Apple Sued over iPad Planned Obsolescence
A Brazilian group is suing Apple for making its iPads better too quickly.
A Brazilian group is suing Apple for making its iPads better too quickly.
Mashable (“Apple Getting Sued for ‘Planned Obsolescence’ of iPad 3“):
Back in October, some users were upset when Apple unveiled the fourth-generation iPad just seven months after the previous model arrived. Now the Brazilian Institute of Politics and Law Software (IBDI) has filed suit against Apple, claiming that the quick release of the iPad with Retina display constitutes “planned obsolescence” with regards to its predecessor, the New iPad.
According to Brazil’s Jornal do Comerciao, IBDI believes that Apple could have implemented the technological updates of the iPad 4 into the iPad 3. By not doing so, they believe that Apple took part in unfair business practices. Were Apple to lose in court, iPad 3 users in Brazil could receive some compensation.
“Consumers thought [they were] buying high-end equipment not knowing [it] was already an obsolete version,” says IBDI attorney Sergio Palomares.
The New iPad and iPad with Retina display are different in three ways.
For one, the current generation tablet includes an A6X processor versus the A5X processor that came with the discontinued iPad 3. It also includes a FaceTime HD camera. The previous model included a VGA front-facing videophone camera. Finally, the iPad 4 includes Apple’s new Lightning connector. The iPad 3 included a 30-pin connector.
I have next to no knowledge of Brazilian law or Apple’s technology cycle, so have no strong opinion as to whether IBDI has a case. But, assuming for the sake of argument that Apple could have released the iPad 4 as the iPad 3 seven months earlier, it’s not at all obvious to me why they were under obligation to do so.
When I buy a product, I expect it to do what it purports to do for a reasonable amount of time. But the fact that the iPad 4 will do some cool things that the iPad 3 won’t do in no way makes the iPad 3 obsolete. If you were happy to spend $400 on a tablet that did what an iPad 3 did, it’s not obvious why the fact that a tablet that did other things seven months later at a similar price matters. After all, you got to enjoy your tablet for seven months rather than delaying gratification; that has real value.
Indeed, I still have an iPad 2 and have no intention of upgrading any time soon. The things that would most motivate me to upgrade—my 4-year-old’s games are rapidly eating up the storage space and I kind of wish that I had 4G capability instead of having to rely on the availability of WiFi—are actually things that were available for more money when my late wife bought me the iPad 2 fifteen months ago.
Technology has long come with planned obsolescence. The first several personal computers and cellular phones I had were “obsolete” within months of their purchase because those technologies were advancing so quickly. Now, PCs in particular are virtual appliances; there’s little improvement when one replaces the old one because of mechanical breakdown. Even my iPhone is in that category; I’ve got a 4s and don’t feel the least bit anxious that the 5 has been in the wild for months.
Shakedown lawsuits also can be written in Portuguese by groups known as IBDI, not only in English by the likes of the ACLU, Common Cause and the Sierra Club. So IOW the for-profit lawsuit cottage industry is global. Sigh.
Did Apple prevent iPad 3s from working? Because if not, I find this case wanting – not legally, as I don’t know Brazilian law, but morally: you knew what you were buying. That didn’t change at all.
Man, if Apple was a stock I would… Wait. That’s not it. Um, this is going to lead to a one iPad st– No, no, that’s not it either. See, the thing about Apple is they’re all about money, bombs and Je… Hmm. Nope. Obamapads are going to turn the US into a third world country because Carter was an awful Pres
Man, this one is a tough one.
You are obviously insufficiently geek-y and unqualified to talk about this subject.
Plus…get an Android!
This is a case where I think the invisible hand of the market would work just fine… And there aren’t so many cases where that happens, as all to often there is real harm done.
Consumers bought their iPads, the iPads continue to function as designed and advertised, so there is no fraud there.
Consumers are upset that they cannot anticipate the release cycle, they feel cheated, and will likely postpone their next iPad purchase, or look elsewhere for another tablet (Android isn’t that bad. So Apple will pay a price for disappointing its customers.
I still have my iPad (actually, we have two of them). Still works for what I got it for, no need to get new ones till the current ones stop functioning. At the very least, you know that between 9 and and 12 months after buying an apple product, a new and better version will be released. 7 months was a little quick, but who the hell cares. Its technology, it changes, rapidly.
@Boyd: Ha. I used to care a lot more about such things; now, the tech seems good enough and I’m not that excited about comparatively minor upgrades.
My company pays for my phone and my choice was between upgrading my Blackberry and getting an iPhone 3GS. Since I was required to be on the AT&T network, I opted for the Apple. And I upgraded to the 4s, paying a premium out of pocket, two years later. Once I got the iPhone, the iPad was a obvious adjunct since it shares apps and whatnot.
I know that Brazilian law has a “public policy” loophole sufficient to blow apart all sorts of stuff in contracts (don’t even try putting a choice of law or forum clause in your international contract because Brazilian courts will just run right over it.) But this? I can’t even figure out what standing this institute has to try something like this.
P.S. If this does go through Brazilian courts, you can expect a big uproar from the business establishment, both Brazilian AND U.S. Neither of them would want something like this to exist.
The Apple ecosystem is still strong. Android creeps up, but it is hamstrung by its bargain-hunter position. People pay for Apple devices first, and then for apps and services at a much higher rate. Steve Jobs might have been right after all (contra Christensen) that you can expand from the top of the market, in a reverse of the innovator’s dilemma.
The claim is that when you count tablets as computers, Apple has a 20% market share in computers. That is huge. It will only erode now if bargain-hunter tablets can create their own greater after-market ecosystem. Doubtful?
(Perhaps a private Dell has a transformative technology in mind, to upset that Apple cart.)
I also don’t plan to replace my iPad 2 anytime soon. Will have to sometime. The battery replacement procedure is ‘Buy an iPad x.”
I’ve watched my wife and daughter buy multiple versions of iphones and pads as new tech comes out. I think its absurd, and makes me critical of Apple, especially if they know how to integrate the latest in each version and not wait. Me: I let the technology settle down a bit. I think Apple has a cult following (best mocked by the commercial with the guy feigning an exploding head due to reposisioning of the power cord)
That said, a lawsuit is bizarre. Lawyers gone wild….
(Ubuntu’s tablet ideas are interesting. It is possible that they will be the only ones who take enough of a gamble on new user experience to change things.)
Brazilian law has several provisions that bar companies from charging hidden fees from the consumers. For instance, what every American airline does (Charging a cheap fare, then charging fees for baggages and for everything else) is illegal. You can´t sell a product that requires the consumer to buy another product so that he can use it.
“Planned Obsolescence” usually means that a company cannot sell a product that is programmed to stop working after a certain amount of time. I don´t know if this suit is going to stick, but the Brazilian Judiciary has a terrible reputation – and it´s a well deserved reputation.
On the other hand, Apple does not have a presence on the country. They barely have offices. That´s why they are losing market share to Samsung, that´s why they are facing these lawsuits.
@grumpy realist:
No. Brazil and many countries that uses Roman Law understands that people can be coerced to sign contracts and that the weaker part of these contracts must be protected. You can´t make a employee sign a contract forbidding her to sue the company if she is raped, for instance.
The real problem for businesses in Brazil are Labor laws, businesses taxes and red tape. The judiciary system is also a mess. But contracts aren´t a major problem.
Brazil needs to get off ipads, like they did with oil.
@Tsar Nicholas:
Do you like your freedom of speech? Press? Religion? Assembly? Petition?
Hell Tsar, if it wasn’t for the ACLU you would be resting uncomfortably in a secret prison in Yemen for most everything you have said here.
@john personna:
If you honestly believe this, John, you’re clueless. Android 3Q12 smartphone market share was 75%. Apple’s corresponding share was 15%.
Nice creep if you can get it.
Hmmm…
This falls into the “Who cares” category.
Still have my Gen 1 iPad… and I haven’t seen any reason to upgrade (or purchase any other tablets, for that matter).
As my wife and I had the pleasure of living in Rio for 21/2 years, it’s nice to see them having the time to have these “first world problem” issues.
@OzarkHillbilly:
Absolutely true.
Cognitive dissonance: Conservatives that SCREAM that we should worship the constitution and fight to protect our rights, and…In the same breath hate the ACLU.
Still, it makes for great laughs.
ACLU: “Taking our country back” since 1920.
Apple’s business plan is based on planned obsolescence. They’ve been doing this for decades. Release a product with key features left out then slowly add those features as “new” models are released. Marketing at it’s finest.
@Boyd: Of course, those numbers are reversed when it comes to profit. If it weren’t for Google generously subsidizing an open platform in a failed attempt to torpedo iOS, Samsung wouldn’t make any profit at all.
@Craigo: And yet the tech media never have to twist and spin the facts like the Apple sycophants have to, in order to maintain their self-esteem.
Far be it from me to interfere with your ability to look down your nose at the ignorant, unwashed masses. They might have to kick you out of the hipster commune!
@Boyd:
Two things. First, I was talking about the development of the app and service ecosystem, and second I was focusing on tablets as the next battle (which Apple is winning).
On ecosystems, this has been the problem:
So what does that mean for Android … many more handsets sold, but with a less active user base?
Now, on tablets:
Android Reaches 39% Tablet OS Market Share (Standing On Amazon’s Shoulders)
That’s the kindle-as-ipad-competitor view. Which is cheating a bit.
Anyway, for Android to be “winning” I’d look for not only higher cellphone sales, but also a higher value total app market, and some sign that it can threaten the iPad.
@Septimius:
Brazil never got off oil. They just don’t use much of what they produce and that’s pretty smart.
If only Brazil’s elections began in corn country things would probably different. The US, well we’re idiots in that regard.
(Those ships off the coast of Brazil aren’t cruise ships…)
@Boyd: Okay. I literally have no idea what you’re ranting about. I suspect you don’t either.
@john personna:
Looking a little more, it seems the big Android numbers are coming out of China. Which is fine, and certainly a way for Android to rack up world market share.
It doesn’t necessarily follow that US Android users or US Android developers are getting immediate benefits from that.
Wake me when the Android app is required for any new venture, and the iOS app is an optional supplement.
Some people like Apple products, some don’t, and some, like me like them for some things and not others. I like the iPhone and iPad, but my home computer is a pc and I have no desire to have a Mac. I like the iPad and iPhone combo for the same reason James does, you buy one ap and can use it on both (or in my household’s case on all three). I’ve had android phones and the iPhone, I prefer the iPhone. I have had mine for 18 months or so and it has had fewer issues than my androids. Just my experience with it, other users experience may vary. (the other half’s android crapped out a month before it was eligible for an upgrade. However, I still had my old android phone that still worked, so 6 of one half dozen of the other).
As for comparing iPhone sales and Android sales, kind of an apples and oranges comparison (pun intended). Comparing iPhone to a particular phone or brand of phone is a better comparison, say the Galaxy. You could compare windows phone vs android phones (not really fair) but then you are comparing a phone operating system vs a phone operating system where both are on phones manufactured by multiple companies.
@David:
But remember, Macintosh essentially died (the first time, before the OSX reinvention) fighting a one versus many battle.
It’s that pattern that gave Google and their developers a confidence that history will (ultimately) repeat.
I expected history to repeat more quickly than this, actually, but Steve Jobs surprised, both by maintaining a consistent edge on quality and by moving the goalposts each time competitors came near (iPod -> iPhone -> iPad).
Perhaps if they have nothing after iPad, and Android does catch up there, it is the end-game.
(Perhaps Apple really needs an Apple TV or something to do the same, again.)
@john personna: It may happen. All things change. Whether Apple or Google or Samsung, or MicroSoft can adapt and succeed depends on how well the respond to their users. I wish them all luck, cause good competition in this area really is a boon to us all. Like I said, I currently like the iPhone and iPad, but have no plans to upgrade them anytime soon. When it is time, maybe there will be something I like better. As to home computer, I like my PC, but have been completely unimpressed with windows 8 and will stay with 7. If I ever have to move to 8, maybe a Mac will get the nod.
Btw, same David, but trying to avoid confusion with another David that has vastly different views than I do on a variety of issues)
@john personna: There is an Apple TV! It’s actually a streaming device, not an actual TV, though. I keep it in my bedroom and use a 360 in my living room.
@Craigo:
Yeah, Apple is on their 3rd generation, but they haven’t figure a way to make it camp-out-all-night attractive.
@Craigo: We have one too, was cheaper than replacing the TV with one that has wi-fi. Decided to dump the cable movie channels and just go with netflix and hulu.
@David from KC: As of the latest update you can AirPlay HBO Go, which was my biggest complaint by far – still no native though. Still no amazon Prime for obvious reasons.
@john personna :But yes, I agree that aggressively moving into streaming is their best bet – unless they’d like to take some of that cash and start competing with Google Fiber/the telcoms.
@Craigo: Google fiber is a sore spot for me, my “fiberhood” had a less than stellar response in pre-ordering…. sigh.
At least you got it – Pittsburgh was never even in the running so far as I know. And I hear it’s pressured Comcast into lowering prices and raising speeds – imagine, all it took was the threat of complete disruption!
I did get a free bump up in my TWC internet speeds. But considering my neighborhood, Pittsburgh has a better shot at getting google fiber than I do unless I move.
@Andre Kenji: I did a report in law school covering the scenario of a US import-export trader trying to export wooden furniture from Brazil. All the law articles I read indicated that any contract written between a US company and a Brazilian company that included a choice of law or choice of forum clause would find said clauses totally ignored by a Brazilian court under a public policy argument. In other words, putting a clause into a contract stating that any litigation would occur in X court in the US would be disregarded. There seemed to be a de facto assumption that such clauses were against Brazilian public policy. Since these articles also quoted quite a few cases, that’s how I will interpret Brazilian law until someone can prove differently.
(Choice of ADR clauses seem to be accepted, for some strange reason.)
@john personna: Yes if you count tablets then Apple shipped 20% of computers sold last year. Their market share is much lower though and the tablet market hasn’t become saturated yet like the conventional PC market.
From the point of view of a software developer there’s no doubt that windows is still completely dominating the desktop/laptop market and that android is dominating the phone market. The tablet market is trending towards Android domination too.
This should be worrisome to not just Apple but also Microsoft.
@matt: Again, why would Apple be worried about market share when they dominate profits – which is, by the way, the literal bottom line here? Samsung ships four times as many phones to make a quarter of Apple’s profits – and let’s not get into the disasters that are Motorola, Lumia, nokia, etc.
Samsung is certainly going to thrive and prosper, certainly, but they’re not exactly an existential threat to Apple – or any threat at all, for that matter.
@Craigo: Yeah cause market share is so totally over rated and worthless for a proprietary software platform. At this point you’re basically bragging that Apple is able to get people to buy overpriced products. That ability is mostly marketing as their actual hardware is of average quality. I will certainly give credit where it is due.
It’s funny you should mention Samsung as they manufactures 26% of the component cost of iphones. Samsung is one of Apple’s biggest suppliers…
Samsung is one of the largest OEM suppliers of components for everything from desktop computers to phones.
Owning Apple products is like owning a Prius. It makes a fashion statement so to speak– The only tangible advantage IOS has over Android is power management. If Android cracks that’s nut that it slowly drowns Apple in 3-4 years. If anyone can crack the TV nut however, I believe it is Apple. Who else has the wallet to corral enough content in one ecosystem to match the cable or satellite experience. I’m rooting for this is this regard–the content monopoly cable and satellite have need to go. Tired of subsidizing 99% of the channels I don’t watch. Live sporting events is the only reason I have cable.
@Liberal Cap:
Very few people manages to own Ipads. Android is the king, both in phones, high end phones and tablets.
@Pharoah Narim:
Apple already cracked that when they released the Ipad. I can wash dishes while watching to Sky News or Al Jazeera English, that´s a revolution to me.
@grumpy realist: I´m not a lawyer, but contracts under Roman Law(Or Civil Law) and contracts under Common(Or English Law) are very different things. In other countries that have their legal systems inspired by the Roman Code you would probably find similar situations. There are several situations where a contract under the Civil Law can be considered nullified, by the way.
@Andre Kenji: Definitely a step in the right direction. Live sports is the only thing keeping most of us from cutting the cord here in the states.
Speaking of Android ….
I’ve heard that Google is going to drop the “Android” name, and use “Google” for the phone now. I’ll let Brazil know so they can get started on THAT lawsuit.
@matt: Okay, you seem to have some sort of weird tribal fetish thing going on with Android. For the record, I don’t have a dog in the fight – I use Apple and Google products almost exclusively, different devices for different tasks, and I don’t care who “wins” – winning, of course, being defined in whatever way favors your creepy, childish attachment to your phone. I care that the companies keep competing against each other to put out great products, because that benefits me, the consumer – the only side I actually care about. If there were only one dominant platform, that would be a very, very bad thing for all of us – remember Windows?
But I’m really curious as to how you can convince yourself that Apple is being “threatened.” Why do you think Apple and Samsung make phones – to have high market share? Of course not. It’s to make money, and currently, they’re the only two companies in the world that do, albeit Samsung making much, much less.
(Google might not care so much about profit in most of its ventures, but they’re a unique case – they do a lot of great things, only one of which – online ads – actually turn a profit, and for now they appear fine with that.)
And again, if anybone is in danger, it’s Samsung – and the threat is Google, not Apple, because Google is subsidizing their mobile division through Android. If Google decides they want to stop setting money on fire at Motorola and get series about hardware, then Samsung is screwed. A proprietary Android platform means that Samsung would have to license a new OS – expensive, and besides iOS and Android, they’re really aren’t any good, proven environments out there – or design one themselves – almost impossible, as they’re a hardware firm with no significant experience in software.
And of course Samsung – whose Galaxy phones are well-designed – would lose access to the Android app environment. They would be left with their component manufacturing – and while they turn a profit on those, mostly their screens, it’s not nearly as much as what their phones currently bring in. Samsung as a whole wouldn’t be in the dire straits of Blackberry or LG, but it’s pretty much inevitable that they’ll cede market share – and profits – to Google in the next decade.
@al-Ameda: I only keep cable for live sports and HBO, and I’m considering dropping it after hockey season anyway. It’ll be a happy day when they finally offer a la carte service.
@Craigo:
I have a “weird tribal fetish” with the truth. You for some reason have taken it personally that I dared point out that Apple has a small market share that is shrinking in some aspects. This is blasphemy for you and so far you’re actually responding like an Apple fanboy.
Good for you? I always am amused when someone starts off with a variation of the “I don’t care either way BUT” as inevitably they end up leaning heavily one way. Windows is still around and still the dominate OS for the desktop/laptop market. So I have no idea why you would think that people wouldn’t remember windows. Windows 7 is the best consumer OS on the market right now. I manage a mixed environment with XP/win7/OSx10.8 on desktops laptops with tablets being recently added.
. I’d like to know where you got this crap about threatened too. It’s like you’re not even reading my posts and are instead kicking into full OMG HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE GREAT APPLE!!!! mode…
Samsung’s phones/tablets/computers all run OSes that have an extremely large market share allowing for consumers to have a great deal of confidence that they won’t have compatibility issues. Apple on the other hand runs a closed system of their own design that lacks compatibility with the far more popular OS choices. Apple has been working to increase their market share because even they know that being a niche product doesn’t guarantee long term sales. Pointing that out is for some reason a major sin from your perspective. Because to you all that matters is profits which is a very short term perspective and doesn’t lend itself to long term success.
More ignorance from you. A large percentage of Google’s profits are from ads but not ALL of their profits stem from ads. Google is an example of a company that knows it has to continue to produce true innovative and new products. Unlike Apple which right now seems to be happy with producing marginal upgrades featuring stuff that should of been in their product generations ago. Long term I’d rather be in Google’s position than Apple’s.
Wow.. There’s so many things wrong with this quote that I almost don’t even know where to begin. You’re saying that a major OEM manufacturer that produces parts for almost every phone/computer/tablet/notebook/tv/etc maker in the world is somehow threatened by google? Really?
OMG what would happen to samsung if a dozen meteors hit their plants??? Or giant monsters attacked their plants and wiped out their maufacturing capability? Both those scenarios are as plausible as the one you presented.
Actually the majority of profits would not come from Samsung’s screen production. Samsung is such a diverse company that if you took away cell phones there wouldn’t be one single source for the majority of their profits. With the help of cell phones Samsung actually made more profit last quarter than Apple.
That being said you’ve contradicted yourself in your own post. You say Samsung is a hardware only company and that Google is an ADs only company but then at the end you say that google is going to threaten Samsung and take away their market share. What? How is a software only company going to take market share from a hardware only company?
@Pharoah Narim:
Really? Lower total cost of ownership?
Maybe I should look at those Apples.
@Craigo: @matt:
Apple looks great in a snapshot. It is still big, rich, and profitable.
The problem comes 5 or 10 years from now. What does 5 or 10 years of pervasive Android use in China do for that platform?
@john personna: Personally I saw Mac ownership as being more like buying a shiny blinged out SUV. Both are overpriced for the technology you get but they look pretty and are considered status symbols by some.
@john personna: Yeah Apple is in a good position today but a decade from now I’m not sure. There’s been a pretty serious brain drain at Apple the last couple years but there’s always the possibility that something innovative is in the pipeline and hasn’t been leaked yet.