Canada court orders Apple divulge documents in iPhone anti-competition probe

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34

    According to AppleInsider's article on Monday, they already did that:

    Both Apple and its carrier partners in Canada have been asked to turn over documents dating back to the Canadian introduction of the original iPhone in July 2008. Apple has reportedly delivered "some" documents, while carriers have provided more than 2,500 such records.

    So YvesVilleneuve was completely wrong.
  • Reply 22 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    So YvesVilleneuve was completely wrong.



    I think Yves was right the first time - someone lodged a complaint, and now they have to collect the documents and look into whether there's merit to the case or not. It may turn out this whole thing gets dropped later. In my opinion, anyway - I don't know for sure how this works.

  • Reply 23 of 34

    I think Yves was right the first time - someone lodged a complaint, and now they have to collect the documents and look into whether there's merit to the case or not. It may turn out this whole thing gets dropped later. In my opinion, anyway - I don't know for sure how this works.

    Yves said: "It's more cost effective and more efficient to ask Apple directly. It saves Canadian taxpayers money."
  • Reply 24 of 34

    According to AppleInsider's article on Monday, they already did that:

    Both Apple and its carrier partners in Canada have been asked to turn over documents dating back to the Canadian introduction of the original iPhone in July 2008. Apple has reportedly delivered "some" documents, while carriers have provided more than 2,500 such records.
    Based on that report, Apple is perceived to be withholding contracts with carriers that are only being stored at Apple, as an attempt to hide these special anti-competitive deals. Obviously, someone at Apple or at any of the carriers blew the whistle to the Competition Bureau by presenting reasonable cause to investigate. Maybe the Competition Bureau received a copy of such deals and wants to verify it's authenticity in several ways e.g. signatures.
  • Reply 25 of 34
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    icoco3 wrote: »
    THERE it is....it's all about RIM !!!!

    U R correct!

    Everyone should look at the cost of the data before the Apple iPhone was introduced..
  • Reply 26 of 34

    We can get into a huge discussion with what you have raised but how is Apple at fault for anti-competition?

     

    Telus, Bell and Rogers are the primary carriers.

     

    To use your population figure of 30 million, how many other carriers could the population support?

     

    With handsets being offered at comparable levels in the US (taking into account FX rates) and the carriers offering non Apple handsets for free how do you see where Apple is fixing prices for the Canadian market?

     

    The service level is extremely spotty. Depends where you are. This is true for all carriers. I should have LTE but often connect at 3G.

     

    Please don't go to superior healthcare, transportation and military issues. I can provide a host of arguments that would indicate how wrong you are.

     

    Quote:



    According to the OECD, when you compare capping, speed and volume, Canadians do quite well.

     

    Particularly when examining some of the issues that Canadians have had to face that are quite foreign to most countries, e.g.,

     


    • The fluctuating dollar

      • Most of the cost to build the necessary infrastructure was incurred when the Canadian dollar was a high as 25% that of the US

      • The effect of such variance on the pricing structure for mobile phones


    • The cost and expanse to build the infrastructure and purchase mobile phones

      • Using American products, e.g., towers/hardware

      • All mobile devices (except RIM) are foreign 


    • Availability of government subsidies

      • Much of the initial building of foreign mobile networks were paid for by their respective governments, aka the people, not the users


    • The expansive geographical issues and smaller population densities that Canadians are subjected to work with

      • Paying for a network to cover Canada by a population of 30 million is significantly higher per capita compared to the 300 million folks in the US


     

    However, having said that, my experience (with Rogers) tells me our service compared to ATT and Verizon is far superior re speed, volume and support, as well as price. Just recently, my foray into New England last month to visit relatives is some proof of that. Everything was equal or better here, including the price they were paying. (the dollar excluding). Support was significantly inferior for our American cousins.

     

    Now this is not to say, that it would be nice if we were paying less. But having superior healthcare, transportation services and less recently planted flags in our cemeteries somewhat offsets the difference that our neighbours to the south are subject with. 


  • Reply 27 of 34
    lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member

    1. Multiple Companies are all involved in essentially the same anti-consumer practices and they all know it - but since no one is sufficiently different than another - consumers are unaware they are ALL being scammed. 

     

    2. An innovative company comes along and disrupts the business as usual practices of all those companies helping to expose the disservice they have been providing to their customers all along. 

     

    3. Those companies which do not directly or significantly benefit from the innovation cry foul and claim that the innovative company is the problem because they want to return to their old ways which have been made unprofitably by the innovation. 

     

    4. Repeat ad nauseam. 

  • Reply 28 of 34
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    1brayden wrote: »

    I don't see it being Apples fault one iota.
  • Reply 29 of 34
    Yves said: "It's more cost effective and more efficient to ask Apple directly. It saves Canadian taxpayers money."

    I meant he was probably right about his first post in this thread where he said it's just a situation where the bureau is forced to investigate even if the claim is probably not true. Clearly he's wrong about the cost thing.

    Based on his reply to my last post, though, now he just sounds like he's making random claims as if they're true. I don't see how what he claims is "obvious".
  • Reply 30 of 34

    Don't really get what the fuss is about. If Apple haven't done anything wrong then they should just hand over the documents. Sure some competitors might learn some stuff but Apple sells their products by making the best product. At lease that's the appearance they give anyway.

     

    The fact there being investigated isn't a bad thing. Consumers need to be protected from things they can't influence. There's always a "buy a different product" argument, but if the other product is being forced to cost more then the consumer is powerless. So where this is suspicion an investigation should occur. If a companies done nothing wrong then they should also welcome investigation because at the end their shown to be good, where before their could have been doubt.

  • Reply 31 of 34
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,718member
    timgriff84 wrote: »
    Don't really get what the fuss is about. If Apple haven't done anything wrong then they should just hand over the documents. Sure some competitors might learn some stuff but Apple sells their products by making the best product. At lease that's the appearance they give anyway.

    The fact there being investigated isn't a bad thing. Consumers need to be protected from things they can't influence. There's always a "buy a different product" argument, but if the other product is being forced to cost more then the consumer is powerless. So where this is suspicion an investigation should occur. If a companies done nothing wrong then they should also welcome investigation because at the end their shown to be good, where before their could have been doubt.

    If you haven't done anything wrong, please let the cops search your house.
  • Reply 32 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post





    If you haven't done anything wrong, please let the cops search your house.

    That's generally what happens. If your suspected of something. e.g. Having a drug stash, cops will search your house. If you haven't got anything illegal to hide you shouldn't have much issue with them doing the search.

     

    The same as if you look like a suspect being looked for, you don't run away when they do a stop and search. You just let them establish that you don't have a knife and are the wrong person, then get on with your day.

  • Reply 33 of 34
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    In Australia we seem to have the opposite issue, iPhone prices increase just before the launch of Samsung's flagships.

     

    For example I got my 128GB iPhone 6 for $8 month on top of an $80 plan, today it costs $12 on top of the same $80 plan, the Note 4 is $6 plus $80 and the Note Edge is $14 plus $80.

     

    Gotta keep "Android is cheaper" going I guess.

  • Reply 34 of 34
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,718member
    timgriff84 wrote: »
    That's generally what happens. If your suspected of something. e.g. Having a drug stash, cops will search your house. If you haven't got anything illegal to hide you shouldn't have much issue with them doing the search.

    The same as if you look like a suspect being looked for, you don't run away when they do a stop and search. You just let them establish that you don't have a knife and are the wrong person, then get on with your day.

    You need a warrant to search if it's not in plain sight.
Sign In or Register to comment.