12/05/2008, 9:05am, EST
Friday, December 5th
Apple receives another 3G speed lawsuit
Apple faces yet another lawsuit challenging its claims of 3G network performance. Through the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, James Pittman has filed a lawsuit against Apple in regards to the poor speeds of the iPhone 3G when compared to advertisements. Pittman claims that the phone was rushed to market in a defective state, and does not perform as represented.
The suit alleges that a defective chipset, and/or the firmware, prevents the iPhone from providing data connectivity "twice as fast" as its predecessor. It is likewise said to not be fully compatible with 3G networks, and fail to deliver 3G data speeds for more than a fraction of connection time. Another problem included in the suit states that users experience unreliable voice service when using the 3G network, including frequently-dropped calls.
Because iPhone owners are required to sign a multi-year contract, one with extra fees each month for benefits Pittman claims are never received, the plaintiff is seeking monetary compensation, including damages and equitable relief for himself and members of the proposed class.
Apple has been targeted for a number of lawsuits due to the latest iPhone. Recently a 70-year-old resident of San Diego, William Gillis, also brought up accusations against Apple, claiming its 3G did not meet the standards proclaimed in the company’s ads.
Apple has also had difficulty even showing ads in the United Kingdom, already having two of its iPhone 3G commercials pulled from television due to apparent misleading content and exaggerated capabilities for the handset.
Filed under: iPhone, Apple
Other story tags: iPhone 3G, lawsuits
, 
, 14
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
Top
subscribe to comments
for this article
Wrong defendant
Since it can easily be proved that the original iPhone 3G (without any subsequent software updates) performs well within the promised specifications, the guy's problem is obviusly with AT&T's network coverage in his area. Out of millions that we sold, a small percentage has consistently reported problems. These were clearly network related and had nothing to do with any possible inherent deficiencies of the device.
What a waste of time...
Other countries
Funny how there is no uproar in other countries. How can you conclude anything other that it's AT&T's service in his area that is to blame?
Amazing Solution!
I have a startling and insane solution to this type of problem: Tell the flipping TRUTH when advertising or promoting a product. If you think for even a second that Apple didn't know full well that AT&T's network wasn't up to the task then you are woefully naive. Apple knew it. If they had been truthful about what consumers could expect in terms of real-world performance this wouldn't be an issue.
Sorry
Sorry, but I side with the consumer in this case. 3G is faster than Edge, but is certainly not twice as fast on a regular basis. And that allows that you can even connect to 3G, or that the iPhone will hold the connection to the 3G network.
The reality of owning an iPhone 3G is that you do not regularly get twice as fast data connection when compared to Edge. That sounds like a reasonable case against the marketing.
Mine's nottwice as fast
In Many cases my 3G performance is actually faster than twice as fast, and in some cases I've actually switched to 3G from WiFi because the WiFi connection I was getting was awful.
Truth in advertising will never happen, it never has, I still can't Slam Dunk a basketball with my Air Jordans, besides, Apple has Always qualified the twice as fast
in print advertising, besides, anyone that believes any claims on network performance is looking for dissapointment, not only here, but in Road Runner's advertizing. But we all can pretty much agree the 3G is faster.
It depends
for me, yeah it pretty much is twice as fast (or faster) than iPhone 2G. But this is in the middle on NYC.
That said, that ad is definitely misleading. I don't think even in perfect conditions and under Wifi can the iPhone 3G get that kind of performance.
Whoever takes the money
Whoever takes the money and benefits from the false advertising is responsible. If the users have the freedom to choose Verizon and get the 'real' 3G, then there wouldn't be a lawsuit like this. Apple does receive more than $400 from AT&T for each iPhone, so the collusion is a joint effort.
Re: Wrong defendant
Man, this always comes up, and people just don't understand.
You can't sue AT&T over the 3G speeds. Why? They aren't the ones advertising that the iPhone is twice as fast. Apple does the advertising, so, logically, they are the ones being sued for false advertising.
You can argue the point that the phone isn't defective (it isn't). But arguing that no other country seems to have the problem (cause of better infrastructure) doesn't solve anything, since the advertising is going on in the US.
If they just advertised the phone, there'd be no problem. But making promises which rely on someone else to come through is just a huge mistake.
Re: Whoever takes the
Whoever takes the money and benefits from the false advertising is responsible.
That is completely true.
If the users have the freedom to choose Verizon and get the 'real' 3G, then there wouldn't be a lawsuit like this. Apple does receive more than $400 from AT&T for each iPhone, so the collusion is a joint effort.
This part is wrong. First, it doesn't matter what network they were on, the second they start saying "It's twice as fast!" you've got issues with someone.
What they need to do is stop hawking the speed. Of all things, it can be argued that the speed is a very insignificant factor to everything else about the iPhone (would a WinMobile phone be so much better just because it was 'twice as fast'?)
Keep the ads to the features, and then there's no problem (something they're doing now, by the way).
Secondly, AT&T isn't part of the collusion, as they are not part of the advertising. Apple controls all of that.
Plus, keep in mind the original iPhone 3G ads yakked on and on about it being 'twice as fast' but never specifically said what is was twice as fast as. I always thought that was misleading in all senses.
Crazy
So why sue Apple? Apple doesn't make and maintain a 3G cellular network.