maciekskontakt

US Judges have a problem with consistency of interpretation. How about Second Amendment?

It migh sound like good idea for a user, but how do you troubleshoot bricked device without wire connectivity? At minimum it needs diagnostic port and then why to make things complex and have it only for technicians if it could be backup for user as well?

douglas bailey said:

The issue must have been that Apple said, 'no we won't repair it.' 
Presumably, if they said, 'yes we will repair it but it will cost you because you took it to someone who was unauthorized to work on it,' they would have been ok.

But honestly, if the ACCC thinks Apple should foot the bill for the repair after someone else has screwed it up, that's crap.

"If a product is faulty, customers are legally entitled to a repair or a replacement under the Australian Consumer Law, and sometimes even a refund. Apple's representations led customers to believe they'd be denied a remedy for their faulty device because they used a third party repairer,"

it is not about "screing it up" - it is about failed attempt to repair or perform unrelated repair by third party and then Apple denying resolution (regardles if fixing the same or other problem).

juanguapo said:

I love Australia and I love Australians but they have some goofy laws. This makes no sense to me.

They do make sense. Read ACCC statement and ruling carefully. And for the record I am not Australian.

netrox said:

Wait a minute, Apple is being fined because someone had their phone repaired outside of authorized dealership?!?! What kind of stupid decision is that?

Read carefully and with understanding. Spend time and re-read. It is not what the case said or judges ruled. It was about refusal by Apple to fix after third party took repair actions.