or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates - Page 2

post #41 of 129
LOL! This will get thrown out rather quickly. Even if Apple did this with malace intent, it still wouldn't be illegal or grounds for a legitimate civil suit. Don't rush out and buy it on the first day, if you don't know what it's worth.

On the flip side, I do see an SEC investigation about which pots all the iPhone money is going into in Apple and AT&T's future.
post #42 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by waytogobuddy View Post

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.

ROFL

I totally agree. I'm sick of hearing whiny people bitching about how they got a raw deal. Here's why you whiners all got a raw deal..

1. You bought an iPhone. This thing does not even do half the stuff a Palm-based treo can do. (sure it has its own limited subset of features that make it pretty and work well with macs, but you have to admit that if you were a former smartphone user, this is the dumbest smartphone on the market right now.) For that alone you should feel buyer's remorse.

2. You bought it in the first two months! Most people know that when apple releases a product, something better is just around the corner waiting to obsolete it. I'm actually an apple fan but this is one thing that simultaneously awes and dismays me.

3. You accepted sub-standard terms and conditions. 2 year contract??? WTF? You agreed to use At&t for your wireless service provider. For that, you should be electro-shocked back into sanity.

4. You felt that the 8GB iPhone was worth $599 at the time and so that's why you paid that much. For that, you got the privilege of being the first early adopter on the block to show off your shiny new iPhone. Don't whine and bitch because Apple decided to make them more affordable for the rest of us who still haven't bought one.
post #43 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by der passant View Post

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.

But the terms and conditions communicated at the time that fateful cup of coffee was sold didn't include an explicit statement to the effect that the hot water included a hidden burning skin clause.

Now, the T&C are printed on every coffee cup, and it is much more clear on that point.
post #44 of 129
I wonder if I can sue the people who are suing Apple??? A reverse class action where one person, me, sues many people, them. They're pissing me off which is causing me emotional distress which, of course, I never agreed to. They're causing me to bite my nails a bit more which is bad for dating. Gawd, the list of grievances can go on and on.... hmmm
post #45 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by der passant View Post

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.

Do you expect that the food and drink you buy from a restaurant will cause third degree burns and require skin grafts and a 7-day hospital stay?

Sounds like a safety and defective product issue to me.

The iPhone suit has nothing in common with the "Joan-of-Arc" coffee that McDonalds was serving.
post #46 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

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.


There is no merit in idiotic actions nor should it be financially awarded.

From Wikipedia... "On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-thru of a local McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. She placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap."

It's coffee for pete's sake, it's supposed to be HOT and I doubt a lower temp cup of hot coffee would have negated any legal action taken on her part. And putting hot coffee between your knees, you get what you deserve.

Also, I read where she has a grandson, therefore she has a son or daughter... I think I'll sue her for procreating and possibly passing on her idiot gene to her children and grandchildren thus possibly creating more idiots in this world. Thanks a lot!

Now we have this idiot! I wonder if they are related?

You know, Al Gore is religiously alarming the world about Global Warming. Well, the earth's temp just rose about 3 degrees because I am STEAMING MAD!

I think Al Gore and the democrats should get with the republicans who advocate tort reform and make some necessary changes for the sake of sanity! PLEASE!!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #47 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

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.


Ummm... helllo? Coffee is supposed to be damn hot. Just one notch below boiling. That lady getting paid was a travesty of justice. This iPhone suit is just as frivolous
post #48 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseworks View Post

"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.

From an earlier AppleInsider article...

Apple said Friday that Daniel Cooperman, general counsel and secretary at Oracle Corporation, will join the company as its new top legal aid reporting directly to Steve Jobs.


"Dan will be an excellent addition to our team and will fit right into Apple's fast paced culture, said Apple chief executive Steve Jobs. "Dan is a seasoned professional with extensive experience in securities compliance, intellectual property, litigation and corporate governance."


WELCOME TO APPLE DAN... NOW GET TO WORK!!!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #49 of 129
Wait a second... Hold the bus... I have already taken out a patent on thinking this woman is an idiot and that this suit is baseless... I'm am now proceeding to sue all of you for saying the same thing.
post #50 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

There is no merit in idiotic actions nor should it be financially awarded.

From Wikipedia... "On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-thru of a local McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. She placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap."

It's coffee for pete's sake, it's supposed to be HOT and I doubt a lower temp cup of hot coffee would have negated any legal action taken on her part. And putting hot coffee between your knees, you get what you deserve.

Also, I read where she has a grandson, therefore she has a son or daughter... I think I'll sue her for procreating and possibly passing on her idiot gene to her children and grandchildren thus possibly creating more idiots in this world. Thanks a lot!

Now we have this idiot! I wonder if they are related?

You know, Al Gore is religiously alarming the world about Global Warming. Well, the earth's temp just rose about 3 degrees because I am STEAMING MAD!

I think Al Gore and the democrats should get with the republicans who advocate tort reform and make some necessary changes for the sake of sanity! PLEASE!!

Jesus... relax, will you? 15 years ago. (BTW, wasn't it your buddy Newt who sued a place where he tripped while ascending to a podium and got a boo-boo?)
I'll keep in mind that Wikipedia is the authoritative legal reference.

"During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700
claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims
involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This
history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of
this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants
advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to
maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the
safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell
coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is
generally 135 to 140 degrees."
post #51 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by dh87 View Post

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.

You forgot that not only did the price drop, but now you can not resell those apples for as much profit as the people who bought the $1.69 apples!
post #52 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

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.

Are you not part of "everyone"
post #53 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

It's coffee for pete's sake, it's supposed to be HOT and I doubt a lower temp cup of hot coffee would have negated any legal action taken on her part.

Actually it would have, and McDonalds had been specifically warned about this by the Shriner's Burn Institute in Cincinnati prior to the incident. If I remember right, they were serving their coffee at something like 20 degrees over typical for major vendors, and the report showed that the severity of the burns caused at that temperature difference was basically along the lines of the difference between 2nd and 3rd degree burns (the difference between you put some salve on it and go home or you get skin grafts and are in the hospital for weeks). Accidents happen, drinks spill. But, we live in a country where others do have some level of responsibility for your safety. You can hop in your car and trust that most of the safety issues have been worked out and that people are tracking these for you, the same for your food when you get to the store, and the same for your appliances when you get home to cook it. We even have laws that you're responsible to make sure the ice on your sidewalk gets cleaned off. One can argue these either way, at some point it comes down to, just how negligent was the defendant?

Anyhow, the coffee case was far more legitimate than this.
post #54 of 129
I want to sue Wal-mart anyone want to join me,

Because of their falling prices campaign the things I bought last week are always less this week. I think Wal-mart should tell us all ahead of time what their plans are for these prices drops so I can plan according. Plus I hate it when my neighbors come home and tell me they paid less for an item I just bought at Wal-mart. Wal-mart's falling price campaign has embarrassed me in front of my friends and family and they show not be allow to do this to us.

Anyone want to join me in suing Wal-mart
post #55 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Jesus... relax, will you? 15 years ago. (BTW, wasn't it your buddy Newt who sued a place where he tripped while ascending to a podium and got a boo-boo?)

That was actually a much more noted legal scholar, former Solicitor General Robert Bork. One link to a story is here: http://www.acsblog.org/economic-regu...e-damages.html .
post #56 of 129
I wonder what she and her lawyer are smoking.
post #57 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Jesus... relax, will you? 15 years ago. (BTW, wasn't it your buddy Newt who sued a place where he tripped while ascending to a podium and got a boo-boo?)
I'll keep in mind that Wikipedia is the authoritative legal reference.

I used Wikipedia after a quick Google search but had the option of quoting many other links as reference sources and what do you use about "my bud" Newt??? Your memory?! I'll keep that in mind as your authoritative legal reference. And if I ever have to go to this "place", I be sure to watch my step if ascending to a podium.

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #58 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfmorrison View Post

But the terms and conditions communicated at the time that fateful cup of coffee was sold didn't include an explicit statement to the effect that the hot water included a hidden burning skin clause.

Now, the T&C are printed on every coffee cup, and it is much more clear on that point.

...by that logic i can put my hand on an ironing board and burn it with an iron, then sue the company who manufactured the iron for not putting a warning label on the iron "caution dipsh!t, this thing is f'ing hot"
...or do i have to drop the iron on my crotch to win the $$$?
post #59 of 129
I was going to respond with something "useful" but instead I am still in awe at how idiotic people can be.
post #60 of 129
She should be ordered to pay Apple's defense costs and her attorney should be disbarred for bringing a frivolous action.
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #61 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by dh87 View Post

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.

May I join that lawsuit.

If this crazy iPHone lawsuit even gets any attention, it would be amaze me

LOL
post #62 of 129
I'm kinda surprised to see this article on AI. While I expect this kind of headline over at the xxxNN mac news site, I have gotten use to AI filtering these kinds of fluff pieces.
post #63 of 129
You missed the most important part

5. Could not Use Hack She complained she could not use an illegal hack to unlock the phone so she did not have to sign an agreement with AT&T. Not only is she looking to make a profit on the product she bought and used, she now wants to hack the phone so she can void her warranty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amerist View Post

ROFL

I totally agree. I'm sick of hearing whiny people bitching about how they got a raw deal. Here's why you whiners all got a raw deal..

1. You bought an iPhone. This thing does not even do half the stuff a Palm-based treo can do. (sure it has its own limited subset of features that make it pretty and work well with macs, but you have to admit that if you were a former smartphone user, this is the dumbest smartphone on the market right now.) For that alone you should feel buyer's remorse.

2. You bought it in the first two months! Most people know that when apple releases a product, something better is just around the corner waiting to obsolete it. I'm actually an apple fan but this is one thing that simultaneously awes and dismays me.

3. You accepted sub-standard terms and conditions. 2 year contract??? WTF? You agreed to use At&t for your wireless service provider. For that, you should be electro-shocked back into sanity.

4. You felt that the 8GB iPhone was worth $599 at the time and so that's why you paid that much. For that, you got the privilege of being the first early adopter on the block to show off your shiny new iPhone. Don't whine and bitch because Apple decided to make them more affordable for the rest of us who still haven't bought one.
post #64 of 129
None of this would happen, if those who brought the lawsuit, had to pay whatever they were suing for, to the other party if they lost

Skip
post #65 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

5. Could not Use Hack She complained she could not use an illegal hack to unlock the phone...

News Flash: Unlocking your phone is NOT ILLEGAL!

Regardless, unlocking is not Apple's concern.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #66 of 129
I'll Tell you how you end these kind of lawsuits, when these things finally get thrown out, the news should cover it and embarrass the hell out of these people, they should be publicly ridiculed they should be made to explain what they were thinks and aren't they embarrassed that what they did.

This is like all those people from the Y2K issue who stocked their basements with stuff because the world was going to come to a stand still. I want the news to go back to these people the day after and asked them what happen and aren't they embarrassed for being idiots
post #67 of 129
I wish endless toil and misery on this woman and her representatives.
post #68 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauer View Post

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

What a stupid thing to say. Do you really think that the people mocking socialist Europe are the same as the ones bitching about open market factors they don't like? You do realize that all Americans are individuals, eh?
post #69 of 129
The thing is, she is going to have to pay for all legal fees involved once she loses this case. That will run a hell of a lot more than $200.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #70 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

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

The problem is that coffee served at temperatures considered by some to be optimal are also temperatures that would cause rapid and severe burning if it gets onto skin. To be honest, I don't know who those people are or if that temperature was determined by a reasonably scientific study or just made up. And I don't "get" coffee either. To me, it's about as attractive as the idea of drinking Drain-o.

I wondered if the original poster that mentioned hot coffee meant the game or not.
post #71 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

What a stupid thing to say. Do you really think that the people mocking socialist Europe are the same as the ones bitching about open market factors they don't like? You do realize that all Americans are individuals, eh?

I'm not sure I consider what is basically an oligopoly to be an open market. I'm not sure if there's even spectrum available for anyone else to come in and make an independent network. That's why the US 700MHz spectrum auction is so important.
post #72 of 129
Couldn't somebody file a class action suit against Dongmei Li on the behalf of all of us (for wasting our time and bandwith)?
post #73 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmjoe View Post

Actually it would have,

But, we live in a country where others do have some level of responsibility for your safety.


I agree and disagree with you.

"Actually it would have" I disagree, there would have been nothing stopping her from filing a suit. Winning her suit might have been a different situation.

"we live in a country where others do have some level of responsibility for your safety." I agree but that "person" should start with YOU.

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #74 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

There is no merit in idiotic actions nor should it be financially awarded.

From Wikipedia... "On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-thru of a local McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. She placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap."

way to selectively cut/paste:

from wikipedia (the next paragraph):

"Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over 90 seconds, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[8] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[9] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. Two years of treatment followed."

also, she asked them to cover her medical costs of about 11K, and they countered with $800. also, the judge lowered the award to a little under $500K.
post #75 of 129
Boo F'in Hoo
post #76 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by icibaqu View Post

way to selectively cut/paste:

from wikipedia (the next paragraph):

"Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over 90 seconds, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[8] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[9] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. Two years of treatment followed."

also, she asked them to cover her medical costs of about 11K, and they countered with $800. also, the judge lowered the award to a little under $500K.

Not selective, just not wanting to paste the whole case history... Had I also included that in my quote, this is what I would have said...

All the more reason not to put hot liquid regardless of the temp between your legs while wearing cotton sweatpants that can absorb the coffee and hold it against one's skin for any length of time.

I don't mean to sound heartless but since when does actions of BOTH parties not take into account here? McDonald's selling overly hot coffee without fair warning or some lady putting a hot drink between her legs. Come on, where does her responsiblity for her injuries take account? Why are her actions totally negated here and the responsibility falls entirely on the defendant (in this case)?

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #77 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by dh87 View Post

That was actually a much more noted legal scholar, former Solicitor General Robert Bork. One link to a story is here: http://www.acsblog.org/economic-regu...e-damages.html .

I did a quick Google search too and found this link... no "Bud" Newt falling but, well here is the link... http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/06/l...obert_bork.php

I will take one quote from the article... Bork's fellow traveler in conservative circles, Ted Frank -- who's currently a fellow at AEI, where Bork used to be a fellow -- "sympathize[s] with Judge Bork's serious injuries." But even Frank deems Bork's claim for punitives a bit dubious.

If it were Nancy Pelosi, I doubt that Harry Reed would say I sympathize but your claim for punitives a bit dubious... MY OPINION folks.

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #78 of 129
It would be nice to see AAPL countersue for costs, including one hour of Jobs's time which is probably worth $300,000 or so. Time this class action rot was stopped. (Ooops, that would mean the end of the Democratic party - oh! well....)
post #79 of 129
Dammit! why the hell are we all arguing about a lawsuit that took place agaainst McDonalds 15 years ago!?
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
post #80 of 129
People keep talking about how stupid the woman is, well how about the lawyer? Any 8 year old aspiring to be a lawyer would know that this simply will not work. But the lawyer is taking the case anyway!
Idiots, both of them
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates