Apple, AT&T sued for over-saturating 3G network with iPhones
A San Diego-based lawsuit filed late last week alleges that Apple and its carrier partner AT&T have knowingly oversold iPhone 3G, promising fast speeds only to see a glut of customers bog down the network with devices that themselves are flawed.
The 18-page complaint from customer William Gillis primarily relies on Internet reports of problems as the foundation of its argument and asserts that leaked information contradicts public statements by either of the defendant companies regarding 3G network performance.
Gillis particularly criticizes AT&T. Although company new media representative Brad Mays has gone on record as saying the iPhone 3G has been "performing great" on its 3G network, the plaintiff counters by pointing to claims that the handset has required too much power. In tandem with the "high volume" of iPhones sold, the sheer signal demand has bombarded AT&T and in many cases kicks users down to the EDGE-based 2G network even when 3G coverage is guaranteed, according to the lawsuit.
Apple and AT&T also misled customers about the practical speed of EDGE with the first iPhone, Gillis also claims, though here he points to ads exaggerating the speed rather than technical issues.
And while Apple chief Steve Jobs is believed to have sent a direct e-mail to one iPhone 3G user confirming a bug fix for the software end of the problem sometime in September, Gillis adds that none of Apple's packaging warns buyers of the current iPhone that its performance might not match customers' expectations.
A disclaimer "points out to them to ask questions, to futher investigate, or [for companies] to simply disclose complete and accurate information about the product," the lawsuit reads. "This is especially true in the case of the speed and performance of an expensive [device]; an important feature in any electronics device purchase."
Since many customers are potentially affected by the alleged flaws in AT&T's network and its interaction with Apple's phone, Gillis is seeking class action status so that every AT&T subscriber in California plagued by slow or intermittent performance -- which could measure into the "thousands" -- can earn compensation if they've suffered through a sub-par 3G experience.
The complaint would have Apple and AT&T pay this restitution as well as punitive damages. Both firms would also be stopped from pursuing the same marketing and public relations tactics that triggered the filing, which demands a jury trial.
Neither Apple nor AT&T has publicly commented on the lawsuit, which is the second lawsuit in as many weeks concerning the same performance hiccups.
Word of the suit was first reported by San Diego journalist Justin McLachlan.
The 18-page complaint from customer William Gillis primarily relies on Internet reports of problems as the foundation of its argument and asserts that leaked information contradicts public statements by either of the defendant companies regarding 3G network performance.
Gillis particularly criticizes AT&T. Although company new media representative Brad Mays has gone on record as saying the iPhone 3G has been "performing great" on its 3G network, the plaintiff counters by pointing to claims that the handset has required too much power. In tandem with the "high volume" of iPhones sold, the sheer signal demand has bombarded AT&T and in many cases kicks users down to the EDGE-based 2G network even when 3G coverage is guaranteed, according to the lawsuit.
Apple and AT&T also misled customers about the practical speed of EDGE with the first iPhone, Gillis also claims, though here he points to ads exaggerating the speed rather than technical issues.
And while Apple chief Steve Jobs is believed to have sent a direct e-mail to one iPhone 3G user confirming a bug fix for the software end of the problem sometime in September, Gillis adds that none of Apple's packaging warns buyers of the current iPhone that its performance might not match customers' expectations.
A disclaimer "points out to them to ask questions, to futher investigate, or [for companies] to simply disclose complete and accurate information about the product," the lawsuit reads. "This is especially true in the case of the speed and performance of an expensive [device]; an important feature in any electronics device purchase."
Since many customers are potentially affected by the alleged flaws in AT&T's network and its interaction with Apple's phone, Gillis is seeking class action status so that every AT&T subscriber in California plagued by slow or intermittent performance -- which could measure into the "thousands" -- can earn compensation if they've suffered through a sub-par 3G experience.
The complaint would have Apple and AT&T pay this restitution as well as punitive damages. Both firms would also be stopped from pursuing the same marketing and public relations tactics that triggered the filing, which demands a jury trial.
Neither Apple nor AT&T has publicly commented on the lawsuit, which is the second lawsuit in as many weeks concerning the same performance hiccups.
Word of the suit was first reported by San Diego journalist Justin McLachlan.
Comments
Umm - when the heck did either Apple or AT&T ever guarantee 3G coverage? Are they going to file a class action suit for every other phone on the planet that doens't hold a signal 100% of the time? If anything he might have a case against AT&T but not Apple.
Although company new media representative Brad Mays has gone on record as saying the iPhone 3G has been "performing great" on its 3G network, the plaintiff counters by pointing to claims that the handset has required too much power.
Well, then, how bout doing what I did and KEEP THE BRIGHTNESS DOWN
The 18-page complaint from pillock William Gillis.
Well, then, how bout doing what I did and KEEP THE BRIGHTNESS DOWN
I'd say that's the worse claim out of all of them. Apple clearly discloses the expected battery life right on the iPhone page. If you don't like it 1) don't buy it 2) don't b!tch about it or 3) just keep an iPod/iPhone cable with you (as if that's that hard)
I just bought a new car and now I keep getting caught in traffic jams!!! I'm suing FORD!!!
I thought the exact same thing.
This is like someone suing GM because they promote a car as being fast, but the purchaser gets caught in rush hour traffic and thus cannot drive the car at the speed advertised.
This is one of the most idiotic suits that I have ever heard of. Suing just AT&T could be somewhat logical, but suing Apple because of AT&T's network problems? Give me a break.
]Apparently, this guy flunked out of Economics 101.
Don't you know? Economics is no longer the law of the land. Welcome to socialism.... Lawsuits and politics make sure there is a chicken in every pot, forget about supply and demand.
Wow, i remember when I bought a set of new tires for my Ferrari, and of course they were the best tires, but damn, I was not pleased with the tires because every time I put the pedal to the metal my tires were spinning and smoking all over the place. I'm going to sue the tire manufacturer because they cannot handle the cars power, oh and I'm going to sue Ferrari because the car is too much for any tire.
WAAAAAAAAA!!!! What a moron. Get a life. Go get another phone if you don't like the phone. Go to another wireless company, AT&T is not the only one out there.
Yeah, and by the way, if you call AT&T and Apple they would have probably canceled your contract, and Apple would have certainly refunded for your phone. Try that with any other wireless company and with any other cell phone/computer company.
One thing if for sure, not all, but some attorneys are just bored with life and greedy for money. Why don't you guys go and sue Iran and Siria for not supplying enough oil, that sure is a big problem, but noooo, you guys have to sue AT&T and Apple. What a bunch of crapp!!!
primarily relies on Internet reports of problems as the foundation of its argument
Priceless
Yeah, and by the way, if you call AT&T and Apple they would have probably canceled your contract, and Apple would have certainly refunded for your phone.
They had 30 days just like everybody else.
Now I know why you call America the land of opportunity, or is that opportunists?
"Severe misuse may cause injury or death" -- warning on a logic probe from my 18-240 class in the early 90's...
Welcome to socialism....
Huh?
That sounds like California.
Again: huh?
I just bought a new car and now I keep getting caught in traffic jams!!! I'm suing FORD!!!
How about the part where they claim the iphone 3g is the cause of issue due to the power demands it makes on the UMTS cell towers?
As you might have read, apparantly the iphone 3g baseband unit requests more radio power than it actually needs resulting in a lower quality connection for all phones on that cell.
If is the case, then surely this is Apple's (or maybe (UMTS chipset supplier) Infineon's) fault, not just AT&T (even if they fixed it in 2.0.2?)
More info here:
http://www.dailytech.com/Report+ATT+...ticle12797.htm
This lawsuit is priceless. I hope this guy is not a rocket scientist or a leader of anything. Surely a lawsuit based on internet "leaked" info must be 100% true and confirms the conspiracy that Apple and AT&T is out to rip off his iPhone 3G experience.
AT&T forces users to pay an extra $10 a month to use the 3G service which I'm not able to access 90% of the time.
I thought the exact same thing.
This is like someone suing GM because they promote a car as being fast, but the purchaser gets caught in rush hour traffic and thus cannot drive the car at the speed advertised.
This is one of the most idiotic suits that I have ever heard of. Suing just AT&T could be somewhat logical, but suing Apple because of AT&T's network problems? Give me a break.