9 ms·

Australian regulator alleges Apple misled iPad/iPhone users over consumer rights

119 points by richardboegli 10y ago

grawlinson 10y ago
Consumer protection law is very strong in Australia & New Zealand. I'm glad to see government taking a tough stance towards what amounts to corporations weaseling out of doing their fair part.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
defined 10y ago
Um, shouldn't that be "misled"?
- franciskim 10y ago
  Yes
nodesocket 10y ago
Nope. Just another struggling government (see Ireland/EU) trying to extract capital from successful US corporations. -edited-
- batiudrami 10y ago
  These have always been the rules and Apple sure charge enough of a premium in Australia (14% more pre-tax) to cover the additional costs. Plus it seems intuitively correct to me - using a third party repair to refuse service on a completely unrelated issue is anti-consumer and all round garbage behaviour which has somehow become accepted as the norm in mobile phone handsets. Also, (and apologies for the tangent) I'm not sure how you'd describe a country whose last recession was 25 years ago is "struggling" (regardless of my personal issues with Australian politics).
  - jolux 10y ago
    If a third party fingerprint sensor is installed, the device's security is compromised. Are they supposed to provide a new Touch ID sensor for free? Is that the solution?
    - cynix 10y ago
      I think the problem was that they were refusing service regardless of whether a 3rd party fingerprint sensor was installed.
- aryehof 10y ago
  A government of a country that leads the USA in almost every public measure and index, including democracy, quality of life and life expectancy. Certainly it can't match the USA in prison population, military size, murder rate, or size of ego. One that tries through consumer laws to ensure that people are not taken advantage of by huge corporate interests seeking to only maximize their profits.
  - j4kp07 10y ago
    "Almost every public measure and index" For one, democracy and quality of life are subjective. Second, the other data points are cherry-picked. Australia has a higher cost of living, a higher fertility rate, the Top Universities in the world 52/100 USA vs 4/100 Australia[1], the Top Medical Universities in the World 22/49 America vs 5/49 Australia[2]. And I could give you plenty more[3], but I think this proves my point. [1] http://www.thebestschools.org/features/100-best-universities-in-world-today/ http://www.thebestschools.org/features/100-best-universities... [2] https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/medicine https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/universi... [3] http://www.zdnet.com/article/us-beats-australia-in-data-protection-laws-microsoft/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/us-beats-australia-in-data-prot...
    - redcap 10y ago
      Try accounting for population size before touting universities as a good measure of anything. Try looking up cost of tertiary education and maybe cost of medical care and see who ends up better. You haven't proved your point.
    - stephen_g 10y ago
      When most of your population lives in three major cities, you only need 4/100 of the top universities! It's generally a pretty great place to live.
- teh_klev 10y ago
  "Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
culturestate 10y ago
If I try to look at this from Apple's side, I can sort of see the logic: the problem stems from the OEM Touch ID sensor being replaced with a mismatched (or entirely third party) sensor during a screen repair, which screws with the hardware security chain on the device and generally makes it difficult to troubleshoot problems even if they seem unrelated. This is an issue inherent in trying to apply consumer rights laws that were written (or at least initially conceived) when the KitchenAid mixer was the pinnacle of household technology to the age of smartphones. As a consumer, I would love to have a better legal framework for situations like this. As a guy who has manufactured and sold a mass market tech hardware product, I have no idea how to realistically make that work.
- gameshot911 10y ago
  My understanding from the article is that Apple might be able to refuse service if they were to look at the device and determine the problem is caused by the 3rd party sensor. What they can't do however is totally refuse service based _solely_ on the fact that a 3rd party repair happened at all.
  - benchaney 10y ago
    That seems like it would run in to problems in practice. What if there is no way to directly link 3rd party repair to malfunctions, but devices that had undergone third party repair malfunctioned more frequently. On the one hand, Apple shouldn't have to take on the burden of causing problems that were caused by third party repair. On the other hand, some of the devices would have malfunctioned anyway, and from the outside it appear like Apple is refusing service solely because of a 3rd party repair.
    - spangry 10y ago
      The situation sounds remarkably similar to auto-manufacturers building cars that can only be services by 'licensed technicians' (usually their dealer network). I wonder if that is the bigger issue the ACCC has in mind (and is trying to discourage): manufacturers who sell a product that creates a subsequent and artificial 'captive market'.
wildchild 10y ago
iSheep will never learn.
- sctb 10y ago
  We've banned this account for posting mostly uncivil, unsubstantive comments. We're happy to unban accounts if you email us at hn@ycombinator.com and we believe you'll post within the guidelines in the future.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Bud 10y ago
If you're going to rewrite the headline, don't misspell words. It's "misled", and not "mislead".
- jessaustin 10y ago
  Thanks for pointing that out. I had had uncharitable thoughts about AC&CC...
bbrian 10y ago
In Ireland, there are no Apple stores but I've often been to the repair section of the main retailer (chargers!) and their policy is obviously deception. When there's a problem they ask is the device under warranty (one year) and unless you're aware of your EU consumer rights, they won't tell you and are hoping you'll walk away, the truth being: "Under Irish consumer law, consumers are entitled to a free of charge repair or replacement, discount or refund by the seller, of defective goods or goods which do not conform with the contract of sale. These rights expire six years from delivery of the goods." [1] My other negative experience was when my iPhone 5 was covered under recalls for the battery [2] and sleep/wake button [3], but Apple refused to fix it without a full screen replacement, for a "crack" so small I hadn't even noticed before sending it in for repair. It became a party piece of mine to challenge people to find the crack. [*] http://imgur.com/a/6qtBi http://imgur.com/a/6qtBi [1] http://www.apple.com/ie/legal/statutory-warranty/ http://www.apple.com/ie/legal/statutory-warranty/ [2] https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-will-replace-your-defective-iphone-5-battery-for-free/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-will-replace-your-defective-... [3] https://www.apple.com/support/iphone5-sleepwakebutton/ https://www.apple.com/support/iphone5-sleepwakebutton/
- legulere 10y ago
  The Apple warranty is with Apple itself (and the authorized repairshops). The EU warranty (2 years minimum, varies throughout countries) is with the seller of the device. I once had a defective SSD in a macbook air out of the 1 year apple warranty period and in the 2 year EU mandated period. Bought on the Apple online shop. There were warnings on the website that it might end up costing money and it really seemed like apple was disliking the EU mandated warranty. I was sent that evening to an authorized repair shop. There they told me that the repair will take longer (up to a week) as the device does not have the 1 year warranty anymore and needs to get cleared by Apple to get repaired. On the next morning at around 8 AM I got a call that I can pick my device up.
  - gambiting 10y ago
    EU mandated warranty is not a warranty that people have in mind when they say that word. EU barely mandates that the manufacturer has to replace/fix a product which has manufacturing faults up to 2 years after purchase(this actually extends up to 6 years in some cases). However, it's up to you to show that something is a manufacturing fault - an incorrectly assembled iPhone case for example, you can expect Apple to fix that within 6 years of buying the phone, and they can't say it's out of the original 1 year warranty so they won't fix it. But if your phone dies 2 years after buying it, they don't have to fix it by law, unless you can prove that it died because of a manufacturing error.
ksk 10y ago
I hope they win. I should not be forced to go to Apple for minor repairs when its obvious they overcharge. I'm glad Subaru doesn't deny me service because I put an aftermarket stereo or used a different garage to repair my headlights. Apple _already_ is capable of diagnosing faults, and finding out which component is causing the problem. If it turns out that the problem is a third party part, they can offer to replace the part. This is standard procedure everywhere.
- georgespencer 10y ago
  > I'm glad Subaru doesn't deny me service because I put an aftermarket stereo or used a different garage to repair my headlights. This is not analogous. The analogy here is that the aftermarket stereo or different garage caused the faults which your Subaru is experiencing, and you are expecting Subaru to fix them. Predatory pricing is a separate issue, but this is about whether Apple is obliged to make good on repairs to devices (both under warranty and at cost) where widespread component failure could have been caused by another repair shop or component. Would Subaru repair your engine if it stopped working after you replaced the camshaft with a different type of camshaft?
  - disordinary 10y ago
    No, it clearly states that the apple is liable for faults that the aftermarket part didn't cause. Any faults with the aftermarket part or faults caused by that repair are the responsibility for the person who installed the aftermarket part. The example is relevant.
    - georgespencer 10y ago
      The point the post illustrated is that an aftermarket part and/or an inexpert repair job could cause widespread damage to other components, and at times do so imperceptibly.
      - ksk 10y ago
        Can you give a practical example of such a thing happening in anything except the rarest of rarest case? If you're always concerned with what's possible, then you'll find that anythings possible, and soon you're buying insurance against a meteor strike damaging your car :P Also lets not forget that legal frameworks are perfectly capable of handling exceptional circumstances. So even if it was the case that the part caused damage to other parts, it would be an argument that a court would be sympathetic to.
dovdovdov 10y ago
Consumer guarantees do not apply if you: [...] - misused a product in any way that caused the problem [...] - asked for a service to be done in a certain way against the advice of the business or were unclear about what you wanted source: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees/consumer-guarantees https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees... Good luck with that. Also, Apple (US) licenses all their software to you without any warranty. If you wish to keep using their device, you have to accept that the very first time you turn it on. By this, Apple tries to protect your privacy (which is coincidentally also now basically their core business value) by not letting 3rd parties compromise your phone's security.
- rmccue 10y ago
  The consumer guarantees are specific rights that you cannot sign away; that is, there's no such thing as no warranty. Whether you agree to it when you turn your phone on is irrelevant. As for misuse, that applies only if it caused the problem. The ACCC's case is that Apple refuses to do any repairs, even when they would be guaranteed (such as a manufacturing fault in the speaker), when the phone has been repaired in any way (such as the screen being replaced). If Apple can prove that these third party repairs do affect their ability to comply with the law, then they may win. I doubt that's the case personally.
disordinary 10y ago
Lots of US companies aren't used to the consumer protection laws in other countries, Valve recently got in trouble for their steam refund policies. Here in NZ stated warranties mean nothing the actual warranty is what is a reasonable expectation, I'd expect a laptop to work for at least five years and so my expectation is Apple or an Apple authorised repairer would service or replace it for the entirety of those five years.
- SubNoizey 10y ago
  Yeah, the ACCC are great here. They could always do more but it seems like they're one of the most active parts of our government.
  - disordinary 10y ago
    Another interesting part of the Consumer Guarantees Act (which I'm guessing is similar to the ACCC) is if a product is replaced with something new then the lifespan of the item resets, so if my laptop is replaced three years into an expected five year lifespan then I get another expected five years. It's amazing how companies try to get away with things though.
    - rmccue 10y ago
      The Consumer Guarantees Act is like the Australian Consumer Law; the ACCC is just the body responsible for enforcing it and representing consumers. The analogous body in NZ is the Commerce Commission: http://www.comcom.govt.nz/the-commission/making-a-complaint/ http://www.comcom.govt.nz/the-commission/making-a-complaint/

119 points by richardboegli 10y ago

Consumer protection law is very strong in Australia & New Zealand. I'm glad to see government taking a tough stance towards what amounts to corporations weaseling out of doing their fair part.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

defined 10y ago

Um, shouldn't that be "misled"?

franciskim 10y ago
Yes

nodesocket 10y ago

Nope. Just another struggling government (see Ireland/EU) trying to extract capital from successful US corporations. -edited-

batiudrami 10y ago
These have always been the rules and Apple sure charge enough of a premium in Australia (14% more pre-tax) to cover the additional costs. Plus it seems intuitively correct to me - using a third party repair to refuse service on a completely unrelated issue is anti-consumer and all round garbage behaviour which has somehow become accepted as the norm in mobile phone handsets. Also, (and apologies for the tangent) I'm not sure how you'd describe a country whose last recession was 25 years ago is "struggling" (regardless of my personal issues with Australian politics).
- jolux 10y ago
  If a third party fingerprint sensor is installed, the device's security is compromised. Are they supposed to provide a new Touch ID sensor for free? Is that the solution?
  - cynix 10y ago
    I think the problem was that they were refusing service regardless of whether a 3rd party fingerprint sensor was installed.
aryehof 10y ago
A government of a country that leads the USA in almost every public measure and index, including democracy, quality of life and life expectancy. Certainly it can't match the USA in prison population, military size, murder rate, or size of ego. One that tries through consumer laws to ensure that people are not taken advantage of by huge corporate interests seeking to only maximize their profits.
- j4kp07 10y ago
  "Almost every public measure and index" For one, democracy and quality of life are subjective. Second, the other data points are cherry-picked. Australia has a higher cost of living, a higher fertility rate, the Top Universities in the world 52/100 USA vs 4/100 Australia[1], the Top Medical Universities in the World 22/49 America vs 5/49 Australia[2]. And I could give you plenty more[3], but I think this proves my point. [1] http://www.thebestschools.org/features/100-best-universities-in-world-today/ http://www.thebestschools.org/features/100-best-universities... [2] https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/medicine https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/universi... [3] http://www.zdnet.com/article/us-beats-australia-in-data-protection-laws-microsoft/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/us-beats-australia-in-data-prot...
  - redcap 10y ago
    Try accounting for population size before touting universities as a good measure of anything. Try looking up cost of tertiary education and maybe cost of medical care and see who ends up better. You haven't proved your point.
  - stephen_g 10y ago
    When most of your population lives in three major cities, you only need 4/100 of the top universities! It's generally a pretty great place to live.
teh_klev 10y ago
"Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

culturestate 10y ago

If I try to look at this from Apple's side, I can sort of see the logic: the problem stems from the OEM Touch ID sensor being replaced with a mismatched (or entirely third party) sensor during a screen repair, which screws with the hardware security chain on the device and generally makes it difficult to troubleshoot problems even if they seem unrelated. This is an issue inherent in trying to apply consumer rights laws that were written (or at least initially conceived) when the KitchenAid mixer was the pinnacle of household technology to the age of smartphones. As a consumer, I would love to have a better legal framework for situations like this. As a guy who has manufactured and sold a mass market tech hardware product, I have no idea how to realistically make that work.

gameshot911 10y ago
My understanding from the article is that Apple might be able to refuse service if they were to look at the device and determine the problem is caused by the 3rd party sensor. What they can't do however is totally refuse service based _solely_ on the fact that a 3rd party repair happened at all.
- benchaney 10y ago
  That seems like it would run in to problems in practice. What if there is no way to directly link 3rd party repair to malfunctions, but devices that had undergone third party repair malfunctioned more frequently. On the one hand, Apple shouldn't have to take on the burden of causing problems that were caused by third party repair. On the other hand, some of the devices would have malfunctioned anyway, and from the outside it appear like Apple is refusing service solely because of a 3rd party repair.
  - spangry 10y ago
    The situation sounds remarkably similar to auto-manufacturers building cars that can only be services by 'licensed technicians' (usually their dealer network). I wonder if that is the bigger issue the ACCC has in mind (and is trying to discourage): manufacturers who sell a product that creates a subsequent and artificial 'captive market'.

wildchild 10y ago

iSheep will never learn.

sctb 10y ago
We've banned this account for posting mostly uncivil, unsubstantive comments. We're happy to unban accounts if you email us at hn@ycombinator.com and we believe you'll post within the guidelines in the future.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Bud 10y ago

If you're going to rewrite the headline, don't misspell words. It's "misled", and not "mislead".

jessaustin 10y ago
Thanks for pointing that out. I had had uncharitable thoughts about AC&CC...

bbrian 10y ago

In Ireland, there are no Apple stores but I've often been to the repair section of the main retailer (chargers!) and their policy is obviously deception. When there's a problem they ask is the device under warranty (one year) and unless you're aware of your EU consumer rights, they won't tell you and are hoping you'll walk away, the truth being: "Under Irish consumer law, consumers are entitled to a free of charge repair or replacement, discount or refund by the seller, of defective goods or goods which do not conform with the contract of sale. These rights expire six years from delivery of the goods." [1] My other negative experience was when my iPhone 5 was covered under recalls for the battery [2] and sleep/wake button [3], but Apple refused to fix it without a full screen replacement, for a "crack" so small I hadn't even noticed before sending it in for repair. It became a party piece of mine to challenge people to find the crack. [*] http://imgur.com/a/6qtBi http://imgur.com/a/6qtBi [1] http://www.apple.com/ie/legal/statutory-warranty/ http://www.apple.com/ie/legal/statutory-warranty/ [2] https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-will-replace-your-defective-iphone-5-battery-for-free/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-will-replace-your-defective-... [3] https://www.apple.com/support/iphone5-sleepwakebutton/ https://www.apple.com/support/iphone5-sleepwakebutton/

legulere 10y ago
The Apple warranty is with Apple itself (and the authorized repairshops). The EU warranty (2 years minimum, varies throughout countries) is with the seller of the device. I once had a defective SSD in a macbook air out of the 1 year apple warranty period and in the 2 year EU mandated period. Bought on the Apple online shop. There were warnings on the website that it might end up costing money and it really seemed like apple was disliking the EU mandated warranty. I was sent that evening to an authorized repair shop. There they told me that the repair will take longer (up to a week) as the device does not have the 1 year warranty anymore and needs to get cleared by Apple to get repaired. On the next morning at around 8 AM I got a call that I can pick my device up.
- gambiting 10y ago
  EU mandated warranty is not a warranty that people have in mind when they say that word. EU barely mandates that the manufacturer has to replace/fix a product which has manufacturing faults up to 2 years after purchase(this actually extends up to 6 years in some cases). However, it's up to you to show that something is a manufacturing fault - an incorrectly assembled iPhone case for example, you can expect Apple to fix that within 6 years of buying the phone, and they can't say it's out of the original 1 year warranty so they won't fix it. But if your phone dies 2 years after buying it, they don't have to fix it by law, unless you can prove that it died because of a manufacturing error.

ksk 10y ago

I hope they win. I should not be forced to go to Apple for minor repairs when its obvious they overcharge. I'm glad Subaru doesn't deny me service because I put an aftermarket stereo or used a different garage to repair my headlights. Apple _already_ is capable of diagnosing faults, and finding out which component is causing the problem. If it turns out that the problem is a third party part, they can offer to replace the part. This is standard procedure everywhere.

georgespencer 10y ago
> I'm glad Subaru doesn't deny me service because I put an aftermarket stereo or used a different garage to repair my headlights. This is not analogous. The analogy here is that the aftermarket stereo or different garage caused the faults which your Subaru is experiencing, and you are expecting Subaru to fix them. Predatory pricing is a separate issue, but this is about whether Apple is obliged to make good on repairs to devices (both under warranty and at cost) where widespread component failure could have been caused by another repair shop or component. Would Subaru repair your engine if it stopped working after you replaced the camshaft with a different type of camshaft?
- disordinary 10y ago
  No, it clearly states that the apple is liable for faults that the aftermarket part didn't cause. Any faults with the aftermarket part or faults caused by that repair are the responsibility for the person who installed the aftermarket part. The example is relevant.
  - georgespencer 10y ago
    The point the post illustrated is that an aftermarket part and/or an inexpert repair job could cause widespread damage to other components, and at times do so imperceptibly.
    - ksk 10y ago
      Can you give a practical example of such a thing happening in anything except the rarest of rarest case? If you're always concerned with what's possible, then you'll find that anythings possible, and soon you're buying insurance against a meteor strike damaging your car :P Also lets not forget that legal frameworks are perfectly capable of handling exceptional circumstances. So even if it was the case that the part caused damage to other parts, it would be an argument that a court would be sympathetic to.

dovdovdov 10y ago

Consumer guarantees do not apply if you: [...] - misused a product in any way that caused the problem [...] - asked for a service to be done in a certain way against the advice of the business or were unclear about what you wanted source: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees/consumer-guarantees https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees... Good luck with that. Also, Apple (US) licenses all their software to you without any warranty. If you wish to keep using their device, you have to accept that the very first time you turn it on. By this, Apple tries to protect your privacy (which is coincidentally also now basically their core business value) by not letting 3rd parties compromise your phone's security.

rmccue 10y ago
The consumer guarantees are specific rights that you cannot sign away; that is, there's no such thing as no warranty. Whether you agree to it when you turn your phone on is irrelevant. As for misuse, that applies only if it caused the problem. The ACCC's case is that Apple refuses to do any repairs, even when they would be guaranteed (such as a manufacturing fault in the speaker), when the phone has been repaired in any way (such as the screen being replaced). If Apple can prove that these third party repairs do affect their ability to comply with the law, then they may win. I doubt that's the case personally.

disordinary 10y ago

Lots of US companies aren't used to the consumer protection laws in other countries, Valve recently got in trouble for their steam refund policies. Here in NZ stated warranties mean nothing the actual warranty is what is a reasonable expectation, I'd expect a laptop to work for at least five years and so my expectation is Apple or an Apple authorised repairer would service or replace it for the entirety of those five years.

SubNoizey 10y ago
Yeah, the ACCC are great here. They could always do more but it seems like they're one of the most active parts of our government.
- disordinary 10y ago
  Another interesting part of the Consumer Guarantees Act (which I'm guessing is similar to the ACCC) is if a product is replaced with something new then the lifespan of the item resets, so if my laptop is replaced three years into an expected five year lifespan then I get another expected five years. It's amazing how companies try to get away with things though.
  - rmccue 10y ago
    The Consumer Guarantees Act is like the Australian Consumer Law; the ACCC is just the body responsible for enforcing it and representing consumers. The analogous body in NZ is the Commerce Commission: http://www.comcom.govt.nz/the-commission/making-a-complaint/ http://www.comcom.govt.nz/the-commission/making-a-complaint/