Users File Second Class-Action Suit Over iPhone Battery

Posted by:
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2007, 08:00
Category: Legal

iphone.jpg
You can’t please them all.
A second class-action law suit has been filed against Apple and AT&T accusing the companies of failing to inform its iPhone customers that fees of more than US$100 would be needed to replace the battery as well as maintain service.
The suit, which according to Computerworld, was filed last Monday in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California by Sydney Leung, is purported to represent a group that could represent hundreds of thousands of iPhone owners. Leung’s case seeks more than US$5 million in compensatory and punitive damages and a court conference to discuss the matter has been set for November 28th.
Click the jump for the full story…

(more…)

Apple Faces Patent Infringement Suit Over iPhone Keyboard Technologies

Posted by:
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2007, 10:24
Category: Legal

iphone.jpg
On Monday, Apple was notified this its iPhone handset allegedly infringes on a 2004 patent issued to Florida-based SP Technologies, LLC.
According to MacNN, the patent outlines a “method and medium for computer readable keyboard display incapable of user termination.” SP Technogies is currently asking that Apple pay what it considers to be “reasonable royalties” for each iPhone sold and is also seeking a permanent injunction against the Cupertino, California-based firm in order to prevent the use of its intellectual property in the popular handset.
SP Technologies has cited Apple’s “willful and deliberate” infringement of its patent, as described in the complaint, which was issued on August 2nd in a federal court in Tyler, Texas.
Should Apple be found guilt of the charges described in the complaint, the company could be forced to pay punitive damages equal to three times the economic the plaintiff can prove it has suffered.
In the past year, Apple has filed dozens of patents related to the iPhone and its unique touch-screen and gesture-based technologies.
Have two cents to throw in about this? Let us know in the comments of forums.

(more…)

Class Action Suit Filed Against Apple Over iPhone Battery

Posted by:
Date: Tuesday, July 31st, 2007, 15:30
Category: Legal

iphone.jpg
A class-action law suit has been brought against Apple and AT&T accusing the company of unfairly steering its user base towards buying frequent and expensive iPhone battery replacements via a non-replaceable battery.
The suit, represented by lead plaintiff, Illinois-based Jose Trujillo, alleges that the lithium-ion battery found in the current version of the iPhone will exhaust itself in approximately 300 charges – roughly a year of consistent use. The situation thereby guarantees that users will need to have the battery replaced on a yearly basis, a situation that could have been avoided via an easily accessible battery compartment.
According to Gizmodo, Trujillo has stated that the customer is essentially tricked into buying a unit wherein users can’t easily replace the battery by on their own:
“Unknown to the Plaintiff, and undisclosed to the public prior to purchase, the iPhone is a sealed unit with it’s [sic] battery soldered on the inside of the device so that it cannot be changed by the owner,” the suit notes.
Click the jump for the full story…

(more…)

Law and Order – Cupertino

Posted by:
Date: Thursday, April 26th, 2007, 00:00
Category: Legal

I have watched enough TV to know that when you catch a small fish you offer them a deal and get them to flip on the ring leader. Fred Anderson took a deal and has certainly implicated Mr. Jobs in the public statement issued by his attorney. It appears that Nancy Heinen will be taking her chances in the courtroom and she has a lot more to lose than Fred Anderson. Will she plead out and testify against Mr. Jobs or follow the code of omerta?
How did this happen? Apple management awarded themselves something like US$100M in options and then picked earlier strike dates that allowed them to say it was less, let’s say $80M. Management performance had been stellar and US$20M amounts to just peanuts when you look at the profits and performance this team delivered. If these laws were written in order to protect shareholders, where is the harm in all this?
Well, presumably they also told Uncle Sam the same story at tax time. Now I am only a “contributing” editor here at the PowerPage, but for the sake of argument, let us say that Jason started paying me US$100K a year to write this drivel. If I told the IRS it was only US$80K, where would the harm be in that? And if I did that a thousand years in a row, it would amount to just about the same thing. If subpoenaed and asked to testify at Nancy Heinen’s upcoming trial, I would suggest Mr. Jobs have a sit-down with Martha Stewart to find out what it’s like to do hard time or whatever sort of time it is you do in minimum security.

(more…)

Apple Admits Backdating; CFO Fred Anderson Resigns

Posted by:
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 13:01
Category: Legal

Apple (AAPL) said late Thursday that stock options granted on 15 dates between 1997 and 2002 were apparently backdated, and though CEO Steve Jobs was aware of favorable grants, he didn’t benefit personally and “was unaware of the accounting implications.

“In addition, the company announced that Fred Anderson, who served as Apple’s CFO from 1996 to 2004, resigned from the company’s board, believing it is in “Apple’s best interests” that he go.

The Street.com :: Apple Owns Up to Backdating

(more…)

Apple Goes After “Podcast”

Posted by:
Date: Monday, September 25th, 2006, 10:16
Category: Legal

Now that Apple’s lawyers have scared the pants off of small entrepreneurs selling products like the Profit Pod and TightPod — items that have nothing to with portable audio in any way, mind you — it seems that the next targets are companies that have the audacity to use the word “podcast” in their names.

With “pod” on lockdown, Apple goes after “podcast” – Engadget

(more…)

Journalists Appeal to Apple CEO on Behalf of Chinese Reporters

Posted by:
Date: Tuesday, August 29th, 2006, 23:17
Category: Legal

The Reporters Without Borders organization has sent a letter to Apple Computer CEO Steve Jobs asking him to implore iPod supplier Foxconn to drop a lawsuit against two Chinese journalists who wrote an article critical of working conditions at a Foxconn Electronics factory.

Wang You and Weng Bao of China Business News have been hit with a libel suit filed by Foxconn after they wrote a story critical of working conditions at a Foxconn plant where iPods are manufactured.

Apple | News.blog | CNET News.com

(more…)

Apple Drops Asteroid Action

Posted by:
Date: Thursday, July 13th, 2006, 12:28
Category: Legal

asteroid-field.jpg

Apple has decided to drop its contentious case against online news journalists at Apple Insider and O’Grady’s PowerPage. The company has decided not to appeal against the recent judgement in the case which favoured the US writers.

Macworld UK – Apple drops Asteroid action

technorati tags:,

(more…)

Apple Removes the Word “Lap” From Web Site

Posted by:
Date: Monday, June 26th, 2006, 08:00
Category: Legal

AppleDefects.com has the scoop on Apple’s further expunging the word “lap” from marketing materials for their “notebooks.”

Do you remember our story last week regarding Apple’s hypocritical marketing and website suggesting to use the MacBook on your lap? Here is a clip from their Student Orientation site to refresh your memory:

onyourlap.jpeg

Well, they no longer have the “On your lap” suggestion. Instead it has
been changed to the more vague, but less condemning “Anywhere you want”…

AppleDefects.com > Apple Covers Up “Lap” Suggestion

technorati tags:, ,

(more…)

FEC Rules Bloggers Are Journalists

Posted by:
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2005, 11:15
Category: Legal

The Lot 49 blog reports that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has ruled that bloggers are journalists. The ruling reports:

The Fired Up network of blogs qualifies for the “press exemption” to federal campaign finance laws. The press exemption, as defined by Congress, is meant to assure “the unfettered right of the newspapers, TV networks, and other media to cover and comment on political campaigns.

(Thanks Gabbr).

(more…)