enigma

  42. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, no. Shouldn't you turn off smart quotes on your cellphone?

  43. DHS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Department of Homo Sexuals

  44. Theres an easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop buying Apple products. I say this while typing this on an iPhone. But honestly this is how the market works. If you can ding their public persona enough and hit their wallet at the same time theyâ(TM)ll sing a different tune

    1. Re:Theres an easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >easy fix
      *laughs in comcast*

      Or EA. Both have awards for being shitty. Both are still filthy rich.

      Go punch the shill who told you about that fix. It will actually do more to solve this problem than ignoring it.

  45. Re:Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $79 for a mouse? Fuck off.

  46. so selling second hand hardware is counterfeiting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is especially bullshit because these are actual apple batteries made in an actual apple-blessed factory with apple-blessed components on an apple-blessed assembly line by apple-blessed employees to apple specifications. These are *original* batteries taken out of *original* apple laptops... and they're being called counterfeit *why*?

  47. Time for Trump to put tariffs on iphones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Odd how he has put them on everything else, but excluded this company (one of the largest abusers of "made in China" around given nothing is made in the US).

  48. Quit making up stuff by TRRosen · · Score: 1

    Apple did not file a complaint. That would be public record and impossible to cover up. And if you think the largest publicly traded company in the world is worried about 20 batteries they don't even sell your an idiot.
    And yes contracts do work that way. A manufacturer only has licence to use Apple's logo on the products it sells to Apple. Manufacturing overruns happen all the time. And guess what. They remove the logos and sell them to the gray market.

    1. Re:Quit making up stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the fucking idiot if you think apple has not been trying to shut down repair shops and pulling every underhanded trick they can to do it.
      apple is totally the type of company that knows that 20 batteries out of circulation means that will result in 20 people being forced to upgrade to new overpriced machines.

  49. Re: They are not "illegal products". Apple is bad. by spongman · · Score: 1

    Apple doesnâ(TM)t make the original cells. Replacing them doesnâ(TM)t make an original product any less original.

  50. Re:so selling second hand hardware is counterfeiti by TRRosen · · Score: 1

    because they weren't. they were physically tested and found not to be Apple batteries.

  51. just stop by TRRosen · · Score: 1

    Stop blaming Apple. Third party replacement batteries are readily available from reputable sellers. This guy decided to save a few bucks and screw his customers by buying iffy products from China. They were fakes. Apple doesn't give a damn about $1000 worth of old batteries it doesn't sell anyways.

    1. Re:just stop by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      Do some research. Refurbished products are more expensive than newly manufactured products and they are of substantially higher quality. The factory new components are rarely if ever up to original spec. There's been numerous documented cases of new aftermarket iPhone screens no longer working after the phone software was updated because the circuitry or firmware wasn't properly implemented.

    2. Re: just stop by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Probably why they falsely marked them as refurbished. By the way there is no such thing as a refurbished Apple laptop battery. There are no replaceable parts in them. They arenâ(TM)t some cheap dell made from generic cells.

    3. Re: just stop by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      There's absolutely a mechanically simple way to refurbish a laptop battery. The technique is not unlike the procedure documented in this how-to. Battery cells are fairly generic electro-chemical parts that are standardized widely across many industries. There's anecdotes about early Tesla cars being built with battery packs made out of many laptop cells wired in series. Apple absolutely refurbishes their own batteries for use in authorized repair shop and depots. The charging and monitoring circuitry (known as a "gas gauge") is a valuable component that can be repurposed in a replacement battery.

      As an aside, there's no law that says only OEMs are authorized to produce "refurbished" components. Aftermarket part vendors also will never claim that their parts, refurbished or otherwise, are OEM. Anyone who's come within 10 miles of the Apple supply chain is fully aware that there's no such thing as 3rd-party available OEM parts, and claiming such is a great way to get your shipments confiscated. In my experience ordering components like this (admittedly not in bulk), the customs declarations almost always specify something like "replacement battery for laptop" or "smartphone spare parts."

    4. Re: just stop by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Apple does not use generic cells. They are built in one piece.

    5. Re: just stop by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      Where are you getting this mistaken information? Do you have any experience with MacBook parts? Check out this video of an Apple battery teardown and note the packs of generic cells inside. You can even compare it to an aftermarket, non-recycled battery and see the exact same internal configuration.

      Years ago I was a certified technician at an AASP (Apple Authorized Service Provider). I don't work as a tech anymore, but I still do everything from battery replacements to logic board repairs for friends and family. Since just about every one of my friends has had a unibody MacBook Pro that needed a battery at some point, I did a fair amount of research on ideal replacement parts. Everything I've commented in this thread has come from my personal experience.

  52. Re: Rossman can suck it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An OS in a VM can not and will never run as well as it can if it were properly installed.

    VM's are for losers.

    numbnuts

  53. Parting out old computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many posters here seem to dismiss the idea that these cos be "legitimate" Apple batteries. In fact, there is a substantial "industry" in China built around buying up non-working products, and then parting them out. They disassemble the devices, then sell the parts - screens, batteries, keyboards, motherboards, ribbon cables, etc. - separately. These are all original parts taken from original products. In some cases, the parts are tested or refurbished, but not always.

    Repair businesses like Rossmann's buy those recovered parts to repair computers here in the U.S. Louis also buys lots of motherboards that don't work, too use as donor boards for replacement components (e.g., individual chips, resistors, capacitors, etc.).

    This is analogous to getting parts from an auto junkyard. These are not counterfeit or NOS parts.