A Cook County, Illinois resident has filed a class action lawsuit against Apple and AT&T over the iPhone.
Jose Trujillo is claiming that Apple and AT&T misled iPhone buyers by not clearly informing them that the iPhone battery was sealed, and could only be professionally replaced.
According to the papers:
Unknown to the Plaintiff, and undisclosed to the public, prior to purchase, the iPhone is a sealed unit with its battery soldered on the inside of the device so that it cannot be changed by the owner…The battery enclosed in the iPhone can only be charged approximately 300 times before it will be in need of replacement, necessitating a new battery annually for owners of the iPhone.
The suit would appear to have little credibility; the sealed battery issue was reported extensively prior to the iPhone being launched and was certainly never kept as a secret.
Looking at the phone prior to buying it and noticing it was a sealed device was would also appear to have been a difficult task for Mr Trujillo; perhaps it needed a sticker warning of the fact, something along the lines of “Presuming nothing, ask questions first” or “Not to be purchased by people chasing a quick buck and 15 minutes of fame.”
(via Daily Tech)
I’m filing a class action lawsuit against Duncan. No where in the title of this story did it mention how stupid the lawsuit was. I was forced to read the rest of the article.
I HAVE RECENTLY BEEN INFORMED ABOUT THE SOLUTION TO ELECTRO POLLUTION CAUSED BY CELL PHONES AND EVERYONE WITH A CELL PHONE NEEDS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES WITH THIS PATENDED SOLUTION HTTP://BIO.EMF411.COM CALL ME FOR A PACKAGE AT 770-206-0327
sounds like he’s hispanic…he’s probably one of those illegal immigrants that are the cause of all our problems, foreign and domestic
Yawwwwwwn.
@gilltots,
You’re out of line with that comment. Please respect that TC likely has multiethnic readers who don’t appreciate racist comments. Be respectful with your thoughts and opinions.
Andrew
OMG you had to read the article. lol
this is exactly the type of frivolous lawsuit that ruins our legal system. If the judge allows this to see any daylight, he should be fired/disbarred.
@ gilltots,
you’re a moron
Doesn’t this idiot realize that the iPod is the same way? Did he look at the phone when he bought it? Another BS lawsuit. Idiots like that shouldn’t be allowed to own iPhones. People are IDIOTS.
ok so apparently you guys need a refresher on this thing called sarcasm.
i actually wrapped the comment in sarcasm tags but apparently since i used angle brackets they got filtered out.
i am actually one of the people that sees the recent assault on illegal aliens for what it is, a huge distraction and waste of time and money. and like it’s a problem all of a sudden, it’s been going on for decades and everything was ok all that time…sheesh people, ease up.
p.s. kent me and you, right now, behind the dumpster.
@ kent
That would be insulting morons
@ gilltots,
we don’t need a refresher on sarcasm because we took your post as is…w/o the sarcasm tags.
the shame of it is that we still live in an age where a comment like that is taken seriously…
p.s. i’ll meet you behind the dumpster…loser has to kiss the winner’s taint.
It really does not take a genius to see that the battery is sealed, but it should definitely show some kind of labeling to inform phone owners that you are not able to remove battery yourself. Most phones can be manually taken out by the phone owner so it would not seem unusual for someone to automatically try to remove battery to replace. Your Success, http://www.houseofhancock.com
Retarded.
That’s a completely lost case. All the analysts were talking about for weeks before the iPhone came out was the fact that the battery was sealed.
-Chris
http://www.nerdcouncil.com
I think many people like Mr. Trujillo would presume that batteries for cell phones are user-changeable because most are user changeable and don’t need a professional service to replace them. Also what if he didn’t read any articles from web sites or on newspapers before buying his iPhone? We are tech geeks but there are people who aren’t. Also it is non-sense to ask a phone buyer to read a review before.
Even though I didn’t like him to file a lawsuit for this matter and i’d rather go for a refund if the sealed battery bugs me, I don’t think that his claim is non-sense.
Yay for crippling America’s screwed up non-criminal legal system even more with worthless class action lawsuits!
Class action lawsuits should be done away with, since those are the big cash cows for most of the frivolous ambulance/deep pockets chasers. We did fine without them for ~200 years until Lyndon Johnson opened the doors in the 60s.
Does it really matter that the battery is sealed in the iPhone? Even if you charged the iPhone every 2 days (doubt you would, usually, have to), you’d still get like a year-and-a-half out of the battery. By then, I’m sure a 2 gen iPhone will be close to being out… Seems like the guy just wants some attention, and maybe some money (doubt he’ll get any, though).
The suit would appear to have little credibility; the sealed battery issue was reported extensively prior to the iPhone being launched and was certainly never kept as a secret.
Was the issue reported before the launch?? I thought it was during/after the launch of iPhone. People were mad about the phone, nobody really cared about the battery or other specs. Well, suit buddy is not going to win the case because he simply assumed that Apple hardware is going to be friendlier or he never had an iPod. As long as it is written on the documentation, Judge is going to dismiss the case in minutes.
i agree with dano. not everyone is a friggin’ uber nerd tied into the iphone literature that spit out pre-launch. i haven’t seen the case to the product, but if it isn’t clearly marked that the phone has a sealed battery, this guy has a leg to stand on. if that’s the case, i hope he wins — that type of sh*t needs to be prominently disclosed. period.
As if they did not have enough problems figuring out how to stay ahead of hackers. Apple is unique and a first mover, I sure they will resolve the hackers and other issues as the come up.
It’s a dumb lawsuit, BUT how stupid is it to have a battery that has to be replaced in one year? I charge my phone every night by throwing it on the cradle. It it dies, I can get another for $40.00. It’s going on two years, no problems yet. Why would they even think to use a batter that must be professionally replaced after only one year? That’s what’s criminal.
I think that it was a bad idea to make the battery non-removable, but on the other hand – why doesn’t he just return the iPhone if he doesn’t like it?
A non-removable battery that only lasts a year or so? What a stupid design on a mobile phone. I could forgive them if this thing was $150 but certainly not at the price they are charging.
Trust me, if people can afford an iPhone and AT&T’s two-year contract, they can afford a new battery when the original one eventually goes to the big cell in the sky.
I thought it was 300 full charges from empty to full? Which would extend the life well over a year. The US legal system does seem to permit frivolous cases that would be laughed out of court in the UK.
The Apple site says full cycle recharges, not putting in the cradle 300 times. And that leaves it at 80 percent capacity, hardly unusable.
I wouldnt be surprised if he won. Didnt some lady win a case because she ordered a coffee and burnt herself because it didnt say the coffee would be hot on the side of the cup?
@Dano
Your average buyer isn’t required to read information about the iPhone before buying one, but this guy is suing because he claims Apple never released any information regarding the sealed battery. Just because he didn’t know about it doesn’t mean Apple didn’t tell people about it. This lawsuit is complete bullshit and out of line.
Well I don’t care, it keeps me interested. It may be frivolous but I would rather that people would get a refund from buying the iphone +(keeping) due to apples profiteering and I may say:
Bring on the class actions!
Okay everybody, take a deep breath and relax. Here’s a little truth for you to cut through all the hazy fog and battery FUD.
No iPhone battery will die in a year and a half. The iPhone battery will not even fall to 80% of its original charge capacity until it has reached 400 full charge cycles. That does not mean every time you stick your iPhone in the dock, that means a full charge cycle. If your iPhone is only down 50% when you dock it and charge, than it will only take a half charge cycle. Even someone who uses the crap out of their iPhone every day will still only require four full charge cycles per week at the most, which transates to 2 years of heavy use. After this period, the battery will not be dead. It will still retain 80% of its original charge capacity (that’s only a 20% loss after two years of heavy use). Again, this is for very heavy usage.
Even if someone did somehow manage to use a full charge cycle every single day, including weekends, it would still be impossible to kill an iPhone battery within 1.5 years. It would still have 80% capacity at that point.
You may now return to your uninformed babbling. Thank you.
yeah, for an average american, iphone is not a no-instruction-needed toy. you geeks don’t understand what 80% of americans are capable of using without reading fine lines. the class action is valid. iphone is not just for valley people. or it should be labelled “geeks only”.
Don’t blame the legal system just because any fool can file a frivolous class action suit. This guy just want publicity and he’s achieved his purpose. The suit will be tossed, but the plaintiff has already garnered his 15 minutes of fame.
How can I be so sure the suit will be tossed? If he was unhappy with the phone he could have returned it for a full refund. End of story.
>The battery… can only be charged approximately 300 times before it will be in need of replacement.
WTF? The last I heard the battery would still charge to 80% after 400 complete cycles. Whatever paper or new site published that story and rote that sentence is full to eyeballs of poop.
@ Aaronontheweb (AjaxNinja)
Re: “We did fine without them for ~200 years until Lyndon Johnson opened the doors in the 60s.”
Possible replies:
5. Um, not a history major, are we?
4. Practicing history without a license again, I see.
3. Well, we know what class YOU had right after lunch, eh?
2. Yep, before the sixties only certain classes could file lawsuits. Kept that meddlesome riff-raff out.
1. History is written by those who didn’t live through it.
This guy’s suit unfortunately won’t be successful. The courts are corrupt and will always side with big business. I sued Serta because like the iPhone you cannot replace its internal parts. I tried to replace the springs in my mattress and found out that only Serta could do this. When I filed a class action suit to fix this outrageous situation the judge slapped me down and of course sided with the big business.
@Chris:
Well, at least this dude had the opportunity to return his iPhone for a refund once he found he couldn’t replace the battery. You (and me, I’m in the same boat), however, are tough ship outta luck, since we most likely slept on the mattress before finding out about the non-user-replaceable springs, which rendered it non-returnable. Furthermore, I went ahead and ripped off the mattress tags, which could subject me to criminal prosecution under the DMTA.
Anyway, I’m looking into the Furniture Software Foundation (FSF). Apparently they have a new furniture public license (FPL) that prevents the Sertaization of software, i.e., if a mattress manufacturer tries to lock the user in to their box springs, the manufacturer cannot use FPL v3 software (mattress stuffing released under the FPL v3). I’m also thinking of developing a pillow and releasing it under the FPL.
@ Chris and Marcos (36)
That was great! I made me smile. Keep it up
@fogcitydave (30)
It seems that your numbers are based on assumption. Actually breaking down numbers assuming the product works the way its supposed to is very pro-Apple/Corporation. This also means that you and Jose T are thinking along the same lines. He assumed that after the associated costs and technological advancements, that a consumer would be able to replace the battery on his/her own. I honestly ASSUME that if the battery lasted longer, that Jose would not have really made it an issue.
The fact remains that Apple has had bad battery charge epxeriences in the past. Remember the iPods, if they held 50% of the charge it claimed, that Apple will not be responsible for the device, is very irresponsible.
Apples track records and its premium costs justifies why a consumer would have expected much more. Jose may actually be the genius here. Corporations like Apple should put in a bit more effort when it comes to fair expectations.
And to those smashing Jose…remember, his a consumer first, and I credit him for not just accepting something just because it is the way it is. Average consumers dont read fine print, and they probably have better things to do in real life. Yes legally, Apple did state the battery was soldered, but just because a coproration states somethings, doesent mean the corporation is playing fair. We all sound like snobs saying he should have known better lada lada. Come on people, grow up.
Under Illinois law, he has 30 days to return the phone and get out of his contract. So, clearly, he’s not too upset or he would just do that and be done with it.
@Tony
Quite true, but understand that there is such a thing as ‘consumer responsibility’… do you blindly fork over $400-$500 without checking the merchandise first? This guy IS NOT a victim, he is an extortionist and/or opportunist. period. I will smash Jose BECAUSE I read the argument he presented, it was pretending to be informative and at the same time, misleading.
Not everyone has the money to throw at things without at least getting useable details about it, especially an IT gadget that DOES require some obvious thought before any purchase is done. If the phone was like under $75, then maybe your argument would be stronger.
Tony, please… “assuming the product works the way it is supposed to is very pro Apple/Corporation”. Save your lefty anti-consumer corporate fear for someone else. Yes, I assume that the product will live up to its specifications, because Apple is a publicly-traded company and can be held responsible for the claims they make. If the iPhone batteries do not live up to Apple’s stated specifications, then Mr. Trujillo would have a reasonable case to bring against Apple, but a pre-emptive class action suit against a theoretical battery problem that cannot yet possibly be proven is a waste of the court’s time. Also, the fact that he has named AT&T in this suit should show you what is true goal is… $$$
You might want to clarify that the “300 charges” claim is bogus and was based on a poorly sourced article that was debunked almost three weeks ago. As noted in comments already, Apple stated that the battery would retain 80% capacity after 400 complete cycles. This crap keeps going around and it’s just completely wrong.
I sourced the original appearance of this from CNET to Gizmodo to MSNBC, with links to actual battery info from Apple:
http://joemalle...nsense-round-2/
And to think he’s suing for $75,000 (http://abcnews....2578&page=1) is totally ridiculous. Clearly Jose T is in for the cash.
Also consider this fact about battery life. Has Jose T proven that the iPhone has already failed after the claimed 300 charges? Furthermore, what quantifiable damage did Apple’s ‘claim’ cause during his (I assume) 5 weeks of use? And what has AT&T got to do with battery charges?
My dear Tony (38), I’m not a corporate-kisser, I do acknowledge the battery issues such as being non user-replaceable. But to choose to sue a company rather than completely return a product on the basis of an issue that, at the moment, is abstract AND unquantifiable at the moment, is dubious.
So to the people who completely and undeniably side with Mr. Jose T. I have two good pieces of advice:
(1) Get a real job, money from lawsuits are still iffy.
(2) Get a life, you can even organize it with your new iPhone
…$75,000… Good Lord!
My first-generation Treo 600 didn’t have a user-replaceable battery. I don’t remember hearing of any lawsuits against Palm back then, but it was launched with nothing near the fanfare of the iPhone. The suit is clearly speculative on the part of the plaintiff (and whomever fly by night counsel he convinced to take the case), and wouldn’t happen if it weren’t against deep pockets like Apple and AT&T.
I hope they hit him with both barrels. Lawsuits like these make everything we buy more expensive, tie up our legal system and take the place of interesting posts on Techcrunch.
If this guy wins this lawsuit then I will eat my iPhone.
Half the fun of a cellular device is cracking it open and taking out the battery.
So is there just a lawyer willing to take up any frivolous lawsuit that’s laying around? I mean such a dead end case would seem to be a waste of time…
Or is it that they’ll just do whatever they get money for?
I am suing Apple, because I put my iPhone in a microwave oven and it went dead.
I wasn’t warned that I shouldn’t put it in a microwave oven. No sticker, no little pictogram in the user guide.
Anybody wants to join me?
Hmmm. Apple + Battery Issues.
Why am I not surprised? Not that I support stupid lawsuits but there is a point there – why doesn’t Apple the take time to build a better battery instead of plunking down all of this fancy technology on batteries built on 19th century technology?
You think they would’ve learned from their iPod issues!
Oh why oh why do people do those things are there not other stuff to do on this earth, go for a work in the nature.