Class action suit alleges Apple lies to customers over size & resolution of iPhone X, XS &...

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 83
    Before even sitting down to read this thread, I’m getting popcorn ready. 
    magman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 83
    macxpress said:
    So they're suing to get a $10 Apple Gift Card in the end which Apple will end up making money off it because someone will buy something because they have this $10 gift card. 

    Honestly...people just have too much time on their hands I guess. You could always return the phone if you didn't like it. 
    Sadly, I think it is  more the millennial mindset that is looking for a quick paycheck. They simply don’t know what hard work is. 
    magman1979TomEmacseekerwilliamlondonRonnnieOwatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 83
    I feel like arguing that anyone was "harmed" by this would be nigh impossible. Anyone who drops 1000 USD on a smartphone without researching it probably isn't harmed by it even if they regretted the purchase. And almost anyone else who buys one would look into it enough to know that the screens are rounded and there is a notch.

    Also WHO DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS A NOTCH!?
    TomEwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 83
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,752member
    Fair point, I think, though I don't know about a lawsuit or any kind of loss anyone is suffering over it. I think Apple should just be forced to measure the screen diagonally from a line even with the bottom of the notch and inside the 'safe area' for their screen size spec. But, then I'm guessing they wouldn't have gone with the notch and rounded corners in the first place... the whole point was a higher screen-size spec.

    I suppose a lawsuit is about the only way to get Apple not to cheat on specs.
    edited December 2018 williamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 25 of 83
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Reply 26 of 83
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,889member
    Lawyers!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 83
    AhsokaAhsoka Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    I feel like arguing that anyone was "harmed" by this would be nigh impossible. Anyone who drops 1000 USD on a smartphone without researching it probably isn't harmed by it even if they regretted the purchase. And almost anyone else who buys one would look into it enough to know that the screens are rounded and there is a notch.

    Also WHO DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS A NOTCH!?
    You did not know that there is a notch?...
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 83
    hentaiboyhentaiboy Posts: 1,245member
    Notch? What notch?


    edited December 2018 williamlondon
  • Reply 29 of 83
    JFC_PAJFC_PA Posts: 649member
    Lol. From the Apple Store tech specs page for my iPhone: “

    Both models:

    • True Tone display
    • Wide color display (P3)
    • 3D Touch
    • 625 cd/m2 max brightness (typical)
    • Fingerprint-resistant oleophobic coating
    • Support for display of multiple languages and characters simultaneously

    The display has rounded corners that follow a beautiful curved design, and these corners are within a standard rectangle. When measured as a standard rectangular shape, the screen is 5.85 inches (iPhone XS) and 6.46 inches (iPhone XS Max) diagonally (actual viewable area is less).”

    berndogradarthekatablambertericthehalfbeemagman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 83
    Sure - who neds your facts in the middle of a great argument!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 83
    Whew, forum is bias to the max ;)

    Anyway - with Apples 500+ lawyers, I don't think it'll get anywhere.

    Plus, they're the kings at suing people ... remember a few years ago they just sued and banned their competitors from certain markets, rather just upping their game? 
    Didn't they sue because of rectangle and squares and corners?



    williamlondon
  • Reply 32 of 83
    Lawyers. You've gotta love em.
    No!

    Lawyers, You've gotta SUE em!
    :)

  • Reply 33 of 83
    Apple never been the leader in pixels for their screens but this is just crap for leveraging a settlement! ?Nothing to it!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 83
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,425moderator
    Whew, forum is bias to the max ;)

    Anyway - with Apples 500+ lawyers, I don't think it'll get anywhere.

    Plus, they're the kings at suing people ... remember a few years ago they just sued and banned their competitors from certain markets, rather just upping their game? 
    Didn't they sue because of rectangle and squares and corners?



    Here you go, I’ll help you reduce your ignorance on the topic... (this is an essay on the topic I wrote a long while back)

    Since the Apple vs Samsung trial there has been much written about the merit of design patents.  I thought I'd provide a bit of insight here for those who might not be conversant in the topic.

    Among Apple's assertions in its lawsuit was that Samsung copied elements of the iPhone and iPad for which Apple holds several patents.  These particular patents are known as design patents.  It seems a lot of folks don't take these patents seriously and go as far as to suggest that they should not exist.  There is a good reason why they do exist, but to explain this we have to begin with a bit of a side trip and requires that we speak about trademark law.  Bear with me on this and hopefully I'll be able to clarify the purpose of design patents and provide some insights into the Apple versus Samsung trial.

    Most people are familiar with the idea of a trademark.  By way of example, Kellogg, the cereal maker, has a trademark on Tony the Tiger and fought a battle with Exxon over Kellogs' claim that the use of an unnamed tiger in Exxon's advertising violates Kellogg's trademark for Tony the Tiger.  Why?  For 30 years, Exxon used its tiger character exclusively to promote its gasoline blend, but then, in the 1990's began using it to sell food. Kellogg said consumers are confused by the similarity between the cartoon tigers and may conclude that Kellogg is somehow behind soda, coffee and other items for sale at Exxon's TigerMart stores.  The case went back and forth for several years, with Exxon initially winning the case, but ultimately losing on appeal.  This case would not seem extraordinary to most people as most folks understand the concept of protecting a unique trademark like Kellogg's Tony the Tiger character.

    Now let's look at another case, one that comes closer to the Apple vs Samsung case, but still an application of trademark law.  This case is Ferrari vs Robert's Replicas.  Back in the 1980's Robert's Replica's was in the business of manufacturing fiberglass kits that replicated the exterior features of Ferrari's Daytona Spyder and Testarossa automobiles. Roberts' copies were called the Miami Spyder and the Miami Coupe, respectively.  Ferrari brought suit against Roberts in March 1988 alleging trademark infringement. 

    Here's what this case was about:  After Ferrari vehicles have been on the market for a number of years, the design of those vehicles acquires what's called "secondary meaning", a concept at the heart of trademark law.  Secondary meaning refers to an association of a design, like the design of a Ferrari vehicle, with quality and craftsmanship or other positive attributes one might associate with the Ferrari brand.  After a design has acquired secondary meaning, trademark law can be applied to protect the company from those who would copy its designs and use them to promote their own products.  Robert's copying of Ferrari's iconic designs could confuse the public and dilute the strength of Ferrari's brand.  Just the presence of large numbers of replicas would dilute Ferrari's image of exclusivity, causing financial harm to Ferrari.  Trademark law, under the concept of secondary meaning, protected Ferrari.  The courts ruled in favor of Ferrari in this case and enjoined Roberts from producing the Miami Spyder and the Miami Coupe.

    But how does this relate to design patent law? 

    The problem with using trademark law to protect a company's designs (under trademark law a product design or package design is referred to as "trade dress") is that a product has to be on the market for a long time before its design acquires secondary meaning (i.e. before the design becomes iconic and is seen by consumers as representative of the company behind the product). When competitors come in immediately after a new product design is introduced and copy it, as is the assertion in the Apple vs Samsung case, the originator of the design doesn't have the luxury of time needed for its product design to acquire secondary meaning in the eyes of consumers.  Consumers immediately see the same design from multiple companies and so don't grow to associate the design with the company that originated that design.

    This is where design patents come in. Where trademark protection of an iconic product design has no expiration, it takes time for a new product to acquire that protection (as stated above). A design patent offers immediate protection of a new and novel design and for a period of 14 years thereafter, giving a company protection of its original designs until they acquire secondary meaning in the market and therefore protection under trademark law. So the design patent serves a valuable function for companies like Ferrari, and Apple.



    jpbollenwilliamlondondedgeckomacseekerericthehalfbeemagman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 83
    @radarthekat ;

    Thanks.

    But can a design patent be a shape or colour or smell? Or the shape of the corners?
    Could you do a design patent on something generic ie patent 4 wheels and ban all cars / claim royalties?
    Can I quickly patent a 6 side cardboard box?

    I think general perception Apple is they just sue and ban and at one stage, everyone just rolled their eyes at yet another Apple lawsuit. Before Apple, products used to compete on pricing / promotion / features / benefits. You know, the better product 'won'. After Apple though, things changed - I remember trying to ban competition in certain countries and run the courts for help and set their 500+ lawyers onto it.




    edited December 2018 williamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 36 of 83
    hentaiboy said:
    Notch? What notch?


    The one you likely are for going to notice after the purchase and before the return period expires. 
    radarthekatbestkeptsecret
  • Reply 37 of 83
    About time. I’m very angry about those missing pixels in the corners and the notch. It ruins my experience with the device, since I bought it unseen, after only seeing the resolution specs.  Those pixels are the best pixels, which Apple must be keeping for themselves. 

    Seriously, I hope Apple can charge their legal fees to this lawyer.  This is why our legal system is so messed up. You don’t have time to resolve important cases, because the courts are tied up with this nonsense.  
    magman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 83
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,010member
    So ... we're going to start suing companies for inflated, misleading, exaggerated, and aspirational marketing and advertising claims and presentations? Does this that I've been drinking Old Milwaukee beer for no good reason and the Swedish Bikini Team girls are actually not going to be showing up at my place any time soon? OMG, where's my class action lawyer? What's next, suing politicians for their constant stream of failed promises, lies, self serving money grabs, and alternative facts?

    We are so screwed. Forget the $1 trillion for infrastructure improvements, we need to build more courthouses and vast new tracts on McMansions to house the army of class action lawyers that we'll need to protect ourselves from these emerging threats. Hopefully all these lawyers won't die on their way to the courthouse while driving their fine German automobiles through the minefield of collapsing bridges and sinkholes. Or not.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 83
    In fairness, I'd hate to buy a 2.0l car and it's 1.8l ...
    or a 60" TV and it's 55" ...
    or a 21MP SLR and it's an 18MP

    It's be good - fantastic really - if products were as labelled. 

    To be honest though, I didn't think iPhone users would pick this up ... they're not into specs 
    williamlondoncgWerks
  • Reply 40 of 83
    I do realize that US culture of lawsuits can be beneficial to the general public, although mostly to lawyers... but in this particularly instance: Just, wow...
Sign In or Register to comment.