Apple (AAPL) sued over iPhone price cut, world collectively laughs
You just have to love the litigious nature of today's American consumer. High-tech is especially troublesome as the product you buy today may be worth half as much within a few months, not to mention the possibility it could be obsolete. If you're an auto owner, you know this racket well. That is, many consumables are fraught with depreciation. But don't count out the country's attorney population and litigious consumer, many of whom love this kind of situation.
When Apple, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) decided to cut the price of its iPhone product from $600 to $400 last month, many early adopters who, for some reason, saw fit to stand in line to pay $600 for an iPod-phone combination were taken aback by the price cut in such a short period of time. Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO, must have seen discontent coming, as he offered each $600 iPhone owner a $100 credit in an Apple store as remuneration for the price cut, and even offered a $200 refund to iPhone owners who had purchased the unit up to 14 days prior to the price reduction.
I'm still amazed he did this, since the personal technology field is constantly awash in price cuts and new model introductions. However, that generous offer was just not good enough for a New York iPhone owner. In what can only be considered a completely baseless case, consumer Dongmei Li has claimed that Apple violated price discrimination laws when it demoted the iPhone's price from $600 to $400 within two months of the product's release. Which law? What terms? Spelling out details such as? This sounds so fishy to me that salmon may be my choice for lunch today.
According to Li's lawsuit, the rapid price cut "injured early purchasers" since they could no longer resell those $600 iPhones for more than the new $400 retail price. Perhaps Li would like to sue every automaker and manufacturer who has product cycles under a year as well? I'll be waiting while twiddling my thumbs.
When Apple, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) decided to cut the price of its iPhone product from $600 to $400 last month, many early adopters who, for some reason, saw fit to stand in line to pay $600 for an iPod-phone combination were taken aback by the price cut in such a short period of time. Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO, must have seen discontent coming, as he offered each $600 iPhone owner a $100 credit in an Apple store as remuneration for the price cut, and even offered a $200 refund to iPhone owners who had purchased the unit up to 14 days prior to the price reduction.
I'm still amazed he did this, since the personal technology field is constantly awash in price cuts and new model introductions. However, that generous offer was just not good enough for a New York iPhone owner. In what can only be considered a completely baseless case, consumer Dongmei Li has claimed that Apple violated price discrimination laws when it demoted the iPhone's price from $600 to $400 within two months of the product's release. Which law? What terms? Spelling out details such as? This sounds so fishy to me that salmon may be my choice for lunch today.
According to Li's lawsuit, the rapid price cut "injured early purchasers" since they could no longer resell those $600 iPhones for more than the new $400 retail price. Perhaps Li would like to sue every automaker and manufacturer who has product cycles under a year as well? I'll be waiting while twiddling my thumbs.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-02-2007 @ 2:07PM
jay5 said...
Maybe my lawsuit about how Chinese buffets have made me fat ISN'T so far fetched...
10-02-2007 @ 4:27PM
JJIrons said...
I agree. As an American, and proud to be one, I am so sick of all the sue happy idiots here that I want to barf. I would say the Liberals are making a generation of people that believe they deserve to be coddled and "protected" by government and their agencies from "all the bad stuff in the whole wide world." (I hope you used baby talk for the last sentence, it adds effect).
I hope the judges have the gonads to not only throw these cases out on their ears but the plaintiffs as well AND make them pay for the court costs.
GROW UP PEOPLE!
10-02-2007 @ 5:43PM
DBL said...
Yes, that's right. The litigious society is all the Liberals' fault. *rolls eyes* Idiot.
10-02-2007 @ 8:32PM
Unpainted Huffhines said...
JJIrons...
My God, imagine the temerity of a group of people who want to be (gasp) "protected" by their own government! The fools! That's what corporations are for. Like Blackwater, for example.
You could easily imagine those Liberal idiots taking this whole government thing a step further and requiring that the government be comprised of ordinary citizens.
That's so scary it makes me want to hide out in an airport men's room!
10-02-2007 @ 8:36PM
Unpainted Huffhines said...
Sorry for the second post, but I thought I'd better clarify something: In no way do I think the person in the article has any grounds for suing, and I find the whole matter disgusting.
/Liberal Patriot, all for personal responsibility