Apple reaches A$2.25M settlement with Australian regulator over 4G iPad

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Apple has agreed to pay an A$2.25 million penalty to an Australian consumer rights watchdog after being accused of falsely advertising its LTE-capable iPad in the country.

In addition to the A$2.25 million (US$2.23 million) penalty, Apple is also expected to pay A$300,000 toward the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's legal fees, The Australian reports (via The Next Web). The ACCC filed its complaint against Apple in March shortly after the release of the new iPad.

Colin Golvan, who represents the ACCC, described the penalty as "substantial" and hoped it would serve as a deterrent to the computer industry.

Though Apple has agreed to the settlement amount, a judge still needs to sign off on the agreement. According to the report, Judge Mordy Bromberg expressed concerns that he didn't have enough information to ascertain whether the penalty is "appropriate."

"At the moment on the agreed facts you put before me, I have no idea whether a consumer who bought the iPad, thinking it could connect to 4G but then realising that it couldn't, has been impacted in any way," Bromberg said."

LTE



The commission took issue with Apple advertising the device as 4G even though it was not compatible with LTE networks in Australia. Apple initially defended its decision, claiming that iPad-compatible 3G networks operated by Telstra, Optus and Vodafone in the country could be classified as 4G. The company also revised its store to better inform customers about the iPad's LTE functionality and also offered refunds to customers who were unhappy with their purchase.

Last month, Apple acquiesced to complaints and began rebranding its "iPad Wi-Fi + 4G" as the "iPad W-Fi + Cellular."

Cellular
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 104


    This settlement pisses me off. Apple offered anyone who wanted it a full refund, so how can anyone claim "damages." This is just the government extorting money from a wealthy company to fill their pockets while looking like they are "watching out for consumers." Granted, I can't blame apple for settling to avoid the hassle. 

  • Reply 2 of 104


    Yeah...Here's some pocket change, kid. Now move on, yer botherin' me, yer botherin' me.

  • Reply 3 of 104
    tibortibor Posts: 12member


    I am so embarrassed right now to be Australian. Let's hope His Honour reviews this and finds that no-one was actually harmed etc by this naming issue, and dismisses the case. 


     


    The ACCC was supposed to be tougher this year, yet it picks on Apple instead of the banks, telcos and health insurance industries. Unbelievable.

  • Reply 4 of 104
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    "This never would have happened under Steve Jobs watch." <sarcasm>

    tenfingers wrote: »
    This settlement pisses me off. Apple offered anyone who wanted it a full refund, so how can anyone claim "damages." This is just the government extorting money from a wealthy company to fill their pockets while looking like they are "watching out for consumers." Granted, I can't blame apple for settling to avoid the hassle. 

    This goes to show you that you need to think about the idiot more than the average person when marketing a product.
  • Reply 5 of 104
    iqatedoiqatedo Posts: 1,587member


    A token settlement and possibly face saving outcome (as illustrated by the judge's inability to determine a proper penalty).  No one losing sleep in Cupertino tonight over this!

  • Reply 6 of 104
    geoadmgeoadm Posts: 81member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tibor View Post


    I am so embarrassed right now to be Australian. Let's hope His Honour reviews this and finds that no-one was actually harmed etc by this naming issue, and dismisses the case. 


     


    The ACCC was supposed to be tougher this year, yet it picks on Apple instead of the banks, telcos and health insurance industries. Unbelievable.



     


    my thoughts exactly. The amount of stuff we get ripped off on in Australia is amazing. Pay one of the highest tax rates in the world and everything costs more than anywhere else yet the ACCC do nothing about anything that actually matters

  • Reply 7 of 104
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    iqatedo wrote: »
    A token settlement and possibly face saving outcome (as illustrated by the judge's inability to determine a proper penalty).  No one losing sleep in Cupertino tonight over this!

    If my math is correct the settlement comes out to 1.36 cents USD per share. I think it's silly and would have fought this for the principle of the matter but, as you say, no one is losing sleep in Cupertino over this.
  • Reply 8 of 104
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,716member


    A money grab by government bureaucrats.  And they wonder why goods imported to Australia costs 50% more...

  • Reply 9 of 104
    wurm5150wurm5150 Posts: 763member
    Because there were like 5 Australians who bought the iPad thinking 4G connectivity works and felt deceived cost Apple $2.25M..
  • Reply 10 of 104
    ThisX3. Banks, mining companies, private schools, please, have our cake and eat it and crap it out in our faces too. Apple were arrogant in the oversight but please, ACCC just bought some fake fangs.
  • Reply 11 of 104
    frood88frood88 Posts: 2member


    http://imgur.com/9cpxE


     


    That is all... lol

     

  • Reply 12 of 104
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    "This never would have happened under Steve Jobs watch."

    This goes to show you that you need to think about the idiot more than the average person when marketing a product.


    hair-dryer-warning.jpg

  • Reply 13 of 104
    Listen to the judge!
  • Reply 14 of 104


    New Apple ad "The new iPad with 4G. Please note that 4G service may not work where there is no 4G service. For example, Antarctica, Marianas Trench, the Moon, and Australia."

  • Reply 15 of 104


    I'm standing in a strangers house right now with my wifi iPad. This stranger has wifi service in his house but refuses to give me his password thus rendering the wifi functionality on my iPad useless. I'm gonna sue Apple for advertising wifi functionality on the iPad.

  • Reply 16 of 104
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tenfingers View Post


    This settlement pisses me off. Apple offered anyone who wanted it a full refund, so how can anyone claim "damages." This is just the government extorting money from a wealthy company to fill their pockets while looking like they are "watching out for consumers." Granted, I can't blame apple for settling to avoid the hassle. 



    No, it's to stop companies misleading people.

  • Reply 17 of 104
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    A money grab by government bureaucrats.  And they wonder why goods imported to Australia costs 50% more...



    What does that have to do with costs of things?? This is about misleading advertising...

  • Reply 18 of 104
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GadgetCanada View Post


    I'm standing in a strangers house right now with my wifi iPad. This stranger has wifi service in his house but refuses to give me his password thus rendering the wifi functionality on my iPad useless. I'm gonna sue Apple for advertising wifi functionality on the iPad.



    Yeah real close.....not.

  • Reply 19 of 104
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GadgetCanada View Post


    New Apple ad "The new iPad with 4G. Please note that 4G service may not work where there is no 4G service. For example, Antarctica, Marianas Trench, the Moon, and Australia."



    More like the rest of the world except the US and Canada...maybe you should get a clue.

  • Reply 20 of 104
    enzosenzos Posts: 344member


    Hey, I'm an Apple fan but this was their mistake. Truth in advertising: it says 4G LTE all over the box and in the adverts but it can't deliver (yet). Wouldn't have been a problem if it had been compatible with Telstra 4G but it isn't.  


     


    Just as long as as the ACCC is consistent in the application of these standards to other companies, I can't see the problem. It's not going to hurt Apple that much

Sign In or Register to comment.