iPad class action

[jkhonea]

Perhaps you missed my point when I posted. I wholeheartedly agree with the lawsuit against AT&T and believe that one WILL hold up. I said I don't think the lawsuit against Apple will not hold up. These are two different companies. I hope AT&T does get hit on this one as they're changing the rules to the game after writing them and don't think that's right, plus, the things they are doing will affect the other wireless carriers ultimately by setting a precedent.

That's all I have been saying all along. AT&T is the guilty party. Proving Apple as an accomplice will be harder without evidence, but AT&T very well may be and should be nailed to the wall.

If there is conclusive evidence Apple is involved in this, then yes, they should be found guilty also. I just think AT&T will be the easier of the two to prove.

 

[pallentx]

There is nothing to this lawsuit. At no time did anyone promise this data plan would be available for any amount of time. I agree its bad business decision to offer it and then yank it so soon, but its not an illegal breach of contract, false advertising or anything like that. Companies do promotional pricing with new products all the time. Before I signed a contract for a fixed rate, but electric rates used to up and down at random. When I signed up for DSL internet, I got a really cheap rate, but after 3 months it doubled.

You can state with certainty that YOU believe that there's nothing to this lawsuit. Apparantly there are some legal pros who disagree.

Certainly. There was that lady that sued McDonalds because the coffee was hot and won a big wad of cash. That doesnt make it right.

If you are upset about ATT's business practices make the ultimate protest and refuse to be their customer. If you dont like Apple's deal with ATT, buy an Android device on Verizon, or Sprint. Running to the court because you want cheap unlimited internet on your new fancy gadget forever is silly.

 

[figmo10]

McDonalds doesn't heat the coffee to 180 degrees anymore, even by accident.

 

[phenixagom]

1. Didnt ATT grandfather the unlimited plan for all purchases made before they announced the change?

2. Class action suits are all about getting you a few dollars and the lawyers millions.

That is for the iPhone users, who can't flip-flop like the iPad was advertised for. If you kept your iPad on unlimited your probably fine, but if you turned it off or dropped to the lower 200-250mb, you prob can't go back to unlimited.....your stuck with 2G for 25$

That is because you DO NOT have a contract. I have a cell phone plan for my wife and I that we do not have a contract. I can flip flop back and forth if I want to. 6 months from now they may not offer the plan I want to switch back to. should I file a class action lawsuit? They advertise heavily about not having a contract and how it's cheaper, etc...ya I can file but it is a fraudulent suit. I do not have a anything in writing stating that the plan will always be available. I full expect that they will drop the plan at some point.

 

[phenixagom]

There is nothing to this lawsuit. At no time did anyone promise this data plan would be available for any amount of time. I agree its bad business decision to offer it and then yank it so soon, but its not an illegal breach of contract, false advertising or anything like that. Companies do promotional pricing with new products all the time. Before I signed a contract for a fixed rate, but electric rates used to up and down at random. When I signed up for DSL internet, I got a really cheap rate, but after 3 months it doubled.

You can state with certainty that YOU believe that there's nothing to this lawsuit. Apparantly there are some legal pros who disagree.

There are also legal pros who don't know what they are talking about. There are legal pros who are also bias. There are legal pros who don't follow the law and do what they want in their mind.

 

[pallentx]

McDonalds doesn't heat the coffee to 180 degrees anymore, even by accident.

The optimal brewing temp according to the Specialty Coffee Association of America is 195-205 deg. The hottest coffee can be and still be liquid is 212. That lawsuit was just dumb and great example of how a lawyer can make a lot of money blowing a lot of BS at a judge and jury.

 

[y2kgtp]

McDonalds doesn't heat the coffee to 180 degrees anymore, even by accident.

The optimal brewing temp according to the Specialty Coffee Association of America is 195-205 deg. The hottest coffee can be and still be liquid is 212. That lawsuit was just dumb and great example of how a lawyer can make a lot of money blowing a lot of BS at a judge and jury.

Yeap...Temp makes a huge difference in the quality of the taste. We have a Bunn, and heats the water to 200 degrees for brewing.

 

[kensteele]

Hey guys, we're sorry. No more free use of AT&T hotspots. Can't afford to do that any longer. From now on starting July 1st, you need to pay us $5 per occurrence to use the hotspots. Sorry about that, too bad I guess, huh?

 

[kensteele]

Also the next software update coming in August/September, it will lock down your wifi and only allow the ipad to connect to AT&T ssid's.

Of course, none of this is true (yet), but I'm sure a couple million sheep would simply swallow hard and leave it up to the rest of us brave enough to step up on their behalf.

 

[pallentx]

No contract - cancel anytime

Its simple. If I get annoyed enough, they wont get my money. I dont need a lawsuit to make my voice heard. I dont need any lawyer to stand up for me. They care more about our money. If they lost a million customers over these changes, they would think again about doing it.

 

[DavidNM]

No contract - cancel anytime

Its simple. If I get annoyed enough, they wont get my money. I dont need a lawsuit to make my voice heard. I dont need any lawyer to stand up for me. They care more about our money. If they lost a million customers over these changes, they would think again about doing it.

Fine - don't join the suit or be a part of any settlement. But this isn't about an 80 year old lady burning her who who with boiling hot coffee. This isn't about someone too busy talking on their cell phone to notice a curb and suing the city. This is about a major company using a specific marketing / advertising promise to sell millions of their product and then the promise being pulled away. That is false and misleading advertising.

Fortunately we don't live in the lawless / justice free country that you desire - and there is re-dress for this type of situation. Apple deserves to get their knuckles rapped over this - for nothing less than the message it will send to Microsoft and Nokia and HP and BP and the hoards of other companies who are secretly in their board rooms wondering why Apple thought of this before they did.

 

[pallentx]

Consumer protection is a matter of law. Lawmakers make laws that regulate advertising, contracts, etc. The courts exist to enforce those laws. If ATT has broken a law, then they deserve any punishment they get. Unless there are factors I am unaware of (and that is certainly a possibility), ATT has broken no law. They made no promises as to how long they would continue to offer unlimited data. They explicitly stated that there is no contract.

I'm not advocating lawlessness. In fact, I am advocating the opposite - that we follow the law and nothing more. How unhappy you are with their business decision is irrelevant to the law. I would say that making a company pay a settlement when they have broken no law is the definition of lawlessness. When you can be punished for breaking laws that dont exist, you have chaos.

 

[kensteele]

Consumer protection is a matter of law. Lawmakers make laws that regulate advertising, contracts, etc. The courts exist to enforce those laws. If ATT has broken a law, then they deserve any punishment they get. Unless there are factors I am unaware of (and that is certainly a possibility), ATT has broken no law. They made no promises as to how long they would continue to offer unlimited data. They explicitly stated that there is no contract.

I'm not advocating lawlessness. In fact, I am advocating the opposite - that we follow the law and nothing more. How unhappy you are with their business decision is irrelevant to the law. I would say that making a company pay a settlement when they have broken no law is the definition of lawlessness. When you can be punished for breaking laws that dont exist, you have chaos.

No contract? If I pointed out "the contract" for you, will you go away?

 

[pallentx]

Consumer protection is a matter of law. Lawmakers make laws that regulate advertising, contracts, etc. The courts exist to enforce those laws. If ATT has broken a law, then they deserve any punishment they get. Unless there are factors I am unaware of (and that is certainly a possibility), ATT has broken no law. They made no promises as to how long they would continue to offer unlimited data. They explicitly stated that there is no contract.

I'm not advocating lawlessness. In fact, I am advocating the opposite - that we follow the law and nothing more. How unhappy you are with their business decision is irrelevant to the law. I would say that making a company pay a settlement when they have broken no law is the definition of lawlessness. When you can be punished for breaking laws that dont exist, you have chaos.

No contract? If I pointed out "the contract" for you, will you go away?

probably not, but that would be an interesting contribution to this discussion. Like I said, there could be information here that I dont have. It could be that the advertising ATT and Apple made was in some way an implied contract of some kind, but I dont see it. Its a tricky thing though to say that they ended the plan "too soon". Then you get into trying to some up with a universally accept amount of time that is "enough time" to offer such a deal before changing the terms. Its fuzzy stuff.

 

[figmo10]

Fuzzy stuff is the fuel of arguments, including arguments before the Court.