Dead Pixels IMPORTANT LEGAL ISSUE

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Technically, dead pixels are covered under Apple's warranty, and they are BREAKING THE LAW by choosing not fix even one dead pixel. Dead pixels are the result of a faulty transistor on the LCD display, and the warranty, at least for my iBook G4, specifically states that:

"Apple, as defined below, warrants this Apple-branded hardware product against DEFECT IN MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of retail purchase by the end-user purchaser ("Warranty Period")."



By definition, a faulty transistor is a defect in materials, even if there are millions of them. There are no other exceptions in the written warranty that excludes them from the obligation of replacing screens with dead pixels, and they would be required by law to state in their warranty if they were not going to cover dead pixels, even one.



The law is very clear on this issue, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act states that a company must make a full disclosure as to the exceptions and limitations of their warranty. In my iBook warranty, there is no mention of dead pixels at all.



FEDERAL LAW!!! Sec. 2302. - "Rules governing contents of warranties" clearly states that the warranty must include "(3) The products or parts covered.", "(6) Exceptions and exclusions from the terms of the warranty.", and "(12) The characteristics or properties of the products, or parts thereof, that are not covered by the warranty."



Look it up for yourself people, Apple is not above the law. I don't have the financial resources to fight this on my own, but if we get enough people together, we all can have screens without dead pixels... YAY!!
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Good luck with that one but you'll find the killer comes in defining a defect. Truth is many products have manufacturing flaws but they just aren't as noticeable as a dead pixel. Odds on they'd argue a "defect" is something that has to impede functionality or something to that effect.
  • Reply 2 of 21
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    I'n the last 4 laptops I've owned I've had a single dead (well, not really dead but flaky) pixel and it was on a Dell.



    I'm happy with all my Apple purchases so I'm not interested in helping with your "witch hunt".



    ps - I'm also pretty sure Apple defines what is acceptable as far as dead pixels (position/color/proximity).
  • Reply 3 of 21
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    PA it's going to go very rough for you if you chose to make AI your grounds for a Dead Pixel bitchfest. Treadly lightly.Most of us know the potential problems with LCD monitors. Spamming the boards will engender little support for your cause. Warmest regards.
  • Reply 4 of 21
    I love my iBook, and my PowerBook even more. Apple computers truly are in my highest regard, but if they didn't want to cover dead pixels, they should have said so in their warranty. I guess my frusteration is increased by the fact that I spent an hour on hold waiting to be told that I was s.o.l.
  • Reply 5 of 21
    there's also an additional paragraph in the warranty that's specific to the LCD and pixels, basically stating it's at apple's discetion to determine if an LCD is indeed defective. Of course there's no specific guidelines, and it will vary from store to store and even from Mac Genius to Mac Genius. Your best bet is if at first you don't succeed, try(another genius), try(another store) try(calling apple) again!
  • Reply 6 of 21
    I have studied my warranty front to back, and there is NO MENTION, in any language, of dead pixels not being covered.
  • Reply 7 of 21
    guess it's online only now.



    See Apple's policy here: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=22194
  • Reply 8 of 21
    Please don't be daft. I've done serious research on this topic, read all the documentation on dead pixels- from apple and elsewhere, and not one person has said anything that refutes my claim.



    If Apple doesn't make reference to dead pixels in their warranty, by law, they are required to uphold the promises they've made. It's too bad that they chose not to put anything about dead pixels in their warranty, but they didn't. Instead they said that they warranted against defects in materials, and a faulty transistor, by definition, is a defect in materials.



    I know it's annoying to hear somebody whine about something that doesn't really affect you, but it's still the law, and Apple is breaking it.
  • Reply 9 of 21
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
    Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



    Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.



    Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
  • Reply 10 of 21
    tuttletuttle Posts: 301member
    "bitchfest"

    "spamming"

    "little pixel stunt"



  • Reply 11 of 21
    And what would you call a "faulty transistor", the admitted cause of a dead pixel? If not a defect, then what? There is nothing included in federal law that accepts industry standards in lieu of full disclosure of the parts not covered in the warranty. I'm not planning on taking Apple to court, obviously, but I do think they should know that their warranty is out of compliance with federal law. Get it?
  • Reply 12 of 21
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PixelAvenger

    And what would you call a "faulty transistor", the admitted cause of a dead pixel? If not a defect, then what? There is nothing included in federal law that accepts industry standards in lieu of full disclosure of the parts not covered in the warranty. I'm not planning on taking Apple to court, obviously, but I do think they should know that their warranty is out of compliance with federal law. Get it?



    it's useless here man.



    the majority of this board takes it up the ass from apple and asks for more.
  • Reply 13 of 21
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PixelAvenger

    And what would you call a "faulty transistor", the admitted cause of a dead pixel? If not a defect, then what? There is nothing included in federal law that accepts industry standards in lieu of full disclosure of the parts not covered in the warranty. I'm not planning on taking Apple to court, obviously, but I do think they should know that their warranty is out of compliance with federal law. Get it?



    Try small claims court. You won't have any legal fees and if Apple doesnt show up, you win.



    Alternatively, you could go to a legal firm and get a consultation. You won't have any legal fees if you get them to accept the case as a class action and get them to work on a contingency basis. If you win, their legal fees will come out of the class action settlement, ie. Apple will pay their legal fees.











  • Reply 14 of 21
    From what I've heard, it's hard to get Apple to fix your computer even if there's something legitimatly wrong with it.
  • Reply 15 of 21
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    it's useless here man.



    the majority of this board takes it up the ass from apple and asks for more.




    A little rough, but generally correct.



  • Reply 16 of 21
    Toshiba refers to these errant pixels as non-conforming - not defect. No defect = no coverage.



    However, if you have a cluster of 7 non conforming pixels in a square inch - you get a new screen.





    My new iBook is looking fine - when I bought it from bestbuy, I bought the PSP. It's got in writing the same policy as Toshiba.
  • Reply 17 of 21
    Saying that a pixel is "non-conforming" or calling it an anomaly is simply rhetoric. The fact remains that the cause of a "non-conforming" pixel is a faulty transistor. There is no arguing that a faulty transistor amounts to a defect in materials.



    What is a PSP?
  • Reply 18 of 21
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PixelAvenger

    Saying that a pixel is "non-conforming" or calling it an anomaly is simply rhetoric. The fact remains that the cause of a "non-conforming" pixel is a faulty transistor. There is no arguing that a faulty transistor amounts to a defect in materials.



    Sorry but you're incorrect there. Yes a transistor failing to switch does cause a faulty pixel but unless it is defined in the courts as a "defect", which it won't be since they'll look at the screen as a whole, you would never stand a chance.
  • Reply 19 of 21
    Referring to a pixel as non-conforming is a legal out for the company - the pixel is not defective (it continues to emit light) however it does not do so in the expected manner.



    A PSP is a product service plan. Apple calls their service plan Applecare (as we all know) - Best Buy calls theirs Product Service Plan (how original). Given the option I'll always buy an extended warranty on a laptop.
  • Reply 20 of 21
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
    Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



    Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.



    Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Sign In or Register to comment.