[QUOTE=jragosta;1671808]This is a stupid lawsuit and won't go very far. Companies have a legitimate right to choose the distribution method for their products. Toyota is free to sell their cars only through Toyota dealers. If I invent something new, I'm free to sell it only through Best Buy or Walmart or Billy Bob's Bait and Tackle if I wish.
Consumers do not have an absolute right to any product they wish to buy. They have a right to buy it under terms that the seller chooses to offer. Any other rule would be a disaster.
We really need 'loser pays' for lawsuits in this country.[/QU
When I buy something, like a Toyota, it is mine to do with as I please. If I want to work on it, change the motor, have the corner mechanic tune it, paint it, whatever, I can, because it is mine. I mean Toyota doesn't send a kill order over the ether if I decide to have someone other than Toyota service it. This philosophy does not seem to be something Apple believes in, that the phone is actually yours to do with as you please. It has not been or will be a hardship for me to not buy Apple for this reason, I mean it is only a phone!! But I understand the frustration for those that have "drunk the kool-aid", bought the phone, fulfilled their contract obligation and still can't do something with THEIR phone other than what the mighty Jobs will allow. So in this case Apple and AT&T deserve to have their asses handed to them, which I hope will be the case.
This is a stupid lawsuit and won't go very far. Companies have a legitimate right to choose the distribution method for their products. Toyota is free to sell their cars only through Toyota dealers. If I invent something new, I'm free to sell it only through Best Buy or Walmart or Billy Bob's Bait and Tackle if I wish.
Consumers do not have an absolute right to any product they wish to buy. They have a right to buy it under terms that the seller chooses to offer. Any other rule would be a disaster.
We really need 'loser pays' for lawsuits in this country.[/QU
When I buy something, like a Toyota, it is mine to do with as I please. If I want to work on it, change the motor, have the corner mechanic tune it, paint it, whatever, I can, because it is mine. I mean Toyota doesn't send a kill order over the ether if I decide to have someone other than Toyota service it. This philosophy does not seem to be something Apple believes in, that the phone is actually yours to do with as you please. It has not been or will be a hardship for me to not buy Apple for this reason, I mean it is only a phone!! But I understand the frustration for those that have "drunk the kool-aid", bought the phone, fulfilled their contract obligation and still can't do something with THEIR phone other than what the mighty Jobs will allow. So in this case Apple and AT&T deserve to have their asses handed to them, which I hope will be the case.
When I buy something, like a Toyota, it is mine to do with as I please. If I want to work on it, change the motor, have the corner mechanic tune it, paint it, whatever, I can, because it is mine. I mean Toyota doesn't send a kill order over the ether if I decide to have someone other than Toyota service it
This philosophy does not seem to be something Apple believes in, that the phone is actually yours to do with as you please. It has not been or will be a hardship for me to not buy Apple for this reason, I mean it is only a phone!! But I understand the frustration for those that have "drunk the kool-aid", bought the phone, fulfilled their contract obligation and still can't do something with THEIR phone other than what the mighty Jobs will allow. So in this case Apple and AT&T deserve to have their asses handed to them, which I hope will be the case.
Horsefeathers.
I have never heard of a case or incidence where Apple and/or AT&T stopped anybody once you became full owner and fulfilled your contract obligations.
Like Toyota, Apple nor AT&T is obligated to assist, service or support what you do with your iPhone it becomes legally yours.
Comments
Consumers do not have an absolute right to any product they wish to buy. They have a right to buy it under terms that the seller chooses to offer. Any other rule would be a disaster.
We really need 'loser pays' for lawsuits in this country.[/QU
When I buy something, like a Toyota, it is mine to do with as I please. If I want to work on it, change the motor, have the corner mechanic tune it, paint it, whatever, I can, because it is mine. I mean Toyota doesn't send a kill order over the ether if I decide to have someone other than Toyota service it. This philosophy does not seem to be something Apple believes in, that the phone is actually yours to do with as you please. It has not been or will be a hardship for me to not buy Apple for this reason, I mean it is only a phone!! But I understand the frustration for those that have "drunk the kool-aid", bought the phone, fulfilled their contract obligation and still can't do something with THEIR phone other than what the mighty Jobs will allow. So in this case Apple and AT&T deserve to have their asses handed to them, which I hope will be the case.
This is a stupid lawsuit and won't go very far. Companies have a legitimate right to choose the distribution method for their products. Toyota is free to sell their cars only through Toyota dealers. If I invent something new, I'm free to sell it only through Best Buy or Walmart or Billy Bob's Bait and Tackle if I wish.
Consumers do not have an absolute right to any product they wish to buy. They have a right to buy it under terms that the seller chooses to offer. Any other rule would be a disaster.
We really need 'loser pays' for lawsuits in this country.[/QU
When I buy something, like a Toyota, it is mine to do with as I please. If I want to work on it, change the motor, have the corner mechanic tune it, paint it, whatever, I can, because it is mine. I mean Toyota doesn't send a kill order over the ether if I decide to have someone other than Toyota service it. This philosophy does not seem to be something Apple believes in, that the phone is actually yours to do with as you please. It has not been or will be a hardship for me to not buy Apple for this reason, I mean it is only a phone!! But I understand the frustration for those that have "drunk the kool-aid", bought the phone, fulfilled their contract obligation and still can't do something with THEIR phone other than what the mighty Jobs will allow. So in this case Apple and AT&T deserve to have their asses handed to them, which I hope will be the case.
Horsefeathers!
When I buy something, like a Toyota, it is mine to do with as I please. If I want to work on it, change the motor, have the corner mechanic tune it, paint it, whatever, I can, because it is mine. I mean Toyota doesn't send a kill order over the ether if I decide to have someone other than Toyota service it
This philosophy does not seem to be something Apple believes in, that the phone is actually yours to do with as you please. It has not been or will be a hardship for me to not buy Apple for this reason, I mean it is only a phone!! But I understand the frustration for those that have "drunk the kool-aid", bought the phone, fulfilled their contract obligation and still can't do something with THEIR phone other than what the mighty Jobs will allow. So in this case Apple and AT&T deserve to have their asses handed to them, which I hope will be the case.
Horsefeathers.
I have never heard of a case or incidence where Apple and/or AT&T stopped anybody once you became full owner and fulfilled your contract obligations.
Like Toyota, Apple nor AT&T is obligated to assist, service or support what you do with your iPhone it becomes legally yours.