Putting aside the issues of abusive and stalking exes, because that IS a problem and ALWAYS HAS BEEN (long before Tile, the original tracker tool which until recently had ZERO anti-stalking features) …
This lawsuit is likely to be thrown out because:
1. Some of the claims are simply not true (like claiming Apple said the AirTags were “stalker proof”)
2. This is like saying guns are extremely effective at killing people, and killing people is illegal, so guns should be outlawed immediately. Good luck with that.
3, The suit all but ignores the fact that Tile (and others) were around earlier, had even less protection, but somehow are not the objects (or even mentioned) in this suit, making it look and smell a LOT more like a money grab by an ambulance-chasing firm. This has GOT to involve Quinn Emmanuel, a firm that consistently files (and loses or settles) these sorts of misguided money grabs against Apple.
Putting aside the issues of abusive and stalking exes, because that IS a problem and ALWAYS HAS BEEN (long before Tile, the original tracker tool which until recently had ZERO anti-stalking features) …
This lawsuit is likely to be thrown out because:
1. Some of the claims are simply not true (like claiming Apple said the AirTags were “stalker proof”)
2. This is like saying guns are extremely effective at killing people, and killing people is illegal, so guns should be outlawed immediately. Good luck with that.
3, The suit all but ignores the fact that Tile (and others) were around earlier, had even less protection, but somehow are not the objects (or even mentioned) in this suit, making it look and smell a LOT more like a money grab by an ambulance-chasing firm. This has GOT to involve Quinn Emmanuel, a firm that consistently files (and loses or settles) these sorts of misguided money grabs against Apple.
What class-action lawsuit(s) has Quinn-Emmanuel filed against Apple?
As for whether they are involved in this one, had you actually read the entire AppleInsider article and followed the embedded links you would already know you are wrong.
Apple sells an item of convenience that is been misused by criminals. Other companies sell similar product and some companies sell guns, knives, and automobiles and all of these can kill people if misused. You cannot stop criminals from committing crimes until they are in jail.
3, The suit all but ignores the fact that Tile (and others) were around earlier, had even less protection, but somehow are not the objects (or even mentioned)
tile is also opt-in, you have to download an app and login. From what I recall , all iOS and macOS devices work with AirTags in the background - is there even an opt-out of AirTags with an apple device?
Regardless the lawsuit is baseless and will get thrown out. Sounds like some scummy lawyers being scummy.
AirTags did not turn good people into bad. It's just one of the many tools they may use in their actions. Yes, there are a few bad actors who use AirTags for nefarious purposes. But little mention of the millions of users who have benefited from AirTag technology to trace stolen/lost items and share their location with friends and family for positive safety reasons.
The hyperbolic name calling, i.e. "sociopathic, psychopathic, just as bad as the abusers", etc. is inappropriate and serves no purpose. Nobody posting here is unsympathetic to the victims of crimes.
What is at issue is a class action against Apple for the presence of a device incidentally used in the process of a criminal act. The problem with this suit is that the use of an AirTag in the commission of a crime is not the proximate cause of the crime, any more than a telescope maker is liable for telescopes used by peeping toms, or a hammer maker liable for a hammer used by a burglar to break a window in your back door.
Mentioned as the basis of going after Apple and AirTag "[insert device here]...is its unparalleled accuracy, ease of use and affordability." Sounds like a template line for a lot of things that are legal and might be used for harmful purposes. If there is a strong ruling on this, it might have judicial relevance to many more things than AirTags. I personally doubt it will go far.
Putting aside the issues of abusive and stalking exes, because that IS a problem and ALWAYS HAS BEEN (long before Tile, the original tracker tool which until recently had ZERO anti-stalking features) …
This lawsuit is likely to be thrown out ...
The lawsuit will be allowed to proceed, per a ruling by US District Judge Vince Chhabria earlier this week. .
Comments
This lawsuit is likely to be thrown out because:
2. This is like saying guns are extremely effective at killing people, and killing people is illegal, so guns should be outlawed immediately. Good luck with that.
As for whether they are involved in this one, had you actually read the entire AppleInsider article and followed the embedded links you would already know you are wrong.
What is at issue is a class action against Apple for the presence of a device incidentally used in the process of a criminal act. The problem with this suit is that the use of an AirTag in the commission of a crime is not the proximate cause of the crime, any more than a telescope maker is liable for telescopes used by peeping toms, or a hammer maker liable for a hammer used by a burglar to break a window in your back door.