“Complaints over Apple’s use restrictions and recent software update for the iPhone have erupted in two lawsuits alleging Apple and its carrier partner, AT&T, engaged in illegal monopolistic behavior,” The Associated Press reports.
“Two separate lawsuits were filed Friday in San Jose — one in federal court and the other in state court and both seeking class-action status,” AP reports.
“The federal case accuses the companies of unfair business practices and violations of antitrust, telecommunications and warranty laws. The state case raises some of the same allegations,” AP reports.
“By not allowing consumers to modify their iPhones to work on other carrier networks, the two companies conspired from the beginning of their partnership to maintain a monopoly, the federal lawsuit alleges,” AP reports. “The companies are unlawfully restricting consumer choice by preventing users from ‘unlocking’ their iPhones, and Apple intentionally disabled unofficial third-party programs or rendered unlocked phones useless with its software update, the lawsuit alleges.”
Full article here.
You’d think that no other carrier ever had an exclusive on a mobile phone before or that a company would be so bold as to no support unsupported apps and hacks.
Don’t you need to have something like 90% market share to even be considered a monopoly in any market? Just curious.
In related news, Microsoft cleared of having a monopoly on operating systems with its 95% strangle hold on the computer industry. . .
Isn’t this a form of flattery? If the iPhone sucked or was even just ok, no one would be upset, because this has been standard practice for years.
Of course it’s hard to say what the Monopoly suits again MS are about then. Why don’t people just switch to Mac?
It’s like complaining that the Chevy dealership has a monopoly on Chevys and that this somehow prevents one from buying a Ford.
This just in: Microsoft operating system penetration upgraded to 98%. Still NOT a monopoly.
Another ridiculous lawsuit. If Apple were selling the world’s only cellphone, this might make some sense, but there are hundreds of other cellphones, many with more functionality than the iPhone.
What people are really whining about is that Apple has released the first cellphone with a great, simple to use, interface, and they want in on the action. Unfortunately, to get their foot in the game, Apple had to enter into a financial relationship with a carrier, and that contract’s perfectly legal, and certainly not unprecedented.
I remember quite clearly a few years back when I was wowed by Motorola’s RAZR, but couldn’t get it because it wasn’t available on my carrier. I had a simple choice, and chose to pass it up…end of discussion.
This is some lawyers’ extortion suit begging to be settled.
A monopoly is a situation in which one company has gained control of the market for a particular good or service. This is in direct conflict with the values of liberalism which emphasize competition among numerous producers.
Even more when it acts so to undermine competitors and shutting down alternatives in a variety of ways.
Hardly that can be applied to Apple and the iPhone.
It’s an iPhone Monopoly!!!!
Actually, it more like buying a Chevy and then saying you can only fill it with gas from only one gas company even though the car can use gas from any petroleum company.
It’s not at all like that.
How quick before the courts toss these nuts out on their butts? I’m sorry, but you CAN buy other smartphones..5 months on the market is hardly enough time to be a monopoly. Sure, I don’t like that there’s no choice for carrier (yet), and yeah, I’d like a more open platform, but let’s petition for a 3rd party SDK, not file frivolous suits…
This is an example of why some lawyers make good firewood.
ONLY THE GOV’T CAN CREATE A MONOPOLY. MEANING NO OTHERS ARE ALLOWED TO LEGALLY COMPETE FOR A GIVEN MARKET (ALA THE OLD MA BELL, OR THE USPS)
AS LONG AS PEOPLE HAVE A “CHOICE” AND “CHOICE” IS THE OPERATIVE WORD, THERE IS NO MONOPOLY – PERIOD.
GO A TO MERCEDES DEALER AND TRY TO BUY AN AUDI, THEN SUE BENZ BECAUSE YOU CAN GET AN AUDI THERE (SILLY) – CASE CLOSED – GO BUY A CHEAP P.O.S. PHONE !!!
And the iPhone market share is what again? 95% of the cellphone market? What? It’s not? Surely 80% then! No?
Wait a minute… you mean Apple is using the fact that it invented the iPhone to keep a monopoly on the iPhone!??! HORRORS!
Will someone please file a lawsuit against the lawyers in these cases for wasting everyone’s collective time and the court’s (and therefore the taxpayers’) money in processing this crap?
I mean, surely we could start a class action suit against all class action lawyers? Citing collective misuse and abuse of public resources, causing irreparable damage to the judicial system, public trust and confidence in the judiciary, and draining the taxpayers of countless millions of dollars propping up the individual gains of a few thousand petty law-thieves.
Surely this proposed suit is no less ridiculous than the recent suits against Apple.
Any lawyers out there feeling like tilting at windmills with me?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Magic word: Hell (how do it know!?)
@Dave L: I think you hit the nail on the head, as far as what many people are thinking. The iPhone *can* run third party apps, so why not?
But the more I explore this line of thinking, the more I see how this kind of situation exists throughout the consumer world. My label printer only wants labels from its manufacturer. The printer manufacturer wants you to buy only their ink. My cell phone carrier (and it’s not AT&T;) only wants me to buy their music, software, and accessories. My vehicle manufacturer tells me to buy only genuine company certified parts. My tap water filter device is made especially for filters created by the same company. Everyone is trying to make money on the little stuff that keeps the big stuff going (sometimes they are even willing to lose money on the big stuff).
I don’t like it. But it’s common practice.
iPhone Monopoly? That would be a fun game!
GOOD!!
Consumers want CHOICE!!
Unlocked iPhones FOR ALL!!!
@blucaso: “surely we could start a class action suit against all class action lawyers?”
Priceless. What a beautiful idea. If only….
The real cause of these ridiculous lawsuits is that our judges don’t laugh them out of court. That, and the fact that we don’t have a “loser pays” system.
P.S. Will the fake “Jake” give it a rest?
Basically this lawsuit says Apple & AT&T;are limiting choice and should be penalized.
Wake up people!… You can still buy another device and/or choose any carrier you want. Both Apple and AT&T;were very clear upfront and this lawsuit and others like it are ludicrous.
On a related note…
There is nothing illegal about a monopoly. Using anti-competitive tactics and/or breaking the law (Microsoft) to gain the monopoly IS. If a company has garnered a large market share due to innovative and highly-desired product… good for them!
AT&T;/ Apple
with a iPhone Monopoly… duh.
It is the wrong use of the word.
And the product has not been out long enough to claim this.
Too many people writing about whatever some editor want to publish.
I wonder if cingular (now at&t;) & Motorola went thru all this hassle when they were the only ones you could get a RAZR thru?? I mean I wanted one but did not get it until it finally came to my carrier (years later)… an unwise choice, and one I’ve since regretted. Sounds like the moto / at&t;deal is about the same one as the current apple / at&t;one. And I don’t recall hearing all the stink about it as the iPhone ordeal. Sad, sad, sad…
That’s it! I’m starting a class-action lawsuit against Steak n’ Shake. It’s the only place a person can get a delicious Turtle Caramel Nut Sippable(TM) Sundae milk shake and there simply isn’t one close to me.
Who’s with me?!
How about when I wanted a Treo 750p but I am with AT&T;and the treo is sold exclusively through Sprint? I guess that’s not the same at all.
I mean 755p. Whoops.
It is not illegal to have a monopoly. It is illegal to use it to gain a competitive advantage in other transactions. Whether Apple has a problem or not would seem to hinge on whether the market in question is “wireless devices” of iPhones alone. It seems like a stretch to identify a market for iPhones entirely separate from wireless communication devices in general. The iPhone may be the best one of the breed, but, it does not seem to be an entirely different kind of device altogether.
This seems like a nuisance law suit. I wonder if it is being funded by M$.
Countries like Saudi Arabia and Malaysia don’t have phones locked to certain carriers, you buy a phone from an electronics or cellphone store and pop in any sim you like.
I understand that Apple needed to get a foot in the door with the aid of AT&T;in the U.S., and that visual voicemail had to be supported from the carrier, but I’m afraid that this trend of locking and price gouging will spread to other countries as well.
I know you guys are dedicated lemmings following in whatever line you are instructed to queue up in, but seriously most of you people are completely head-fucked. Okay, because of the way cell phones have been sold by the cellular industry in the US we are stuck with locked iPhones. Fine. But why the hell are you pissed off at people trying to change that, or at other countries that don’t permit similar restrictions?
If the iPhone is unlocked Apple will sell more phones. If the iPhone is open to third party applications, Apple will sell more phones. Hell, someone could invent a third-party application for the iPhone that makes it attractive to millions of people that otherwise wouldn’t think of buying an iPhone. Remember all those Apple II’s sold because of VisiCalc? PC’s sold because of Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect?
Okay, Apple’s stuck doing some stupid things because the US cellular industry makes companies that want to participate in the industry do stupid things, but people trying to change how that industry is required to work are doing a good thing, not a bad thing.
Apple should allow unlocking of the phone to other carriers. People won’t complain so much about the apps if they weren’t tied to AT&T;’s greed. personally I can’t wait until the iPhone comes out in France. as it is ILLEGAL TO SELL A CARRIER LOCKED PHONE.
That’s right once apple releases the iPhone in many european countries the locking system will disappear, because it will be illegal. then i just have to import one, and change the language settings.
@ Dave
Newsflash! PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE A GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO TELL APPLE OR ANY OTHER COMPANY WHOM THEY CHOOSE TO USE AS A CELL SERVICE PROVIDER. Just because they make the best smartphone in the biz but YOU and others don’t like AT&T;, doesn’t give you the right force anyone’s hand and try to make Apple unlock the iPhone. It doesn’t matter if AT&T;’s service doesn’t work where you live and work – that’s not Apple’s fault. The fact that they chose AT&T;and only AT&T;is irrelevant. It’s Apple’s product not yours and THEY get to choose how to implement it! You don’t like that? TOO BAD! Go buy a POS Blackberry.
Exactly WHICH market does Apple/ATT have a monopoly in? The cell phone device market? Hardly – the iPhone is still at the bottom regarding market share. The wireless network market? ATT is the largest, but they don’t have anywhere near half the market, let alone a monopoly.
This is the same lame argument made by those who charges that Apple has a “monopoly” on the MP3 music player market.
The only “monopoly” that Apple/ATT have at this point is an exclusive arrangement to sell the hottest product on the market. And since when is that a crime?
MDN Word: “girls”, as in “the competition should stop whining like little girls about monopolies and start competing with better products and services”.
@ opj
Fine. So why not sue just the service provider AT&T;? Why include Apple in the suit? As you said, “Apple’s stuck doing some stupid things because the US cellular industry makes companies that want to participate in the industry do stupid things.” Also notice that the focus in the suit is on Apple allegedly violating monopoly laws with less emphasis on AT&T;’s part. This is nothing but a thinly veiled attack on Apple. Nothing more.
The reason this is a complete waste of time is that, as the inventor, manufacturer and retailer of the iPhone, it’s *Apple’s choice* as to what carrier, what features and what restrictions they want to offer.
To say that Ford must make all of its cars fully capable of driving on any kind of road surface (asphalt, cement, dirt, offroad, mountain terrain, ice, submerged) while offering sports car performance and while carrying a full load of lumber, is to lose sight of the fact that the product is manufactured to be attractive to a specific market segment with a specific feature set. It’s not meant to be all things to all people.
If it doesn’t float your boat as it’s offered, then don’t buy it. But to file a lawsuit… to attempt force the manufacturer to redesign it so that it *does* float your boat… is insane.
Egotistical, self-absorbed, I’m-the-only-person-in-the-universe-whose-needs-are-important…
In other words, American. Unfortunately, we’re a sick society, getting sicker every day.
Bob: “I’m suing GM, because the only engine choices I had were theirs!!! Talk about a locked down system!!!
Worse yet, to keep the warranty I had to go to them for service! Man, this is a monopoly, and absolute monopoly!!!”
Question: “And Bob, why didn’t you buy some other brand of car instead – there are over 40 different brands you know…”
Bob: “Uh, well, because you know, my brother, he uh, he works for GM and got me a discount so…”
Yeah, nice. This is a total joke of a lawsuit. Apple’s SW updates might have broken the phone to work on other networks, which is what is being aledgedly raised here, but no one using the phone on another carrier had to EVER update the phone either, but they did, so they screwed themselves.
Make choices people and live with them – and please – shut up and take the trial lawyers with ya!
The only other network that the iPhone *could* work on in the U.S. in its current configuration is T-Mobile. Not Verizon, not Sprint/Nextel, etc. Is T-Mobile really that much of a better choice than AT&T;? No, I didn’t think so.
@AP
“MDN Word: “girls”, as in “the competition should stop whining like little girls about monopolies and start competing with better products and services”.
I think the problem is that for what ever reason, most of them are completely incapable of competing by making better products. It’s far easier to just sue, spread FUD, etc.
How does ONE product… oh, TWO if you count the 4 and 8 GB iPhones, constitute a monopoly?
Apple SHOULD unlock the iPhone, with disclaimer warning that not all of it’s features, like visual voive mail, will be enabled or function if using a carrier other than AT&T;.
What’s the big deal there?
@AP
Indeed. I thought we would start to see some serious attempts at creating more user friendly phones from other companies once the iPhone was released. It’s been 3 months and seems to me like it’s business as usual for all the cell phone manufacturers.
Wow….this is how success is rewarded nowadays?
Im all for allowing the iPhone on all services, but lets not be stupid, this is not a monopoly.
Consoles such a PS3, 360, and Wii only allow people to play games for their console. Is that a monopoly? no. Microsoft, Apple, none of these companies currently have a monopoly.
Its all a luxury, and a choice… >.<
Ah, so if Apple made the iPod to only work with songs purchased from the iTS and not from regular CDs, that would be cool with you guys?
@ Realist
“Ah, so if Apple made the iPod to only work with songs purchased from the iTS and not from regular CDs, that would be cool with you guys?”
OK. You win the prize for the most INANE, IRRELEVANT, AND IDIOTIC analogy ever used for this discussion. What an unbelievable display of ineptitude.
There are plenty of other cell phones that are available only for certain carriers i.e. LG’s Chocolate, and isn’t Verizon’s new “iPhone killer” only available for Verizon? Why aren’t you people hounding those companies? Hmmm…could it be that it’s because the iPhone is an Apple product and the whiners are a bunch of M$ shills and fanboys?
I want to form a hit squad to track down all of these sue-happy scumbags and their lawyers and eradicate them in the most painful and hideous ways. The ‘Saw’ movies come to mind.
I really can’t see them winning. I bet these lawyers haven’t a clue how the phone industry works. Apple and AT&T;are by no means unique in their partnership.
I think this is a preemptive lawsuit so that laywers can maintain their monopoly on frivolous law suits.
I agree with Dave Marsh. Just another stupid lawsuit by a spoiled turd that used to having his way.
So say we all.
If the truth ever comes out…
I’m sure that AT&T;pushed for “exclusivity” a whole lot harder than Apple did…!
Interesting how all this crap comes out of California. Those people need to get a life and a job.
Three words: god bless america…lol
Now this is funny!
How does it feel mr. Jobs?
I’m laughing soooo hard I’m about to pee.
oops
lol
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
Mister Ejag—why are you yelling? All caps is a sign of yelling, and is not good net-etiquette in the least. Do learn the correct protocols for posting on the web or don’t post.
All cell vendors have a locks on their phones so the phone works only on their network. So what’s the issue with iPhone and AT&T;? Take a Verizon phone, it won’t work on T-Mobile, Sprint, nor, AT&T;. Also, some Verizon phones are not available on T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T;.
All this saber rattiling is madding it’s only for thier fifteen minutes of fame. Folks build a bridge—get over it.
@ therepguy
Indeed! Moreover, exactly HOW would Apple benefit in limiting their sales by having only ONE cell service provider. Clearly, Apple would only benefit from having deals with multiple cell service providers. Therefore, what other conclusion could one possibly come to than that AT&T;is the main beneficiary of a locked iPhone.
There simply isn’t any other way to put it.These people are fucking stupid.
What makes me laugh is the fact they keep going on about the iPhones that got bricked. As if it’s a permanent issue.
There are loads of tutorials on the web showing you how to un-brick a bricked unlocked iPhone. Apparently you can downgrade from the 1.1.1 to the 1.0.2 firmware using iTunes then re-activate the phone. I think you can then either jailbreak it again or upgrade back to 1.1.1 but I might be wrong about the last bit. Either way you can get it working again.
So it’s not really bricked is it, as bricking a gadget means it’s rendered permanently useless and that is far from the truth.
I hope Apple goes to court. Unbricks a bricked iPhone, Shows plans to allow iPhones to be unlocked after the contract is finished and over the next month when they reveal Tiger they tell everyone that the reason they didn’t release an SDK is because it’s based on Leopard and the SDK was secret from the Leopard reveal.
It’ll poo all over these toss pot lawyers who are filing the suit.
Please Apple. you are number 1. Make it so!
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. You can unlock your iPhone and will will remain working forever but dont think Apple is going to support it when they release a software update. So unlock your phone all you want but fuck off if you want continued support for it.
This goes for all other products I can think of.
“but I’m afraid that this trend of locking and price gouging will spread to other countries as well”
How is it gouging if no one is making you buy it? Really. Please explain to me how you can even remotely call this gouging. No one is forcing you to buy ANYTHING!!!!! Can’t gouge you if you decide not to buy.
geesh.
“because of the way cell phones have been sold by the cellular industry in the US we are stuck with locked iPhones. Fine. But why the hell are you pissed off at people trying to change that,”
Because you ARENT LOCKED IN YOU F*CKING TOOL. Buy another goddamn phone if you dont like it. ITS THAT SIMPLE!
In other news, Dell has a monopoly on Dell computers
Ford accused of Mustang Monopoly! No other company allowed to sell Mustang! Class action lawsuit to follow!
We truly are a nation of retards.
I don’t think the word “monopoly” means what you think it means.
W! T! F!
The only monopoly Apple has is a monopoly on cool products. It’s not illegal for Apple to have an exclusive iPhone arrangement with one service provider per region.
And the rest of the world looks on in bemusement…
@Military Police
Your logic is wrong. You can use other inks in your printer, you can use other paper in your printer. You can use other water filters in your faucet. You can do all this without hacking or rigging the printer or faucet that will potentially make it not work. The iPhone is a computer, there will be security updates (bug fixes) and additional software added, (iTunes Wifi), because Apple made the device and software and has an agreement with a specific carrier to make them work together. Apple fixing the software and adding to the device does not hurt anyone who is legitimately using the device as it was designed for. If people are hacking into it -breaking into the software to make it work then it will void the warranty when they try to go back to Apple to fix it.
If you break your faucet in the process of adding another filter from another company who’s fault is that? The filter company’s, yours or the faucet maker?
macromancer; again, you’re missing the point. You aren’t AT&T;. You aren’t Apple. So why do you have some an emotional involvement in keeping a cell phone locked? For what sane, rational reason would you be unhappy if people could use the iPhone on any compatible carrier, and without having to pay a cancellation fee to AT&T;.
Again, in what way with this cause any damage to your life? Why are you emotionally compelled to have a couple of huge corporations ram you up the ass? Not getting enough at home?
Personally I bought iPhones for myself and my wife. I already had Cingular from years back. I happily spent the refunds we received from Apple to get a new nano. What I’m not going to do is go rabid with rage at the horrifying thought that Apple and AT&T;might be forced to remove some current restrictions from what I can do with the phone. “No, no, I don’t to be able to switch to T-Mobile!! Please, protect me from such options!! Oh, the humanity, save me save me save me from myself.”