Edward Kirk
September 4th, 2007, 11:28 PM
<img src="http://www.iphonealley.com/images/storyimages/september07/battery.jpg" align="right" />
Apple has been hit with with the next (and surely not the last) of what has been a long line of complaints in regard to the Apple's iPhone battery replacement practices. For those counting, this is the fourth complaint filed against Apple about their iPhone. The complaint filed this past Wednesday in California's northern district accuses Apple and AT&T of knowingly withholding information about the iPhone's true battery replacement costs until after the June 29th launch, misleading some customers into buying the device who would otherwise not have.<!--break-->
Just like all of the other complaints, this one is based on un-verified statements that the iPhone's battery will cease to function after completing 300 charge cycles, which is exactly what plaintiffs Mr. and Mrs. Stiener claim. They state that after this time, they would be forced to pay $115 to replace the battery.
They claim that by not warning them sufficiently with labels on the packaging or the like before they purchased the device, Apple and AT&T are guilty of breaching both good faith and the California Commercial Code, which demands that manufacturers in the state honestly reflect how their products will perform in real-world conditions.
Written by the law firms Hoffman & Lazear as well as Folkenflik & McGerity, both of which were responsible for a similar suit in mid-August, the nine-page argument is considered a class action suit and would have Apple and AT&T pay restitution to any affected customer in California.
[via <a href="http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/09/04/apple_hit_with_video_encoding_and_iphone_battery_l awsuits.html" target="_blank">AppleInsider</a>]
Apple has been hit with with the next (and surely not the last) of what has been a long line of complaints in regard to the Apple's iPhone battery replacement practices. For those counting, this is the fourth complaint filed against Apple about their iPhone. The complaint filed this past Wednesday in California's northern district accuses Apple and AT&T of knowingly withholding information about the iPhone's true battery replacement costs until after the June 29th launch, misleading some customers into buying the device who would otherwise not have.<!--break-->
Just like all of the other complaints, this one is based on un-verified statements that the iPhone's battery will cease to function after completing 300 charge cycles, which is exactly what plaintiffs Mr. and Mrs. Stiener claim. They state that after this time, they would be forced to pay $115 to replace the battery.
They claim that by not warning them sufficiently with labels on the packaging or the like before they purchased the device, Apple and AT&T are guilty of breaching both good faith and the California Commercial Code, which demands that manufacturers in the state honestly reflect how their products will perform in real-world conditions.
Written by the law firms Hoffman & Lazear as well as Folkenflik & McGerity, both of which were responsible for a similar suit in mid-August, the nine-page argument is considered a class action suit and would have Apple and AT&T pay restitution to any affected customer in California.
[via <a href="http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/09/04/apple_hit_with_video_encoding_and_iphone_battery_l awsuits.html" target="_blank">AppleInsider</a>]