And so the iPhone class-action action begins (and recut trailers)

Yes, iT's Monday's iT Blogwatch: iN which we learn of an iPhone class-action lawsuit. Not to mention some more recut classic movie trailers...

Jesus Diaz broke the story

It was bound to happen. It seems that a guy called Trujillo has been the first to file a class-action suit against Apple and AT&T because of the iPhone. The reason? You guessed it—it's the battery. Read all about this dumbtastically stupid lawsuit, including the entire complaint text ... Trujillo, hopefuly not related to the former Dominican dictator, claims that he didn't know that the battery is a "sealed unit with it's [sic] battery soldered inside" and that, "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."

Putting aside that this guy's lawyer's grammar is worse than mine, is he really that ignorant? Does he think that the judge is going to be stupid? (OK, you don't need to answer that. It was a rhetorical question.) The fact is that the iPhone battery lasts for more than "300" charges and doesn't need to be changed after that. According to Apple, the battery "is designed to retain up to 80% of its original capacity after 400 full charge and discharge cycles." [more]

Charles Jade adds:

Just about every new product in consumer electronics is going to have a problem or two, and there may also be technical issues too. In this potential court case, Apple's problem is one, Jose Trujillo ... To the Plaintiff's apparent surprise and dismay, you do not have access to a phone while the battery is being replaced unless you pay $29.95 for a loaner, and Apple will erase "all data from the iPhone." Damn them
It turns out Apple "marketed it's [sic] iPhone as a 'revolutionary new mobile phone' that incorporates 'high technology'," whatever that means ... Looking at the court documents, it's—or is it its?—hard to know where to begin, though a cheap shot at Mr. Trujillo's lawyer and the use of possessive pronouns is as good a place as any. [more]

David Chartier boggles:

How anyone could think the iPhone battery's longevity could be any different from the plethora of other Lithium ion-based devices we've been living with for so long is beyond me (especially since it's been officially put to rest time and time again), but I guess in today's world, someone had to fill the village idiot's shoes by using lies and mis-information to bring a lawsuit against this moment's hot new gadget. [more]

Aidan Malley asks, "What if?":

A victory in the complaint would have both Apple and AT&T pay actual losses as well as punitive damages to customers who weren't properly warned in advance of the long-term costs of maintaining a working battery in the phone. [more]

 David Kravets is probably if Trujillo can get away with it:

The iPhone's terms-of-service contract, which at 17,000 words is one of the longest and most complex ever to accompany a wireless gadget ... No one reads such things, least of all early adopters eager to own the summer's most-lusted-after product. So ... we read it not just once but several times, with the help of a few good lawyers.
Class-action lawsuits are also forbidden under AT&T's agreement, a point that may run counter to a Wednesday decision (.pdf) by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation's largest federal appeals court, which is based in San Francisco. Ruling on a challenge to a long-distance phone service agreement, the appellate court said denying class-action lawsuits might not be valid in California. Separately, the Washington Supreme Court recently ruled that cell phone contracts may not ban class-action lawsuits in that state.. [more]

Michael Santo is surprised:

Oh, come on. Yes, the iPhone does not have a swappable battery like most cell phones, and yes, the replacement plan isn’t the best (mostly because you have to send your device in), but still … suing because of it?
I mean, the fact that the battery was not swappable was a subject of much discussion for months. On the other hand ... the battery replacement plan wasn’t revealed for a couple of days after the phone went on sale, and if you purchased it before then, and add in the two-year contract ... this is just another senseless lawsuit. [more]

Philip Elmer-DeWitt has chapter and verse:

The lawsuit ... has generated a lot of heated discussion here and elsewhere, much of it aimed at lawyers and their litigious clients ... Leaving aside the lawyer jokes (we've heard 'em all), there seems to be some confusion about the facts of the case, which centers on whether or not Apple informed purchasers ahead of time that the iPhone's battery was sealed ... At the risk of being called as a witness in the trial, this is what I've learned about what Steve Jobs and Apple said about the battery issue and when they said it:

At the MacWorld keynote in which he introduced the iPhone, Jobs gave specs on battery life but did not volunteer the information that it wasn't user replaceable. Neither does Apple's Jan. 9 iPhone press release. In subsequent coverage in the press and blogosphere the battery was often described as non-replaceable ... although the source of this information is not clear.
The battery issue came in for intense scrutiny in the Apple blogs after John Dvorak's famous April iPhone podcast, in which he quotes an unnamed Cingular (AT&T) executive complaining about the "amateur mistake" Apple made in not having a removable battery.
Glenn Fleishmann on TidBits posted ... information [that] showed up "on or around July 2" ... "iPhone Service FAQ." ... The FAQ also describes Apple's $29 Apple Care Service Phone program, which provides a loaner cell phone.
Does any of this justify a class action lawsuit or entitle Mr. Trujillo, his lawyers and the class of iPhone purchasers to damages? You be the judge.. [more]

Duncan Riley urges, caveat emptor:

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.” [more]

Buffer overflow:

Around the Net Around Computerworld Previously in IT Blogwatch

And finally... Classic Movie Trailers Recut

Richi Jennings is an independent technology and marketing consultant, specializing in email, blogging, Linux, and computer security. A 20 year, cross-functional IT veteran, he is also an analyst at Ferris Research. Contact Richi at

Copyright © 2007 IDG Communications, Inc.

Shop Tech Products at Amazon