iPhone class action: guess who will win

Stephen Withers
Wednesday, 01 August 2007 12:57

Your IT - Mobility

Whether third-party batteries are of equivalent quality to the ones Apple buys remains to be seen, and some people will always opt for the original equipment product to be on the safe side. But as we've seen with laptops, even OEM batteries can cause problems.

And how about this: "Plaintiff and the class relied upon the truth of Defendants' statements, believing all costs associated with the iPhone to have been fully disclosed prior to purchase of same." Taken at face value, this is an assertion that Trujillo thought the iPhone's battery would last as long as the rest of the device. Hello - rechargeable batteries wear out.

But here's the real kicker. Even if Trujillo and the class he claims to represent had a solid case, what would be a reasonable deal? A full refund (except for call and data charges actually accrued), a release from the service contract, and maybe $100 for the time wasted actually buying the iPhone?

No. "Plaintiff's individual claim is valued at less than $[US]75,000 inclusive of all damages and fees" - what's that? $US6000 damages (assuming the most expensive service contract with AT&T) and $69,000 for the lawyer? If it's actually less than $US50,000, $US5000, or whatever, why not say so? Oh, hang on, it's the old "punitive damages" claim.

Who is going to be best served by this case? Looking at other class actions, the plaintiffs will probably end up with something like a voucher for a modest discount on their next iPhone. Apple's management will be distracted. The case can't help the share price. If the court holds that a non-removable battery is an inherent fault in a mobile phone, you can expect future iPhones to be thicker than they would otherwise have been. Who does that leave?

Yep, the lawyers.