Tag Archives: class action

Daily Update for April 23, 2013

It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world.

You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here.

No Flash? Click here to listen.

Subscribe via RSS

Daily Update for April 23, 2013 originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Apple reaches settlement with parents over in-app purchases

Parents whose children purchased in-app items for real money without them knowing are going to receive compensation from Apple. As reported by GigaOM, the company has reached a settlement today in a class action lawsuit filed against it in 2011, and will issue a US$5 iTunes gift card to those who make a claim. If the claim is for more than $5, Apple will add a credit to the person's account, while claims over $30 will be paid in cash.

The suit was originally brought against Apple by a Pennsylvania man named Garen Meguerian, whose daughter racked up more than $200 in in-app purchases without his knowledge. For its part, Apple sought to limit such purchases by requiring an account password to be entered for each IAP. In the suit, Meguerian suggested that a second, different password be required for IAPs.

Under the proposed settlement, those seeking to receive payment from Apple will have their iTunes purchase histories reviewed to ensure that the purchases were actually made, and must attest that their children made the purchases without their knowledge and without being given the account password. The settlement is currently awaiting approval by a federal judge.

[Via Apple Insider]

Apple reaches settlement with parents over in-app purchases originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Mon, 25 Feb 2013 21:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Google accused of tracking iPhone users, up to 10m could sue in the UK

The Guardian is reporting that Google may be hit with a slew of lawsuits over the company's clandestine monitoring of Britons who use the Safari web browser on iPhones, iPads and Macs.

Google admits that it bypassed Safari security settings that blocked sites from tracking user habits through cookies. Last February, security researchers found that Google's DoubleClick ad network was storing cookies on devices even when users had chosen to block them.

In the US, Google paid the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) a US$22.5 million fine based on the same privacy invasion. In the UK, the Guardian reports that at least 10 iPhone users have started legal proceedings and dozens more are "being lined up." Plans are being made to form a group to make an "umbrella privacy action." The total class size is estimated at 10 million users.

News of the legal action was reported by the Sunday Times of London. Privacy advocate Judith Vidal-Hall was quoted as saying that Google was guilty of "electronic stalking" and was angered "that our data is either being sold or passed on to third parties." Vidal-Hall was one of two signees of a letter before action sent to Google execs in the US and UK.

Google accused of tracking iPhone users, up to 10m could sue in the UK originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Instagram target of class-action lawsuit

Photo-sharing service Instagram received a lump of coal in its stocking this holiday season. After Instagram changed its Terms of Service recently with the alleged intention of selling user photos, there was a loud outcry from the user community and many users deleted their accounts with the intention of moving to Flickr and other services. Now Instagram is on the receiving end of a class-action lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleges breach of contract violations and was brought by class-action legal firm Finkelstein & Krinsk on behalf of Lucy Funes and others. This is quite interesting, considering that almost immediately after the uproar over photo ownership began, Instagram reiterated to the public that nothing much had changed in the Terms of Service.

Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom thinks that people might have misinterpreted a section of the new Terms of Service that stated that the company may try integrating advertising into the service. Indeed, a veritable Twitter storm erupted, with many users (most of whom probably had not read the legal document) believing that Instagram was going to sell user photos without compensation.

The new Privacy Policy and Terms of Service for the service don't take effect for another three weeks, so it's certain that this lawsuit and the continued confusion over what exactly Instagram is saying will generate a lot more turmoil.

Instagram target of class-action lawsuit originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:15:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Apple Defends Siri in Lawsuit, Says It’s ‘Not Perfect’ but Still ‘Cutting Edge’


SiriApple has recently come under fire by a handful of people that claim the company misrepresented what the virtual assistant can do and are seeking a class action lawsuit based on false advertising. Apple whipped right back at the disgruntled, sue-happy bunch by stating that Siri may not be perfect, but she’s still cutting edge.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the plaintiffs are claiming that the iPhone 4S commercials and statements about Siri are false and misleading and “does not perform as advertised.” In a recent court filing, Apple responded to those allegations with a motion to dismiss the case.

The motion states that the plaintiffs “do not tell the Court how Siri’s operation allegedly differs from any particular representation they relied on.” The group is accused of only offering general and vague descriptions of their disappointment. The statement points out that every one of the plaintiffs claimed that they were unhappy with their purchase “soon after” but failed to take advantage of Apple’s 30-day return policy or one-year warrant, which is still in effect.

Apple calls attention to the fact that Siri is still under development, referring to the October 4, 2011 product announcement where it is called a “beta.” It is noted that, at that press event, the presenter specifically notes that users “can’t ask Siri everything and it’s not perfect.”

The plaintiffs are being accused of taking “an alleged personal grievance about the purported performance of a popular product and turning it into a nationwide class-action under California’s consumer protection status.”

It looks like these guys thought they could play with the big dogs, but got their tails handed to them with a couple of well-written proverbial facepalms by Apple.

» Related posts: Apple Says Older Devices Won’t Get Siri Siri’s Been Ported to the iPad, but Apple’s Servers Still Aren’t Talking Apple Opens Siri to iOS Engineers, Looking to Improve Functions

Judge refuses request to dismiss ebook class action suit

Apple received a legal slap on Wednesday when U.S. District Judge Denise Cote rejected a request to dismiss a class action lawsuit against Apple and five publishers.

Cote scoffed at the idea that Apple and the publishers acted independently in coming up with what's known as agency pricing, their defense to the charges that they were price-fixing ebooks. Not only that, she accused Steve Jobs at being at the center of it all. Parts of the opinion, as excerpted by paidContent, reads:

In short, Apple did not try to earn money off of eBooks by competing with other retailers in an open market; rather, Apple 'accomplished this goal by [helping] the suppliers to collude, rather than to compete independently.'"

"Finally, the fact that Apple might have had different motivations for joining the conspiracy, and was involved in only a portion of it, does not undermine the existence of the conspiracy itself or Apple's role as a participant.

Cote also cites ongoing investigations against Apple, including the antitrust suit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, as other reasons to maintain the class action suit, filed in August 2011.

Judge refuses request to dismiss ebook class action suit originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Tue, 15 May 2012 23:50:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Apple hit with class action lawsuit over iTunes double-billing

Apple has been hit with another class-action lawsuit for double billing customers in the iTunes store.

New York resident Robert Herskowitz claims Apple charged him twice for the single "Whataya Want from Me" by Adam Lambert. Herskowitz says he contacted Apple and got an automated response telling him his request was being reviewed. The message he received from Apple wasn't so friendly.

"Your request for a refund for 'Whataya Want from Me' was carefully considered; however, according to the iTunes Store Terms of Sale, all purchases made on the iTunes Store are ineligible for refund. This policy matches Apple's refund policies and provides protection for copyrighted materials."

So, the lawsuit is underway, and Herskowitz is looking for others who claim they have been similarly unfairly charged.

You can read the lawsuit online at Justia.

Apple hit with class action lawsuit over iTunes double-billing originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Thu, 03 May 2012 16:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Alleged eBooks Price-Fixing: New Canadian Class-Action Lawsuit

Canada has joined the class-action lawsuits against Apple club over allegations that the tech giant had colluded with five other publishing houses: Simon & Schuster, HarperCollins, Hachette Book Group, Penguin, and Macmillan in an effort to raise the price of electronic books for iPad and iPhone. This move came no long after the Department of [...]

iPhone 4 owners who refused a free bumper case can now claim $15 settlement

iPhone 4 owners who didn't accept a Bumper case as part of a class-action suit regarding the device's antenna are now eligible to receive US$15 from Apple, AppleInsider reports. Apple initially offered free Bumpers in 2010 for a brief period.

Those eligible for the settlement had to have been the original owner of an iPhone 4 before February 17. The settlement offer is good through August 28.

iPhone 4 owners who refused a free bumper case can now claim $15 settlement originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:31:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Apple begins defense against possible ebook antitrust case

Apple is wasting no time beginning to defend itself against the possibility of a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) antitrust action alleging that the company conspired with publishers to fix ebook prices.

Last week, Apple requested that a class action suit alleging price-fixing on ebooks be thrown out. Part of the suit hinges on a comment that Steve Jobs made to the Wall Street Journal's Walt Mossberg in January of 2010, saying that unhappy publishers might decide to withhold ebooks from Amazon.

Lawyers in the class action suit think that Jobs's comment meant that Apple and publishers were conspiring to force Amazon to raise ebook prices. Apple's retort last week says that the lawyers "mischaracterized" the exchange, and that Jobs only meant that Apple had a different strategy in the ebook business than Amazon.

Apple says that it wants to sell as many ebooks as possible, which is totally believable since the company is still a relative bit player in the ebook market. As a result, the company would not have an incentive to raise prices on ebooks. But Apple's argument fails to address accusations that Jobs schemed with publishers to slow Amazon's eventual move into the tablet market with the Kindle Fire.

Apple's lawyers responded in their court filing last week by downplaying the threat of the Kindle Fire:

But this allegation just strings together antitrust buzzwords.. Nor does this "Kindle theory" make sense on its own terms. For example, if Amazon was a "threat" that needed to be squelched by means of an illegal conspiracy, why would Apple offer Amazon's Kindle app on the iPad? Why would Apple conclude that conspiring to force Amazon to no longer lose money on eBooks would cripple Amazon's competitive fortunes? And why would Apple perceive the need for an illegal solution to the "Kindle threat" when it had an obvious and lawful one which it implemented - namely, introducing a multipurpose device (the iPad) whose marketing and sales success was not centered on eBook sales?

There are rumors that some publishers are currently in settlement talks with the DOJ. These publishers might be exchanging damning information for a lesser settlement, which could spell trouble for both Apple and other publishers.

Apple begins defense against possible ebook antitrust case originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Settlement Announced in iTunes® Gift Card Class Action Lawsuit


iTunesAfter a misstep with a series of iTunes Gift Cards, Apple may be staring down the barrel of over $50 million dollars in payouts. This settlement comes as the result of a class action lawsuit (Johnson v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 1-09-CV-146501, California Superior Court, Santa Clara) filed to compensate iTunes users that had been overcharged for purchases made through the service.

The lawsuit claims that Apple advertised and sold iTunes gift cards with the communicated message that all songs were available for ¢99. Apple denies this claim even though many of the gift cards have the text stating “Songs are 99¢” printed on them.

Despite this denial of guilt, Apple has agreed to provide each claimant with iTunes tore credit credit for $3.25.

The truth is that songs were available for ¢99 at the time the gift cards were sold, but in April of 2009 many of those songs rose to a cost of $1.29 and Apple refused to honor the original lower price for those who had the older cards.

Millions of e-mails are currently being circulated to those who are eligible for a piece of the pie, but if you are a United States citizen and feel you may qualify for a portion of these settlement funds, you can visit the Johnson settlement website. Because of the gifted-nature of these cards and the high likelihood that many landed in the hands of children, claimants do not need to meet minimum age requirements in order to participate.

Do you think this is a reasonable settlement? The advertisements definitely appear to have been misleading, though I am guessing the small print somewhere somehow identifies that Apple has the right to charge whatever the heck they feel like charging. In the end it might just be that this is a wise PR move for Apple to basically say ‘you know what, your continued business is more important than proving we didn’t break the law.’ If that is the case, it could result in creating satisfied and therefore loyal customers out of individuals who may have otherwise boycotted their service.

Daily Update for September 26, 2011

It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes, which is perfect for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world.

You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for listening through iTunes, click here.


No Flash? Click here to listen.

Daily Update for September 26, 2011 originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:25:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

iPhone privacy class action case thrown out

It appears that Apple has one less legal headache to worry about. According to Eric Goldman's Technology & Marketing Law Blog, a class action suit alleging that Apple, app developers, and mobile advertising companies violated the privacy rights of iPhone users has been dismissed for lack of standing.

The court order actually deals with several class actions that were consolidated into a single lawsuit -- "In Re iPhone Application Litigation". TUAW first reported on two of these lawsuits (Lalo vs. Apple and Freeman vs. Apple) last year. The lawsuits dealt with the collection and unauthorized sharing of private user data with third-party advertising networks, and stemmed from a Wall Street Journal investigation that revealed that several iOS and Android apps were transmitting age, gender, location and device identifier information to those advertising companies.

That information was mined by the recipients, then used to serve up in-app advertisements. The exchange of information was done without the knowledge or consent of the users, and the hidden nature of the data exchange caused outrage among privacy advocates.

In the dismissal notice filed on September 20, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California brought up a number of reasons to dismiss the consolidated case, including the fact that not one plaintiff had actually suffered an injury as a result of the alleged privacy breaches, nor was there any direct injury traceable to Apple of the other defendants.

Apple's legal team still has its hands full with a number of other patent-infringement lawsuits, but the company should be relieved that at least one lawsuit has been thrown out the door by the courts.

iPhone privacy class action case thrown out originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Apple involved in class-action lawsuit over ebook pricing

On today's episode of The Daily Lawsuit: law firm Hagens Berman has filed a class action lawsuit against Apple and five of the major book publishing houses. The suit claims Apple and these publishers have conspired to raise prices on ebooks.

According to the suit, Amazon's loss-leading pricing for ebooks, designed to drive sales of its Kindle e-reader device, may have led to consumers having an established expectation of low ebook pricing. Allegedly, Apple and the major publishers named in the suit have colluded to raise ebook prices significantly over Amazon's lower prices under the so-called agency model.

Under the agency model, ebooks are sold directly to consumers (rather than being sold to retailers as under the old model), with retailers splitting revenues from sales. In the case of Apple's iBookstore, Apple's cut is the same as for most of its other online services: 30 percent.

The suit alleges that Apple's pushing of the agency model has meant that competitors like Amazon are now unable to price ebooks lower than Apple's set prices, which has resulted in driving the price of ebooks higher than ever before -- in some cases, electronic media is more expensive than traditional printed copies. We've looked at iBookstore pricing before, but the situation in 2010 didn't seem to reflect what's described in this suit. The price of ebooks certainly isn't higher than the cost of printed copies in many non-US countries, either; in New Zealand, I could buy three ebooks off the US iBookstore for the cost of one trade paperback from a brick-and-mortar retailer. That pricing situation is the same or worse in the UK and Australia.

According to Hagens Berman, "The lawsuit seeks damages for the purchase of e-books, an injunction against pricing e-books with the agency model and forfeiture of the illegal profits received by the defendants as a result of their anticompetitive conduct, which could total tens of millions of dollars." Well, good luck with that; from what we've been seeing so far, the iBookstore hasn't exactly been a smashing success.

Apple involved in class-action lawsuit over ebook pricing originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 01:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source

Antitrust class action lawsuit filed against Apple, others over anti-poaching agreements

The law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein has announced that they have filed a class action lawsuit against Apple and other major tech companies on behalf of a Lucasfilm employee. The lawsuit alleges that the tech companies took part in illegal "no solicitation" agreements that barred them from poaching each others employees. These anti-poaching agreements led to "eliminate competition and cap pay for skilled employees" according to the lawsuit.

MacRumors notes that in addition to Apple, the suit names Adobe, Google, Intel, Intuit, Lucasfilm, and Pixar as defendants. Former Lucasfilm software engineer Siddharth Hariharan said in a statement, "My colleagues at Lucasfilm and I applied our skills, knowledge, and creativity to make the company an industry leader. It's disappointing that, while we were working hard to make terrific products that resulted in enormous profits for Lucasfilm, senior executives of the company cut deals with other premiere high tech companies to eliminate competition and cap pay for skilled employees."

The lawsuit goes on to say the the anti-poaching agreements first took place among Pixar and Lucasfilm in 2005. Shortly thereafter, Apple, Adobe, Google, Intel, and Intuit all joined in. The anti-poaching agreements were allegedly in place until 2009.

Antitrust class action lawsuit filed against Apple, others over anti-poaching agreements originally appeared on TUAW on Wed, 04 May 2011 17:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Steve Jobs ordered to provide antitrust deposition

iPod

There are some days when it feels like Steve Jobs is the only person who works at Apple, judging by the number of times his name is cited when anyone has a complaint against the company.

Now, a US judge has ordered him to answer questions relating to monopolistic behavior over the iPod and the iTunes Store back in 2004. Then, Apple made changes to the iPod software which disrupted RealNetwork's Harmony software, designed to allow songs purchased from the RealNetworks online store to be transferred to the iPod. Thomas Slattery, who filed the class action suit against Apple in 2005, said this violated antitrust and unfair competition laws.

At worst, lawyers can force Steve Jobs to spend two hours answering questions for a deposition on the matter, although Apple lawyers are pushing to have the whole case dismissed next month -- parts of it have already been dismissed. Today, you can put music downloaded or ripped from just about anywhere on your iPod, iPhone or iPad via iTunes, and music tracks sold in the iTunes Store no longer come with DRM.

"The court finds that Jobs has unique, non-repetitive, firsthand knowledge about the issues at the center of the dispute over RealNetworks software," said magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd in San Jose, California. Like I said, some days Steve Jobs is the only person who's ever worked at Apple.

[Via Macstories]

Steve Jobs ordered to provide antitrust deposition originally appeared on TUAW on Wed, 23 Mar 2011 07:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Lawsuit claims AT&T “systematically” overcharges iPhone, iPad owners

A lawsuit filed in California federal court claims AT&T "systematically" overcharged iPhone and iPad owners by inflating the amount of data downloaded by each customer and tacking on "phantom traffic" to the month-long tally. The lawsuit was filed by Patrick Hendricks who asserts AT&T charged him a $15 overage fee that was the result of this artificially inflated data. Hendricks cites AT&T's alleged practice of overestimating data traffic by as much as 300 percent in what is described as "a rigged gas pump that charges for a full gallon when it pumps only nine-tenths of a gallon into your car's tank."

The complaint also mentions phantom data charges that were added to his bill, but never started or experienced by Hendricks. The complainant hired a private firm to track his data usage on AT&T, and they reported usage of 2.2 MB during a week when the iPhone had all push notifications turned off, all location-based services turned off, no active applications running and no email account setup on the handset. Hendricks is seeking class action status on the complaint and is asking for restitution and class damages. AT&T responded by saying it would vigorously fight the lawsuit.

Lawsuit claims AT&T "systematically" overcharges iPhone, iPad owners originally appeared on TUAW on Tue, 01 Feb 2011 16:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source | Permalink | Email this | Comments