6 ms·

As you guys seem to be confused on this so let me explain the rationale. Brazil has a consumer law, that defines what companies can/can't do when selling to co

As you guys seem to be confused on this so let me explain the rationale. Brazil has a consumer law, that defines what companies can/can't do when selling to consumers. It has like, warranty minimums for durable goods (90 days), "no questions asked" return right for virtual purchases (7 days), etc... among those there is a very special one called "Venda Casada", which translates to tie-in/combined sale. The "venda casada" article forbids the condition of an purchase to the necessity of purchasing another item (from whoever is selling it). For the Apple case, the judge understands that by removing the charger (and therefore selling as a separate product), Apple is forcing the consumer to purchase 2 items when acquiring an iPhone, as the charger is a must have item for a smartphone, and to make things worse, Apple has a proprietary charger so new customers and those migrating from other platforms (like android) will need to buy the charger. The rationale is pretty similar to a TV brand selling a TV without the charging cable, since everyone has a TV, so they surely must already have a charging cable. This is a law, it is not Brazil government/judiciary with some vendetta against Apple. Many companies have had decisions against them because of this. I hope this helps make things clearer. Cheers!

mbalyuzi 4y ago
Just wait 'till they discover that Apple Watches need an iPhone to work...
jonhohle 4y ago
Apple does not have a proprietary charger. It has a proprietary cable, which comes with the device. That cable plugs into a standard USB charger or port, even one’s that came with android phones.
- twawaaay 4y ago
  Apple says: "When using electronic accessories with your iPhone, ensure that they are either genuine Apple products or that they have been certified as Made for iPhone under the MFi program. Certified items come with the "Made for iPhone" logo on them and/or on their packaging. (...) Using uncertified or counterfeit accessories may damage your iPhone and/or adversely affect operation. Apple's warranty does not cover damage caused by use with a third party product that does not meet Apple's specifications." So you have to buy Apple charger to be able to use iPhone "correctly" and to preserve warrant.
  - crazygringo 4y ago
    No, that's simply not true. A charger is no more an accessory than an electrical outlet is. Obviously you can use any charger you want, and your warranty will be just fine.
    - NikolaNovak 4y ago
      Are you saying that as a lawyer experienced in this area of law and location... or like my dad dispenses legal advice, because "it's obviously true (to him)"? The OP quoted written Apple policy. If you want to persuasively negate it, it should have more than "Nope!" in response.
      - crazygringo 4y ago
        Let's put it this way: in reality, how is Apple ever going to know what charger you used? Obviously it can't. So in practice, which is all that matters, it can never void your warranty. And let's keep in mind, the entire purpose of a standard USB-C port is that you can use any charger. Otherwise Apple would use a proprietary connector on its charger, which it has never done. So let's just stay in the realm of common sense here, OK? :) No need to be demanding whether someone is a lawyer, sheesh.
        NikolaNovak 4y ago
        Fair enough; I should have said "as someone with legal expertise in this area", not "as a lawyer". But I DO believe it's important to distinguish when one is dispensing legal experience (even if not advice), vs "common sense". Different people will have different preferences and fair enough, but for what little it may be worth, I tend to come to HN to read about (ridiculously frequent and that's what makes this place wonderful!:) people's experience in obscure areas ("I read that article and I worked on Apollo software, here's how it works!" "Yeah, my experience in 2km hole drilling is different...", "CRISPR is great but here's the extremely obscure yet fascinating cutting edge biotechnology area I'm working on" etc), less so about common sense exchange :-)
        4y ago
- ajdude 4y ago
  I just bought an iPhone yesterday, and the charger no longer comes with a standard USB A port. It comes with a lightning-to-usbC cable, which it suggests I plug into my MacBook to charge. I do not have a USB-C outlet, so I either need to get a USB A to USB C adapter or a USB-C charger port if I want to plug my phone into the wall.
  - vinay427 4y ago
    Yes, and this sounds completely compatible with the GP comment. USB C (PD) charging is the non-proprietary standard that virtually every modern smartphone uses.
cassianoleal 4y ago
> to make things worse, Apple has a proprietary charger This is incorrect. Lightning is only used on the phone's end of the cable. The other end, which connects to the actual charger, is USB-C. This cable is included with the phone. What the judges are saying is that they not only need to include the cable, but also the actual charger, which in this case is in fact USB-C.
- twawaaay 4y ago
  Apple requires that you use Apple-made or Apple-certified charger and reserves the right to void warranty if you do not.
  - cassianoleal 4y ago
    Do you have a source for that? I've found some references to potentially voiding the warranty by using a non-MFI cable. But again, the cable is included with the phone.
    - philippejara 4y ago
      item c of "what is not covered by this warranty": https://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/products/ios-warranty-document-us.html https://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/products/ios-warranty-d... Note that the same clause is present in the brazillian warranty.
      - cassianoleal 4y ago
        > (c) to damage caused by use with a third party component or product that does not meet the Apple Product’s specifications (Apple Product specifications are available at www.apple.com under the technical specifications for each product and also available in stores) This one? It doesn't say the charger needs to be certified, only that it needs to meet specifications, which can be found in the tech specs for each product. The iPhone 14's specs [0] don't seem to mention any requirement for certifications. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong but so far I haven't found anything to support your claim. Could you please point me to where I can find the need for a certification? [0] https://www.apple.com/iphone-14/specs/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-14/specs/
twawaaay 4y ago
I would add different countries set their protection laws largely independently, meaning the specific protections will be different. US/EU are large enough so that our protection laws kinda become a possible standard for other countries and so we kinda got used to it actually being a standard. Brazil has every right to set their own protection laws and in this case it absolutely does not seem to me it is in any way unreasonable. At least not more unreasonable than US letting customers try stuff out and send it back for free which obviously is abused by large part of population and causes situations where people receive products that look suspiciously like they have already been opened and possibly even used by somebody previously.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  Actually, this is copied almost verbatim from some EU countries. It's just that the EU market is different enough that the same law has different effects.
crazygringo 4y ago
So does this apply to AirPods as well? Because those aren't sold with a charger either, never have been. My Apple Watch didn't either -- it comes with a charging puck that attached to a cable, but it doesn't come with a charger. Neither did my Magic Trackpad. Or Magic Keyboard. Not including a charger is becoming more and more standard. I'm curious if Brazil is applying this law equally to all products that charge over USB, or if it's just selectively targeting flagship devices like iPhones?
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  The law applies to every product. There is a decision to make over the charging medium details, but the one against iPhones apply to anything that charges over USB-C. For other USB substandards, other rules may apply. The rules for USB-C also may change as the market matures.
- dakial1 4y ago
  It applies. but I'm not sure if anyone is suing Apple over those or just the iPhones. Samsung was also fined earlier this year for the same reason. But keep in mind that this is not "Brazil" targeting, someone needs to sue Apple in the court for this (the judge ruling and fine) to be applied. In this case it was a consumer association, that is getting some 10MM BRL (2MM USD) out of this (so this is probably the association interest, not consumer fairness), but it is in Apple best interest to respect the law and avoid professional litigators to go after them.
- vitorgrs 4y ago
  First people need to sue Apple for this. I guess no one is suing Apple over airpods. Worth to remind that before going to court, there's consumer protection 'agency', known as PROCON, to resolve consumer issues before going to court. This happened with Samsung. Samsung resolve the issue before going to court. They give a free charger if you ask for.
jt2190 4y ago
“Venda Casasa” (Portuguese) https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venda_casada https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venda_casada
FoomFries 4y ago
So you can’t sell a physical console game without the console? This seems to follow similar logic.
- kevincox 4y ago
  Also where does it end. Do they also need to provide you the wall outlet? And the wires to wire that outlet to your electrical panel? It does seem that if it works with a standard USB or USB-C charger they should be fine not to include it to provide the consumer choice of what charger they want to use, be it Apple, third-party or an existing one that they had lying around.
- nzach 4y ago
  Not really. A game is content for your console, not a feature. A better analogy would be selling a pre-assembled PC without an operating system. And this is illegal in Brazil, although this law isn't strictly enforced.
- dakial1 4y ago
  The judge ruling is kind of a stretch of that law. Because it was first conceived to avoid forcing consumers to buy 2 items together (if you don't buy X I can't sell you Y), or putting quantity limitations (you can only buy 4 or more of X, otherwise I won't sell to you). Of course you can do promo combos (3 for the price of 2) but that shouldn't be the only option, the consumer needs to be able to buy the standalone product.

mbalyuzi 4y ago

Just wait 'till they discover that Apple Watches need an iPhone to work...

jonhohle 4y ago

Apple does not have a proprietary charger. It has a proprietary cable, which comes with the device. That cable plugs into a standard USB charger or port, even one’s that came with android phones.

twawaaay 4y ago
Apple says: "When using electronic accessories with your iPhone, ensure that they are either genuine Apple products or that they have been certified as Made for iPhone under the MFi program. Certified items come with the "Made for iPhone" logo on them and/or on their packaging. (...) Using uncertified or counterfeit accessories may damage your iPhone and/or adversely affect operation. Apple's warranty does not cover damage caused by use with a third party product that does not meet Apple's specifications." So you have to buy Apple charger to be able to use iPhone "correctly" and to preserve warrant.
- crazygringo 4y ago
  No, that's simply not true. A charger is no more an accessory than an electrical outlet is. Obviously you can use any charger you want, and your warranty will be just fine.
  - NikolaNovak 4y ago
    Are you saying that as a lawyer experienced in this area of law and location... or like my dad dispenses legal advice, because "it's obviously true (to him)"? The OP quoted written Apple policy. If you want to persuasively negate it, it should have more than "Nope!" in response.
    - crazygringo 4y ago
      Let's put it this way: in reality, how is Apple ever going to know what charger you used? Obviously it can't. So in practice, which is all that matters, it can never void your warranty. And let's keep in mind, the entire purpose of a standard USB-C port is that you can use any charger. Otherwise Apple would use a proprietary connector on its charger, which it has never done. So let's just stay in the realm of common sense here, OK? :) No need to be demanding whether someone is a lawyer, sheesh.
      - NikolaNovak 4y ago
        Fair enough; I should have said "as someone with legal expertise in this area", not "as a lawyer". But I DO believe it's important to distinguish when one is dispensing legal experience (even if not advice), vs "common sense". Different people will have different preferences and fair enough, but for what little it may be worth, I tend to come to HN to read about (ridiculously frequent and that's what makes this place wonderful!:) people's experience in obscure areas ("I read that article and I worked on Apollo software, here's how it works!" "Yeah, my experience in 2km hole drilling is different...", "CRISPR is great but here's the extremely obscure yet fascinating cutting edge biotechnology area I'm working on" etc), less so about common sense exchange :-)
      - 4y ago
ajdude 4y ago
I just bought an iPhone yesterday, and the charger no longer comes with a standard USB A port. It comes with a lightning-to-usbC cable, which it suggests I plug into my MacBook to charge. I do not have a USB-C outlet, so I either need to get a USB A to USB C adapter or a USB-C charger port if I want to plug my phone into the wall.
- vinay427 4y ago
  Yes, and this sounds completely compatible with the GP comment. USB C (PD) charging is the non-proprietary standard that virtually every modern smartphone uses.

cassianoleal 4y ago

> to make things worse, Apple has a proprietary charger This is incorrect. Lightning is only used on the phone's end of the cable. The other end, which connects to the actual charger, is USB-C. This cable is included with the phone. What the judges are saying is that they not only need to include the cable, but also the actual charger, which in this case is in fact USB-C.

twawaaay 4y ago
Apple requires that you use Apple-made or Apple-certified charger and reserves the right to void warranty if you do not.
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  Do you have a source for that? I've found some references to potentially voiding the warranty by using a non-MFI cable. But again, the cable is included with the phone.
  - philippejara 4y ago
    item c of "what is not covered by this warranty": https://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/products/ios-warranty-document-us.html https://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/products/ios-warranty-d... Note that the same clause is present in the brazillian warranty.
    - cassianoleal 4y ago
      > (c) to damage caused by use with a third party component or product that does not meet the Apple Product’s specifications (Apple Product specifications are available at www.apple.com under the technical specifications for each product and also available in stores) This one? It doesn't say the charger needs to be certified, only that it needs to meet specifications, which can be found in the tech specs for each product. The iPhone 14's specs [0] don't seem to mention any requirement for certifications. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong but so far I haven't found anything to support your claim. Could you please point me to where I can find the need for a certification? [0] https://www.apple.com/iphone-14/specs/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-14/specs/

twawaaay 4y ago

I would add different countries set their protection laws largely independently, meaning the specific protections will be different. US/EU are large enough so that our protection laws kinda become a possible standard for other countries and so we kinda got used to it actually being a standard. Brazil has every right to set their own protection laws and in this case it absolutely does not seem to me it is in any way unreasonable. At least not more unreasonable than US letting customers try stuff out and send it back for free which obviously is abused by large part of population and causes situations where people receive products that look suspiciously like they have already been opened and possibly even used by somebody previously.

marcosdumay 4y ago
Actually, this is copied almost verbatim from some EU countries. It's just that the EU market is different enough that the same law has different effects.

crazygringo 4y ago

So does this apply to AirPods as well? Because those aren't sold with a charger either, never have been. My Apple Watch didn't either -- it comes with a charging puck that attached to a cable, but it doesn't come with a charger. Neither did my Magic Trackpad. Or Magic Keyboard. Not including a charger is becoming more and more standard. I'm curious if Brazil is applying this law equally to all products that charge over USB, or if it's just selectively targeting flagship devices like iPhones?

marcosdumay 4y ago
The law applies to every product. There is a decision to make over the charging medium details, but the one against iPhones apply to anything that charges over USB-C. For other USB substandards, other rules may apply. The rules for USB-C also may change as the market matures.
dakial1 4y ago
It applies. but I'm not sure if anyone is suing Apple over those or just the iPhones. Samsung was also fined earlier this year for the same reason. But keep in mind that this is not "Brazil" targeting, someone needs to sue Apple in the court for this (the judge ruling and fine) to be applied. In this case it was a consumer association, that is getting some 10MM BRL (2MM USD) out of this (so this is probably the association interest, not consumer fairness), but it is in Apple best interest to respect the law and avoid professional litigators to go after them.
vitorgrs 4y ago
First people need to sue Apple for this. I guess no one is suing Apple over airpods. Worth to remind that before going to court, there's consumer protection 'agency', known as PROCON, to resolve consumer issues before going to court. This happened with Samsung. Samsung resolve the issue before going to court. They give a free charger if you ask for.

jt2190 4y ago

“Venda Casasa” (Portuguese) https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venda_casada https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venda_casada

FoomFries 4y ago

So you can’t sell a physical console game without the console? This seems to follow similar logic.

kevincox 4y ago
Also where does it end. Do they also need to provide you the wall outlet? And the wires to wire that outlet to your electrical panel? It does seem that if it works with a standard USB or USB-C charger they should be fine not to include it to provide the consumer choice of what charger they want to use, be it Apple, third-party or an existing one that they had lying around.
nzach 4y ago
Not really. A game is content for your console, not a feature. A better analogy would be selling a pre-assembled PC without an operating system. And this is illegal in Brazil, although this law isn't strictly enforced.
dakial1 4y ago
The judge ruling is kind of a stretch of that law. Because it was first conceived to avoid forcing consumers to buy 2 items together (if you don't buy X I can't sell you Y), or putting quantity limitations (you can only buy 4 or more of X, otherwise I won't sell to you). Of course you can do promo combos (3 for the price of 2) but that shouldn't be the only option, the consumer needs to be able to buy the standalone product.