Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 70
Discuss Class Action Lawsuit Respondents Needed at the General - Hackint0sh.org; Originally Posted by shadowmatt It really doesnt matter what Apple prints in their terms and ...
  1. #11
    Respected Professional Array

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shadowmatt View Post
    It really doesnt matter what Apple prints in their terms and conditions. Just because they print something doesnt make it legal.

    The laws of your country rank higher than Apple's terms and conditions.
    Shadowmatt, you're right in many ways, since the law is nothing more than words and words as we both know are subject to interpretation. This said, the laws state that it is illegal to enter another persons home against their will and decide to remain. I guess that you would agree that such a law is stupid, since isn't that what you've done with your iPhone?

    Look, it's really simple. Encourage everyone in this forum to get together and file a class action suit. After you'll lose, you'll not only have managed to make yourself and everyone else in this forum seem like nothing more than a bunch of hackers, but you'll also make it seem to the world that Apple is 100% justified in what they've done.

    You guys are really a bunch of children here and Apple is playing adult games in a grown-up world. Grow up a little.
    Last edited by Snowbird; 09-30-2007 at 05:24 PM.


  2. #12
    Rookie Array

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    14
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowbird View Post
    This said, the laws state that it is illegal to enter another persons home against their will and decide to remain. I guess that you would agree that such a law is stupid, since isn't that what you've done with your iPhone?
    .


    Snowbird - here's the thing, (and this is the attitude or point of view I find surprising)

    IF someone adds an app to their phone, they are NOT illegally entering "apple's home".

    THEY and NOT APPLE own the iPhone, and have every right to enter it.



    A better analogy is:

    You buy a partially furnished home from Apple which comes with a warranty. You add some furnishings like a coffee table in the living room. Then, the plumbing in the kitchen suddenly breaks. Apple claims they don't have to abide by the warranty since you added a coffee table, even though the coffee table had nothing to do with the plumbing.



    And then there's the issue of "malicious intent", which might be hard to prove (except that Apple has publicly stated that future upgrades could destroy phones), but could be an interesting lawsuit of its own.

    Would it be legal for Apple Homebuilders to burn down your home because you installed coffee table 1.0? I don't think so.


    A

  3. #13
    Professional Array

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    It also has a lot to do with Apple lying. Remember when there were issues with the first iPod Shuffles, which would stop responding, even though the battery was fine? Apple offered an iPod Shuffle reset utility that would re-flash the firmware and restore it to factory spec. Then the owner could attempt to reinstall the update.

    In this case, Apple could easily restore people's phones back to the state they were in, out of the box, whether in store or offer a download, like in the case of the Shuffle's. They are lying when they say what we're doing will 'damage the software'. Software isn't a tangible thing. It breaks and you re-install it.

    Apple is simply trying to make an example out of people. They want to appear to the phone companies they have contracts with, that they're doing something about hacking, and honoring their exclusivity agreements. Apple wasn't so concerned when it was just AT&T involved, but now there's much more cash involved.

  4. #14
    Guest Array izim1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    108
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by warrenpeace View Post
    It also has a lot to do with Apple lying. Remember when there were issues with the first iPod Shuffles, which would stop responding, even though the battery was fine? Apple offered an iPod Shuffle reset utility that would re-flash the firmware and restore it to factory spec. Then the owner could attempt to reinstall the update.

    In this case, Apple could easily restore people's phones back to the state they were in, out of the box, whether in store or offer a download, like in the case of the Shuffle's. They are lying when they say what we're doing will 'damage the software'. Software isn't a tangible thing. It breaks and you re-install it.

    Apple is simply trying to make an example out of people. They want to appear to the phone companies they have contracts with, that they're doing something about hacking, and honoring their exclusivity agreements. Apple wasn't so concerned when it was just AT&T involved, but now there's much more cash involved.
    THAT'S it! you see people? all you guys have to do is re-install the the software.

    it's really not that simple dude. when you opened up the software and unlocked it you moved around and modified things. apple's only obligation is to work within the confines of what THEy originally put on the software and what they "assume"(yes they know better) that the iphones still have out there. software can and will conflict from time to time and cause damage to the ways things work rendering things "unusable". i'm not keeping count but just off the top of my head i'd say that there were alot more phones bricked while trying the anysim app. than with apples firmware update. shit happens sometimes man. you cant go through life believeing someones "out to get you"

    and btw i dont recall how many people were installing 3rd paty apps on their shuffles. reflashing their baseband or whatnot......

  5. #15
    Amazingly Knowledgeable Array

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fort Meade
    Posts
    941
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    55

    Default

    Guys, a little wisdom from me: apparently T-Mobile Germany is going to offer the iPhone exclusively through their shops with a contract only in Germany. Which is actually a good thing for customers because there can't be any confusion anymore about who can use the iPhone and how. In the US, people can freely buy a "brick" at any local Apple Store, just to find out later on that they can't use it because they aren't from the US (it happened to two german tourists who sold me their iPhones, happy me) or because they don't want to switch to AT&T. This is actually where Apple made the mistake regarding iPhone marketing, if they would have wanted to restrict access to the iPhone, they could have easily sold the iPhone with an AT&T contract only, selling contracts for AT&T at the local Apple Shops. I think this is actually the ONLY "attack point" where a class action lawsuit could have success: if a company freely sells a product which can't be used by everyone, in my opinion this is fraudulent behaviour. Apple took the money of non-AT&T customers but they're not willing to give them something in return. I hightly doubt that Apple could survive a class action lawsuit regarding this marketing method since they can't sell a brick for 600 bucks. This is fraud! Meaning: the best attempt to get them (Apple) is to prove that Apple was fully aware that people were buying iPhones, even without subscribing to AT&T. Also it would be important to prove that the CAUTION remarks on the iPhone package are way too small for everybody to read, it is also very important to prove that none of the Apple employees selling iPhones were warning buyers that they can't use the iPhone without a AT&T subscription and that there were no very good visible warning signs in the Apple Shops to warn customers of the requirement of an AT&T subscription. Bla bla bla...I think you get my point. Sueing them for something else doesn't have much of a chance since you can't blame Apple for protecting their product, especially since the iPhone isn't only a phone but part of a DRM marketing system which is a potential high risk target for hackers.

    I don't know if anybody who put up this class action lawsuit is a lawyer but honestly, before you loose your precious time and money, make sure that you get the help and support from a first class lawyer regarding this stuff, otherwise it is a waste of time.

    Another possible point of "attack" for a class action lawsuit: a lawyer has to prove that although Apple was well aware that they sold one millon iPhones but AT&T hadn't had nearly as much subscriptions, they didn't change anything, on the contrary, they actually started to increase iPhone production and issued the 1.1.1 FW which was supposed to trap owners of unlocked iPhones (incl. OFFICIAL AT&T subscribers) with a bricked phone to teach them a lesson. This would require a proper analysis of the FW 1.1.1 but if there is proof, Apple would be in serious trouble. It is one thing to protect a product but another one to make a product you sold inoperable, even with a legal subscription.

    So forget about a lawsuit regarding third party applications, FW mods, etc. The ONLY way to get to them (Apple) is to prove that they actually KNEW exactly WHO is buying the iPhone and still didn't take the necessary steps to stop these buyers because they wanted the profit. Although they knew exactly who is buying the iPhone, Apple increased production. Then, they intentionally(?) bricked most of these phones with FW 1.1.1 to teach "hackers" a lesson or maybe even worse: to make people buy MORE iPhones and to force them to get a A&T subscription. Sounds better...
    Last edited by 997TT; 09-30-2007 at 07:57 PM.


  6. #16
    Guest Array izim1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    108
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 997TT View Post
    Guys, a little wisdom from me: apparently T-Mobile Germany is going to offer the iPhone exclusively through their shops with a contract only in Germany. Which is actually a good thing for customers because there can't be any confusion anymore about who can use the iPhone and how. In the US, people can freely buy a "brick" at any local Apple Store, just to find out later on that they can't use it because they aren't from the US (it happened to two german tourists who sold me their iPhones, happy me) or because they don't want to switch to AT&T. This is actually where Apple made the mistake regarding iPhone marketing, if they would have wanted to restrict access to the iPhone, they could have easily sold the iPhone with an AT&T contract only, selling contracts for AT&T at the local Apple Shops. I think this is actually the ONLY "attack point" where a class action lawsuit could have success: if a company freely sells a product which can't be used by everyone, in my opinion this is fraudulent behaviour. Apple took the money of non-AT&T customers but they're not willing to give them something in return. I hightly doubt that Apple could survive a class action lawsuit regarding this marketing method since they can't sell a brick for 600 bucks. This is fraud! Meaning: the best attempt to get them (Apple) is to prove that Apple was fully aware that people were buying iPhones, even without subscribing to AT&T. Also it would be important to prove that the CAUTION remarks on the iPhone package are way too small for everybody to read, it is also very important to prove that none of the Apple employees selling iPhones were warning buyers that they can't use the iPhone without a AT&T subscription and that there were no very good visible warning signs in the Apple Shops to warn customers of the requirement of an AT&T subscription. Bla bla bla...I think you get my point. Sueing them for something else doesn't have much of a chance since you can't blame Apple for protecting their product, especially since the iPhone isn't only a phone but part of a DRM marketing system which is a potential high risk target for hackers.

    I don't know if anybody who put up this class action lawsuit is a lawyer but honestly, before you loose your precious time and money, make sure that you get the help and support from a first class lawyer regarding this stuff, otherwise it is a waste of time.
    997tt, in all seriousnes, i know it's gonna look like im picking on you but i'm really not. it's just that you dont seem to understand that apple has made it pretty clear that the iphone is for use with at&t only. "the apple iphone, only on the new at&t" it's printed on the box and the at&t contract requirement is on the little list that they have next to the demos that tell you what your buying. along with the itunes and internet connection requirement. really how much more do you feel thay had to do?people here dont waste a single second to jump on guys for not using the "search" function before posting new threads (yourself included) but it's excusable for people to put down a few hundred dollars for something without taking the time to read up on it? last time i checked, stupidity and ignorence were NOT valid defenses. "i'm sorry your honor, i didnt know doing 100mph in a school zone was illegal..."and you DO know that activation is done at home via itunes right? so by your defenition of "freely sells" then the att stores also freely sell the iphones since all you do is buy it there then take it home and activate it on your computer. i'm gonna go ahead and assume that the itunes and internet requirement will be the same in europe so that anyone can go to the carrier stores and by an iphone. your blaming apple for some peoples inability to read and understand requirements.
    Last edited by izim1; 09-30-2007 at 08:10 PM.

  7. #17
    Rookie Array

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    19
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Post

    izim, you're not listening.

    Apple can *say* whatever they want, but it does not mean they have the right to go out of their way to spank you if you disobey in ways that do not damage the device. And, taking it one more step, Apple can *say* the hacks/unlocks damage the device, but those familiar with the hacks/unlocks (i.e., those who wrote them) will certainly disagree.

    Would a class-action suit succeed? I don't know.
    But I do know that it would add to the bad press Apple is bringing upon itself with it's recent anti-consumer behavior. And, I'm all in favor of that.

  8. #18
    Rookie Array

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    5
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    izim, bad analogy.

    Suppose I buy an iPhone from Apple. I don't even really want a phone, I just like the pretty colors on the activation screen. I gaze at the screen for hours every day. 30 days later my pretty picture quits working! I take it back to Apple and they refuse warranty because it's not activated on AT&T? I don't think so.

    If my iphone quits working and that reason is not directly attributable to my hacking the phone, then Apple owes me warranty coverage, both legally and morally. It makes absolutely no difference what they write on the box.

  9. #19
    Senior Professional Array theviolator's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    145
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Guys I agree in general that Apple is wrong here. Since it was claimed by Apple
    itself that the iPhone is much more portable computer than any other phone in
    the market, this makes it like buying a computer from them and not be able
    to install any software! That is absurd, since Apple is not doing anything to give
    us that much needed functipnality. Its like I'd void my waranty on my Mac if
    I install Photoshop on it!? However the much simpler and more natural solution
    in this case is, dont buy Apple products and much less another iPhone! Thats
    what Im intending to do. And further more, dont even update to new FW updates!
    it would be really interesting if less and less people update their phones that I
    think will make Apple a little confused..
    Anyway I couldnt care less for the iTunes music store or TV output for that matter!
    No updates for me and my next phone most likely will not be from Apple.

  10. #20
    Guest Array izim1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    108
    Post Thanks / Like
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishbert View Post
    izim, you're not listening.

    Apple can *say* whatever they want, but it does not mean they have the right to go out of their way to spank you if you disobey in ways that do not damage the device. And, taking it one more step, Apple can *say* the hacks/unlocks damage the device, but those familiar with the hacks/unlocks (i.e., those who wrote them) will certainly disagree.

    Would a class-action suit succeed? I don't know.
    But I do know that it would add to the bad press Apple is bringing upon itself with it's recent anti-consumer behavior. And, I'm all in favor of that.
    dude search some of my posts. i have repeatedly stated that if apple fucks anything up with their upgrades that they HAVE to fix it. your preaching to the choir man. i'm sick and tired of trying to explain "if your mod didnt break it they HAVE to fix it" apple has to prove your guilt. not the other way around (you prove your innocence) that being said what are YOU talking about that i dont listlen? '7tt over there keeps saying apple "freely sold" iphones to people without making it clear enough that they were for att only..... that's just ridiculous. they did what they had to do. that "ignorence" defense will never fly in any u.s. court. especially not here in texas (we fry retarded inmates remember) i have no probs with the 3rd party apps. only the people that feel they have a right for apple to help them hack the iphone by not making it hard for them, then just letting things slide........

    and unless you have some "secret" wired conversation with SJ in which he says somethng to the effect of: "check this out dude, im gonna screw all the hacked iphones up, its gonna be soooo funny" on tape, then i just dont see how you can prove "malicious intent".


 

 
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-07-2010, 02:00 AM
  2. MacNN: Bell Canada hit with class-action throttling lawsuit
    By hackint0sh in forum Latest Headlines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 07:20 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-04-2007, 10:57 PM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-26-2007, 10:03 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-28-2007, 04:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO
(c) 2006-2012 Hackint0sh.org
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:46 PM.
twitter, follow us!