Since everyone commenting here today is on Apple's side, I'm going to try to take the other side to keep some balance here. Canada is a free democracy where an independent judicial system means anyone can file a lawsuit, not unlike America. Are people on this forum objecting to lawsuits or freedom or an independent judiciary? I'm not going to shut down Canadians' freedom; I celebrate it. Indeed, I would defend it both in words and, if necessary, in arms.
In America the loser rarely has to pay the winner's court case's cost (some US states have laws defining when this may happen.) In Canada it's occasionally (and only partial costs). In Britain it's often. [Bizarrely, in Canada sometimes even before the court case is resolved the plaintiff may get legal fees from the company they are suing.] The idea of the loser paying the winner's legal fees is intended to precent frivolous lawsuits. The downside is that the poor don't get as much justice when they have to pay the winner's legal fees. I think you Americans should be grateful that your system defends the poor. "Equal justice for all." Indeed Americans' taxes even pay the poor's legal fees with state-appointed lawyers (who tend to have less experience because the pay is low.) It sounds like some of you here want a legal system more like Britain, or worse Japan (where the poor don't get a lawyer unless the charge carries a penalty of over 3 years), or worse, Russia (where the poor don't get a lawyer if they are shown to be competent to defend themselves.) As such, the state paying for the poor's lawsuit against Apple is actually a good, just and fair thing.
Did I make a good case?
No, because the case is still bollocks. No one is disputing their right to file a frivolous case.
While Apple is certainly the target of frivolous and ambulance chaser lawsuits, here the one issue I have is them waiting a week after they knew about the issue to shut it down and/or even notify people. Confidential information is discussed on FaceTime and not immediately taking action is not acceptable. Similar to the whole Facebook thing and how long it took them to revoke the Enterprise certification. Apple needs to react to these things in a timely fast manner if they want the trust of the customers.
That said unless people can prove they were harmed the lawsuit is a money grab for the lawyers as I'd guess 99% of the class.
Can you begin to imagine the nimber of bug reports that apple gets in a week that nee to be sorted through, the may be large but that does not mean unlimited resources, all bug reports take time to check, I think that a week is incredibly short, most companies take a lot longer than this to acknowledge a bug let alone try and fix it. I think most people think that a few minutes with an editor and bugs simply fall away. When people have never developed code, they should refrain from commenting on reactions. The same can be said for most jobs where people comment without having any idea of the complexity.
I'm sure they get many bug reports daily. One would hope they have a system to triage and catch major risk bugs. Those move to the top of the list. No it won't be solved instantly but they can turn off the feature and/or at least alert users. Apple is very propriety with it's secrets quite understandably. They need to make sure people using their apps are afforded the best security as well.
Yes others have bugs that take longer to catch etc and they are frequently sued for damages that result.
This firm must be hoping Apple will simply settle rather than taking it to court, because I can't see how this case can win on its merits. Wouldn't a plaintiff have to prove actual harm? Is the fact that someone COULD have eavesdropped on me enough to warrant an award of damages, or would I have to demonstrate that someone actually DID listen in without my knowledge?
There's another aspect of suing over a bug I'm not clear about. At what point does the existence of bug rise to the level of negligence? Could a court conclude that the existence of software bugs is an inevitable part of life in the 21st century, and that liability may hinge on the response to them and whether or not the developer exercised due diligence in its pre-release testing?
While Apple is certainly the target of frivolous and ambulance chaser lawsuits, here the one issue I have is them waiting a week after they knew about the issue to shut it down and/or even notify people. Confidential information is discussed on FaceTime and not immediately taking action is not acceptable. Similar to the whole Facebook thing and how long it took them to revoke the Enterprise certification. Apple needs to react to these things in a timely fast manner if they want the trust of the customers.
That said unless people can prove they were harmed the lawsuit is a money grab for the lawyers as I'd guess 99% of the class.
In software bug world 3-6 months is reasonable provided it is not being actively exploited by bad agents and the information is not being broadcasted in the media. It only becomes problematic when the opposite happens. Revoking the license of a company that is violating your terms of agreement is different from fixing or even addressing a bug. It was obscure and not out in the wild. The balance is do you shutdown a service being used by potentially 100’s of millions of people who may even need it for work. There are likely more dangerous bugs that they are working on that they have been doing so for months. Once again as long as no one is actively exploiting it it’s fine, because if shutting something down without verification and testing was the standard no devices would ever be functional.
I don't know about Canada, but you generally have to show injury/damages to sue in the U.S. Everyone is up in arms over this, but I've only seen one questionable claim of actual 'damage' to someone over this.
While Apple is certainly the target of frivolous and ambulance chaser lawsuits, here the one issue I have is them waiting a week after they knew about the issue to shut it down and/or even notify people. Confidential information is discussed on FaceTime and not immediately taking action is not acceptable. Similar to the whole Facebook thing and how long it took them to revoke the Enterprise certification. Apple needs to react to these things in a timely fast manner if they want the trust of the customers.
That said unless people can prove they were harmed the lawsuit is a money grab for the lawyers as I'd guess 99% of the class.
In software bug world 3-6 months is reasonable provided it is not being actively exploited by bad agents and the information is not being broadcasted in the media. It only becomes problematic when the opposite happens. Revoking the license of a company that is violating your terms of agreement is different from fixing or even addressing a bug. It was obscure and not out in the wild. The balance is do you shutdown a service being used by potentially 100’s of millions of people who may even need it for work. There are likely more dangerous bugs that they are working on that they have been doing so for months. Once again as long as no one is actively exploiting it it’s fine, because if shutting something down without verification and testing was the standard no devices would ever be functional.
I hear all that and it certainly has some validity. I do question how vital a brand new service is however you are quite correct we need to take into account how exploitable a bug is and how well known it is.
No, because the case is still bollocks. No one is disputing their right to file a frivolous case.
My exact words were that I was "celebrating" their "freedom" to "file a lawsuit". That was my case. If you aren't disputing that case then you are in 100% agreement with my statement. Thanks!
Can Appleinsider stop reporting this? Why report it? Especially with such an offensive title.
Curious as to how the title is offensive?
It implies that we actually *LIVE* in Canada?
Many of us do. Don't you?
What's your point?
No, the headline says that now is your chance to sue Apple and live in Canada.
Ah, indeed it does! Nice catch.
I can't see the promotion being very effective though. While I'm sure many would love to live in Canada, making it contingent on suing Apple is going to be a deterrent.
Can Appleinsider stop reporting this? Why report it? Especially with such an offensive title.
Curious as to how the title is offensive?
It implies that we actually *LIVE* in Canada?
Many of us do. Don't you?
What's your point?
No, the headline says that now is your chance to sue Apple and live in Canada.
Ah, indeed it does! Nice catch.
I can't see the promotion being very effective though. While I'm sure many would love to live in Canada, making it contingent on suing Apple is going to be a deterrent.
If they made it too easy, everyone would want to do it (except during this week of nightmare weather perhaps).
Comments
Yes others have bugs that take longer to catch etc and they are frequently sued for damages that result.
There's another aspect of suing over a bug I'm not clear about. At what point does the existence of bug rise to the level of negligence? Could a court conclude that the existence of software bugs is an inevitable part of life in the 21st century, and that liability may hinge on the response to them and whether or not the developer exercised due diligence in its pre-release testing?
I was going to say, 'Nope, I'm good! I'd prefer not sue anyone.'
Best
What's your point?
I can't see the promotion being very effective though. While I'm sure many would love to live in Canada, making it contingent on suing Apple is going to be a deterrent.