Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates

[AppleInsider]

Apple Inc., along with its chief executive and exclusive U.S. iPhone wireless partner AT&T, have been hit with a new lawsuit from a disgruntled customer who charges the trio with a variety of offenses stemming from the recent iPhone price cut.

In the suit, filed Sept. 24 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Queens resident Dongmei Li accuses the parties of price discrimination, underselling, discrimination in rebates, deceptive actions, and other wrongdoings for their role in the Sept. 5th price drop on iPhone, which saw the handset's price tag slashed an unprecedented $200 less than two months after its debut.

Li was among the thousands who waited hours in line on June 29, 2007 for her chance to purchase one of the touch-screen devices, according to the suit. When she reached the front of the line, her local Apple store only had 4GB models remaining, which she purchased anyway despite having intended to buy the larger-capacitied 8GB model.

She, like thousands of others, the suit claims, is now the victim of price discrimination in that she cannot resell her iPhone for the same profit as customers who purchased the device after price drop. Similarly, she cannot trade up to 8GB model she had initially hoped to obtain and is now left with a product that has been discontinued.

Li also feels cheated by Apple's rebate policy because she was only offered a $100 store credit towards a future Apple store purchase when those customers who bought the same iPhone within a two week window period immediately preceding the cut received the full $200 refund under the company's price protection policy.

Li included in her 8-page complaint historical stock graphs that show Apple's share price to have risen in between the time it released iPhone in late June and when the company instated the price cut. She argues that this is proof that there was no sound reason for the cut, which she equated to "underselling."

"Market conditions did not require Apple to change its price," Li's attorney, C. Jean Wang of Wang Law Offices, PLLC wrote in the filing. "iPhone was selling very well because Apple's stocks were increasing since August 16, 2007 and rose as high as $144.16 on September 4, 2007, the day before Apple announced that it was cutting the price of iPhone."

The lawsuit goes on to accuse Apple, Jobs and AT&T of forcing customers into 2-year service agreements with AT&T and imposing hefty $175 termination fees. These requirements are unfair, the suit continues, because customers who purchased the iPhone later in the year were able to utilize unlocking solutions that allowed them to forgo such terms and fees.

Given Apple's since stated stance on this matter -- and the recent consequences faced by users of unlocked iPhones in recent days -- it would seem this portion of the suit is now of lesser merit.

For those claims which the Court is still likely to take into account, Li is requesting compensatory damages in the amount of $1 million, punitive damages in the amount to be determined at trial, and a court order that she is entitled to "threefold her damages , the costs involved in maintaining this action, and attorney's fees."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[syklee26]

i can see why he is angry. iPhone with $200 price cut now has competitive price against those Chinese fake iPhones.

[der passant]

This is right there with suing over hot coffee.

[GQB]

Originally Posted by der passant

This is right there with suing over hot coffee.

Actually, the hot coffee suite had a bit of merit... the coffee was absurdly and dangerously hot. At least there's a pro and con.
This is total nonsense.
Right up there with the latest generation of whiners who want Apple to support their hacks, and who don't want them to fix buffer overflows so that their hacks continue to work.

[jamesfabin]

I was one of those who also bought my iPhone the first night it was available. I hired a person through craigslist to stand in line for me and when he got near the front (about 10pm), he called me. I arrived and didn't have a wait and picked up my 8GB iPhone and some accessories. I paid the full price plus the cost of having a person stand in line for hours (at $25 an hour). Should others feel sorry for me? No. I made the choice. These people who are upset the iPhone is now more affordable need to get a life. If you want something hot & new NOW, then you pay a permium. If this lady couldn't afford the phone (and who actually NEEDED to get an iPhone), then she should be spending her time at a college or taking up a part time job. I think people who complained about the price reduction have no ground to stand on. Everything gets cheaper with time, and the sooner the better. Also, the more iPhones sold, the more attractive it will be for third parties to develop accessories or software for it.

To me this is the same as a person standing in line 2 weeks to see Star Wars, then complaining that now you can walk down to Block Buster and rent it for half the price. We each make our own decisions - if you want something bad enough you'll do what you need to get it. If that means spending more (like those people on eBay who bought Nintendo Wii's for nearly $2000), waiting in line for hours (or days), then you make the choice to do it.

It may sound rude, but all I can think of is that this lady couldn't afford the phone and now wants to complain about it because if she bought it today that $200 savings would have changed her life. It wont - you spend that much on a good night out at dinner. If you can't afford to play, sit on the sidelines.

That's my opinion and I'm sure many will disagree, but we're all free to have our own opinions. When I left the Apple store that first night I spent a little over $1000 dollars to get my iPhone day 1. I could have saved if I waited, but I didn't want to. I made that choice. And even if the phone cost me $2000, I would have bought it because I wanted it. If I couldn't afford it, I'd be using a Razr or some other lower end phone. In the end, it's just a phone and no one NEEDED to get it or was forced to.

James

[gregarious119]

I hope that she gets charged Apple's legal fees when her suit gets thrown out of court. Nothing that Apple has done has broken any law. Nobody - including Apple - twisted her arm to buy one at any certain price.

The MOST...absolute most... that she should get IF she were to win, should be $100 - the difference between what she paid minus the rebate and the current price. $1 Million in damages for a $100 price difference? C'mon now.

[Hauer]

To me over here it is really funny seeing (some? lots?) of Americans whine about the sides of a free market they do not like and (some? lots?) critizing European "socialism" (haha).

BTW I do think Apple handled this price cut clumsily. But in a fair way.
GH

[waytogobuddy]

This is total nonsense.
Right up there with the latest generation of whiners who want Apple to support their hacks, and who don't want them to fix buffer overflows so that their hacks continue to work.

Difference is the iphone dev team isn't suing anyone!

what's wrong with people!? Some lady CHOSE to buy something, then sued becasue her deal wasn't sweet enough? Honestly. don't be a customer. stay at home. turn on the gas stove, end yourself.

[macinthe408]

Originally Posted by GQB

Actually, the hot coffee suite had a bit of merit... the coffee was absurdly and dangerously hot.

Oh, you must be the plaintiff.

[dh87]

Last week at Whole Foods, I paid $2.29/lb for apples. This week apples were only $1.69. I am suing Whole Food for $1 million dollars, which is a conservative estimate of my actual, emotional, and spiritual damage. As the eponym of the product in question, I may sue Apple as well.

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by macinthe408

Oh, you must be the plaintiff.

The coffee was several degrees above the standard temperature that hot coffee is normally served at. It caused burns at a severity that normal hot coffee could not do.

Everyone loves to refer to the coffee lawsuit without knowing any of the facts.

[Cory Bauer]

This story makes me ashamed to be human.

Originally Posted by dh87

Last week at Whole Foods, I paid $2.29/lb for apples. This week apples were only $1.69. I am suing Whole Food for $1 million dollars, which is a conservative estimate of my actual, emotional, and spiritual damage. As the eponym of the product in question, I may sue Apple as well.

lol, I think you've got a strong case!

[mooseworks]

"compensatory damages in the amount of $1 million, punitive damages in the amount to be determined at trial, and a court order that she is entitled to "threefold her damages , the costs involved in maintaining this action, and attorney's fees.""

Ok, so that makes $3million, plus punitive damages (what ever they are) plus court costs etc.

Surely that is ridiculous for a price difference of $100

What twisted attorney thought that one up? oh, of course, all attorneys are twisted!

the mind boggles, if this goes to court the world has gone completely crazy.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by GQB

Actually, the hot coffee suite had a bit of merit... the coffee was absurdly and dangerously hot.

Actually, most involved in the beverage industry thought McDonad's coffee temperatures were about right:

"A spokesman for the National Coffee Association says McDonald's coffee conforms to industry temperature standards. And a spokesman for Mr. Coffee Inc., the coffee-machine maker, says that if customer complaints are any indication, industry settings may be too low - some customers like it hotter."

http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm


i have read the same statement in other locations, especially that some coffee is served at sub-optimal temperatures, simply because businesses fear lawwsuits.

[GQB]

Originally Posted by macinthe408

Oh, you must be the plaintiff.

Nah, just reporting what I've read elsewhere. No dog in the fight either way.

[11thIndian]

Point 1- If you thought the iPhone was overpriced then you shouldn't have bought it at that price.

Point 2- If you didn't want the 4GB version then you shouldn't have bought the phone you didn't want.

[city]

I want to sue everyone on the planet. Will C. Jean Wang of Wang Law Offices, PLLC represent me? Yes, Wang will need to sue him/herself too.

[Cory Bauer]

Originally Posted by 11thIndian

Point 1- If you thought the iPhone was overpriced then you shouldn't have bought it at that price.

Point 2- If you didn't want the 4GB version then you shouldn't have bought the phone you didn't want.

11thIndian, you can't seriously expect people to take responsibility for their own actions Obviously, this woman should be rewarded millions of dollars because her compulsive spending habits came back to bite her

[Constable Odo]

But her iPhone still works, doesn't it?

I hope she never buys an ultra-current model wide-screen HDTV. My poor Sony HD set dropped in price so fast it made my head spin. It still works great, though and I doubt if I can sue anyone for my rushing out to buy it. I should have waited six months later, but I was impatient. My bad, I learned my lesson.

[FlashmanBurgess]

Tell me what service provider does NOT require a 2 year service agreement. I had to pay Verizon a $175 termination fee even though I've been a customer for over 7 years. I can't believe these people are making this an issue. It's as though this is thier first phone purchase and are shocked to have to commit to 2 years. THEY ALL DO THAT IDIOTS!

[FlashmanBurgess]

Originally Posted by dh87

Last week at Whole Foods, I paid $2.29/lb for apples. This week apples were only $1.69. I am suing Whole Food for $1 million dollars, which is a conservative estimate of my actual, emotional, and spiritual damage. As the eponym of the product in question, I may sue Apple as well.

Now that's funny.

[jmarc21a]

Well not yet...

But I will be if they come out with an improved or cheaper iphone then I will be so pissed! That's why I'm filing a pre-emptive lawsuit against Apple saying that if they ever improve the iphone or reduce the price they have to give me the new model for free for the rest of my life.

I'm sure all of you can understand the anxiety of waking up each morning wondering if evil Apple has improved or lowered the price again on the iphone.

I can't help feeling so sorry for myself, afterall my mommy said that I'm entitled to anything I want and more!

[DeaPeaJay]

Originally Posted by sandor

Actually, most involved in the beverage industry thought McDonad's coffee temperatures were about right:

"A spokesman for the National Coffee Association says McDonald's coffee conforms to industry temperature standards. And a spokesman for Mr. Coffee Inc., the coffee-machine maker, says that if customer complaints are any indication, industry settings may be too low - some customers like it hotter."

http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm


i have read the same statement in other locations, especially that some coffee is served at sub-optimal temperatures, simply because businesses fear lawwsuits.

Coffee is *supposed* to be too hot when you first get it. You shouldn't even be able to take a sip without burning your tongue for at least 3-5 minutes. It's part of the experience.

[mark2005]

DeaPeaJay: Good one!

Exactly how I feel every morning, as I drop in an ice cube so my impatient self can get a sip.

[Cato988]

after reading this... i decided that im going to sue a gas station every day that there is a price drop from the day before. Should work right?

[danielchow]

to make sure i got everyone covered, i'm suing the rest of you for hurting my feelings in the future!

wang is taking care of the matter for me.

[potterhead4]

Originally Posted by mark2005

DeaPeaJay: Good one!

Exactly how I feel every morning, as I drop in an ice cube so my impatient self can get a sip.

I'm suing Krups because their espresso machine makes the coffee too hot to sip for five minutes but I'm too impatient and usually burn my mouth on it anyways before the temperature goes down by 25 or 50 degrees. Had the coffee been warmed to the *FAIR* temperature from the start, none of this would have happened.

[Ken Laws]

"The lawsuit goes on to accuse Apple, Jobs and AT&T of forcing customers into 2-year service agreements with AT&T and imposing hefty $175 termination fees."

I'll never forget that terrifying night. I was just sitting at home, minding my own business, when Steve Jobs and a platoon of AT&T thugs burst through my front door.

"YOU are getting an iPhone right now, on launch day, and you're going to have to sign a contract indicating that you'll use it for TWO YEARS! BWA HA HA HA HA," said the Steve, wringing his hands in evil glee.

The AT&T thugs manhandled me into a waiting unmarked black van and took me down to the Apple Store at The Grove in West Hollywood. Hovering helicopters and troops with vicious, snarling dogs kept the damned in line as we waited, huddled in fear, knowing our only choices were to sign the two year contract or be put up against the back wall of the Apple Store and shot.

I survived that night. But I know a lot of people who didn't. I see their faces whenever I get a call on my iPhone, because I screwed up my contacts list and all the portraits are wrong.

For the sake of the dead, I hope she wins.

[skottichan]

Y'know, I'm rereading this, it really doesn't seem that she's bitching that they cut the price per se. The suit is that because of the price cut, she can't resell it for what she bought it for, plus profit.

She's probably one of those eBay price gougers, y'know like the ones who work for Toys R Us, that buy the Wii for $250 minus employee discount and resell it on eBay for $500+.


I love the entitlement mentality in the US right now.

[quinney]

Originally Posted by Cory Bauer

This story makes me ashamed to be human.

Listen to some Art Tatum. You will be proud again.

[1984]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

She, like thousands of others, the suit claims, is now the victim of price discrimination in that she cannot resell her iPhone for the same profit as customers who purchased the device after price drop. Similarly, she cannot trade up to 8GB model she had initially hoped to obtain and is now left with a product that has been discontinued.

So basically she wanted to sell it for a profit on eBay but can't so she is suing Apple for a million dollars. When will people start taking responsibility for their own actions? It's always someone else's fault. Gee, I forgot to tie my shoelaces and tripped. I'm going to sue Nike.

[sleevesend]

That's all we need ... companies and stores worried about lowering the prices of their products!

[skottichan]

Originally Posted by 1984

So basically she wanted to sell it for a profit on eBay but can't so she is suing Apple for a million dollars. When will people start taking responsibility for their own actions? It's always someone else's fault. Gee, I forgot to tie my shoelaces and tripped. I'm going to sue Nike.

Actually...that suit was filed. Except it was Redwing Boots. A construction worker was injured after tripping on an untied boot. He and his wife filed a multi-million dollar suit. Now all new Redwings come with a warning.

[Dalí Debaser]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"iPhone was selling very well because Apple's stocks were increasing since August 16, 2007 and rose as high as $144.16 on September 4, 2007, the day before Apple announced that it was cutting the price of iPhone."

[ Digg this story ][/c]

If this woman or her lawyer knew anything about business they would know this is a pathetic argument. Stock prices do not represent net income. Not only that but it's not as though Apple is receiving the money that the stock price increased by! They only receive the money earned at the IPO. We should sue her for wasting out time.

[tripo]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This lady is totally nuts ! huihhhahaha ahaoooooohoho

[der passant]

Originally Posted by Gustav

The coffee was several degrees above the standard temperature that hot coffee is normally served at. It caused burns at a severity that normal hot coffee could not do.

Everyone loves to refer to the coffee lawsuit without knowing any of the facts.

Yes hot water or hot water can cause burns. If you don't want to get burned by it don't buy it. Same for iPhone price drops.

[a_greer]

No one made this person buy the 4 gig model, he chose to, he could have waited or went to a different store, hell, I don't know of one att store that sold out of 8 gig phones...I am really disgusted with Apple products and pricing lately, but this is a crap suit.

[Highwayman]

I see the iPhone is finally 'available' in Canada...$985
http://canwestmobile.com/buynow.html

Now that should be a lawsuit!

[greenwire]

I Googled "Wang Law Offices, PLLC, New York" and found a law firm in Flushing. People could call them directly to comment on their use of our (already overburdened) court system.

[Clive At Five]

Originally Posted by Constable Odo

But her iPhone still works, doesn't it?

I hope she never buys an ultra-current model wide-screen HDTV. My poor Sony HD set dropped in price so fast it made my head spin. It still works great, though and I doubt if I can sue anyone for my rushing out to buy it. I should have waited six months later, but I was impatient. My bad, I learned my lesson.

Or buying a car, where you lose thousands in resale value the second you pull off the lot...

I should piss and moan about that, maybe...

-Clive