Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits "Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"

[Arlen Holder]

Dateline today...
o BBC: *Apple fined for slowing down old iPhones*
<https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724>
"The French watchdog said iPhone owners "were not informed that
installing iOS updates (10.2.1 and 11.2) could slow down their devices".

As part of the agreement, Apple must display a notice on its
French-language website for a month.

It says:
*Apple "committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"*
*and had agreed to pay the fine.*"

"Apple has been fined 25 million euros (L21m, $27m) for deliberately
slowing down older iPhone models without making it clear to consumers."

Despite Apologists like Jolly Roger claiming they knew all along exactly
what Apple was doing, even before it made the news...

"The fine was imposed by France's competition and fraud watchdog DGCCRF,
which said *consumers were not warned*."

--
Apple only admits they lied years after they got caught red-handed lying.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 04:24:23 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote:

> As part of the agreement, Apple must display a notice on its
> French-language website for a month.
>
> It says:
> *Apple "committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"*
> *and had agreed to pay the fine.*"

*You have to admit Apple MARKETING is brilliant!*

For a paltry 25 million euros and admission of a crime for a month,
Apple now gets to legally throttle almost every iPhone on this planet
(to less than half speed, in about a year or so, & sell 'em expensive
batteries every year or two!)

*FOREVER!*

How brilliant is that!
o *It's sheer marketing genius!*

--
I _love_ Apple's marketing genius!
o What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/s6gu-hj2BwAJ>

[Alan Baker]

Apple settled a dispute. "Admissions" in such situations must be taken
with a very large grain of salt.

>
> -- Apple only admits they lied years after they got caught red-handed
> lying.
>

Whereas you never admit when you've lied.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-08 10:57 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 04:24:23 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote:
>
>> As part of the agreement, Apple must display a notice on its
>> French-language website for a month.
>>
>> It says:
>> *Apple "committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"*
>> *and had agreed to pay the fine.*"
>
> *You have to admit Apple MARKETING is brilliant!*
>
> For a paltry 25 million euros and admission of a crime for a month,
> Apple now gets to legally throttle almost every iPhone on this planet
> (to less than half speed, in about a year or so, & sell 'em expensive
> batteries every year or two!)
>
> *FOREVER!*
>
> How brilliant is that!
> o *It's sheer marketing genius!*
>

Apple didn't admit to a crime, Liar.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 17:51:28 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

> Apple settled a dispute. "Admissions" in such situations must be taken
> with a very large grain of salt.

Hi Alan Baker,

You're a classic Apple Apologist! :)
o You apologists can't handle the simple fact Apple committed a crime.

Apple has some of the best lawyers on the planet, Alan Baker.
o And they _admitted_ they committed a crime.

*Only you apologists brazenly deny even what Apple admits!*
o What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0/e5J-nW0hBAAJ>

You can apologize for that fact all you want, Alan Baker.
o But you hating facts doesn't change the fact they're STILL facts.

Here is your brazen response to the same facts earlier today:

o What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/XUHMXcoxAgAJ>

Here's Alan Baker's post to the fact Apple admitted a crime:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/MElVHoNJAgAJ>
On 2020-02-08 10:38 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> As you well know, Apple admitted they committed a crime,

Alan Baker: *That's a flat-out lie.*

Why do apologists brazenly deny facts that even Apple admits?
o I don't know why.

I think facts conflict with apologists' purely imaginary belief systems.

FACT:
o Apple committed the crime and publicly admitted they committed the crime.

HINT: Apple has the best lawyers on the planet; so if they had a better
option, you can bet that they would have employed it.
--
The fact is, Apple openly & publicly admitted committing the crime.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-08 6:17 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 17:51:28 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> Apple settled a dispute. "Admissions" in such situations must be taken
>> with a very large grain of salt.
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>
> You're a classic Apple Apologist! :)
> o You apologists can't handle the simple fact Apple committed a crime.

You can handle the simple fact that a settlement isn't an admission.

>
> Apple has some of the best lawyers on the planet, Alan Baker.
> o And they _admitted_ they committed a crime.
>

Nope. I've read the actual text on Apple's French site...

...and it doesn't say that.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 18:21:11 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

>> Apple has some of the best lawyers on the planet, Alan Baker.
>> o And they _admitted_ they committed a crime.
>>
>
> Nope. I've read the actual text on Apple's French site...
>
> ...and it doesn't say that.

FACT:
MacRumors reported the DGCCRF revealed its findings in a Friday press
release, which MacRumors translated as:

"Following an investigation by the Directorate General for Competition,
Consumption and the Suppression of Fraud (DGCCRF) and after the
agreement of the Public Prosecutor of Paris, the Apple group agreed
to *pay a fine of 25MEuros in the context of a _criminal_ transaction*.

o Apple Fined 25 Million Euros in France for Slowing Down Older iPhones With iOS Update
<https://www.macrumors.com/2020/02/07/apple-fined-25m-euros-france-slowing-down-iphones/>
--
Amazingly, apologists brazenly deny even that which Apple publicly admits!

[Alan Baker]

"in the context" of something doesn't mean that same as that something.

That's why you add the words "in the context", Liar.

[Arlen Holder]

Here is another article from today I happened across just now:
o Apple fined $41 million for secretly slowing old iPhones
<https://www.smh.com.au/technology/apple-fined-41-million-for-secretly-slowing-old-iphones-20200210-p53z9n.html>

"The DGCCRF has indeed shown that iPhone owners had not been informed
that the updates of the iOS operating system (10.2.1 and 11.2) they
installed were likely to slow down the operation of their device," it said
in a statement, adding that *Apple had "committed the _crime_ of deceptive*
*commercial practice by omission*"
--
Apologists call all facts they don't like, "lies", which is generally
because apologists have no adult response to those facts they hate.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-10 2:10 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> Here is another article from today I happened across just now:
> o Apple fined $41 million for secretly slowing old iPhones
> <https://www.smh.com.au/technology/apple-fined-41-million-for-secretly-slowing-old-iphones-20200210-p53z9n.html>
>
> "The DGCCRF has indeed shown that iPhone owners had not been informed
> that the updates of the iOS operating system (10.2.1 and 11.2) they
> installed were likely to slow down the operation of their device," it said
> in a statement, adding that *Apple had "committed the _crime_ of deceptive*
> *commercial practice by omission*"
>

Sorry, but was there a trial?

Until there is a trial and conviction, anyone can SAY anything.

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 09:05:41 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

> Sorry, but was there a trial?
>
> Until there is a trial and conviction, anyone can SAY anything.

Hi Alan Baker,

Are you claiming that Apple has lousy lawyers?

I do not respond to any of your posts with "Liar" or "lies" in them,
basically because by your writing those words, you already acceded that you
don't like the facts but that they're facts because your _only_ response to
those facts you don't like is to call them 'lies'.

Remember, you apologists only have 7 responses to facts you don't like, one
of which is to incessantly brazenly call all facts you don't like, "lies".

But this post didn't contain a brazen refusal of facts like you normally
do; so I will respond to you, as any adult would respond to your query,
Alan.

Do you think Apple doesn't have some of the finest lawyers money can buy on
this planet, Alan Baker?

*Do you realize this is likely the _best_ deal Apple could possibly garner?*
o Just like with Apple's surrender to Qualcomm, Alan Baker

Both of which you apologists proved to have failed to comprehend.

The real tragedy here is that Apple is now, apparently, legally free to
throttle every iPhone on the planet from now until FOREVER!

In fact, Apple has been doing just that by introducing throttling to more
and more iPhones in iOS 10, iOS 11, iOS 12, and iOS 13 (with the latest
iPhones perhaps getting their throttling "medicine" in iOS 14).

How great is that!
o Apple gets to sell you a fast phone, and then, a year or two down the
road, it halves in speed or simply shuts down altogether.

This is FANTASTIC marketing!
o It's planned obsolescence at its finest, you have to admit.

While I claim apologists are stupid, you'll _never_ hear me claim that
Apple is stupid.

You don't make all that profit on an intelligent customer base after all.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-10 6:03 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 09:05:41 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but was there a trial?
>>
>> Until there is a trial and conviction, anyone can SAY anything.
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>
> Are you claiming that Apple has lousy lawyers?

I'm claiming that there was no trial...

...that there was no guilty plea.

>
> I do not respond to any of your posts with "Liar" or "lies" in them,
> basically because by your writing those words, you already acceded that you
> don't like the facts but that they're facts because your _only_ response to
> those facts you don't like is to call them 'lies'.

Liar.

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 20:18:19 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

> I'm claiming that there was no trial...
>
> ...that there was no guilty plea.

Wow. Alan Baker posted a post that doesn't claim every fact is a lie.
o You're improving on your _adult_ skills, Alan Baker.

Hence, I will treat you as if you're an adult, with my response, Alan.

What would have happened Alan Baker, had Apple refused to accept what
appears to amount to a "plea agreement" in that Apple accepted the
punishment of 25 million plus a month of public admission of their sordid
acts?

HINT: Are you aware that a huge percentage of Apple's revenue was likely at
risk as the "imposed" fine instead of only about 3 hours of Apple's daily
revenue in the ad hoc plea-bargain "agreement".

DOUBLEHING: Apple likely has the finest lawyers on the planet, where, just
as with the 6 billion dollar 5G modem legal battles, they likely got the
best deal humanly possible, given Apple's legal might.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-11 7:35 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 20:18:19 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> I'm claiming that there was no trial...
>>
>> ...that there was no guilty plea.
>
> Wow. Alan Baker posted a post that doesn't claim every fact is a lie.
> o You're improving on your _adult_ skills, Alan Baker.
>
> Hence, I will treat you as if you're an adult, with my response, Alan.
>
> What would have happened Alan Baker, had Apple refused to accept what
> appears to amount to a "plea agreement" in that Apple accepted the
> punishment of 25 million plus a month of public admission of their sordid
> acts?

I don't know and neither do you.

>
> HINT: Are you aware that a huge percentage of Apple's revenue was likely at
> risk as the "imposed" fine instead of only about 3 hours of Apple's daily
> revenue in the ad hoc plea-bargain "agreement".
>
> DOUBLEHING: Apple likely has the finest lawyers on the planet, where, just
> as with the 6 billion dollar 5G modem legal battles, they likely got the
> best deal humanly possible, given Apple's legal might.

You don't know how good Apple's lawyers are, nor do you know what they
considered important.

What we do know is that they were not convicted of any crime.

Do you agree we know that?

[Arlen Holder]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:36:25 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

>> What would have happened Alan Baker, had Apple refused to accept what
>> appears to amount to a "plea agreement" in that Apple accepted the
>> punishment of 25 million plus a month of public admission of their sordid
>> acts?
>
> I don't know and neither do you.

Hi Alan Baker,

Shockingly, for a second post in a row, you didn't use the word "Liar" in
response to facts that you had no other response to.

You're improving on your _adult_ skills, so I'll continue to treat you as
if you're an adult.

As for you not knowing, clearly you didn't even bother to _look_ it up.

As an adult, I already looked it up _long ago_, so I already knew, even
before I posted this thread, that the law apparently carries a penalty of a
maximum sentence of two years in prison and up to 5 per cent of Apple's
annual turnover, which is something like 11 billion dollars or so
(depending on how they calculate Apple's sales in France of the affected
products).

I posit that every adult already knew this, Alan Baker, because this is old
news. The only thing that's new news is that Apple's lawyers got them a
sweet deal of admitting to the crime for only a month, and paying a puny
penalty that amounts to something like 3 hours of Apple's daily revenue.

The "big deal", to all adults, particularly to French adults, is that Apple
publicly admitted committing a crime which the Paris Prosecutor's office
was involved in prosecuting further had Apple _not_ agreed (apparently).

> You don't know how good Apple's lawyers are, nor do you know what they
> considered important.

Never have you heard me claim Apple is stupid, Alan Baker.
o Neither do you here me claim Apple doesn't have the money needed.

Rest assured, every human with adult cognizant abilities can rationally
assume Apple's lawyers are the best that Apple's money can buy.

Why you apologists attempt to refute the most sensible assessments, is
beyond my comprehension - but that's what makes you an apologist after all.

Do apologists really think Apple's lawyers don't realize the importance of
public admission that Apple committed a crime?
<https://i.postimg.cc/B6gyHjmf/liar01.jpg>

> What we do know is that they were not convicted of any crime.
> Do you agree we know that?

Play all the silly word games you want, Alan Baker
o It's what you apologists do to deny outright facts you simply don't like.

*It's shocking how fantastically _immune_ to facts apologists prove to be!*
<https://i.postimg.cc/bvkPYvzj/liar03.jpg>

HINT: Programmed obsolescence is illegal in France.
--
Apologists easily prove to not appear to own adult cognitive skills.

[Arlen Holder]

I've studied apologists for years, where the facts are that the scores of
apologists who post frequently to this ng are not like normal people.

Adults will note that the apologists like Alan Baker don't even _read_
cites before brazenly denying statements that are clearly in those cites!
<https://i.postimg.cc/x11K1czb/liar00.jpg>

Alan can brazenly deny that the cite above says "in the context of"
o But the facts remain whether or not apologists like those facts.

Alan can brazenly deny that the cites below say "committed a crime"
o But the facts remain whether or not apologists are afraid of facts.

Adults will note the apologists' incessantly instinctive knee-jerk reaction
is _not_ to read any cites provided (Lord knows, Alan Baker and Lloyd
Parsons and Rescuba prove that in spaced)... before brazenly denying them.

*Brazenly denying facts is part of what makes apologists, apologists.*

Appologists' knee-jerk reaction is to act like a bullying schoolkid:
o "*Liar liar pants on fire*"
when simply apprised of a fact that destroys their imaginary belief system.

Worse, some of the more child-like apologists, e.g., Lewis & Jolly Roger,
turn into instant schoolyard bully hate-filled vitriol, simply for being
told a fact that instantly DESTROYED their purely imaginary belief system.

And yet, the facts remain, whether or not apologists like those facts:
<https://i.postimg.cc/bvkPYvzj/liar03.jpg>

Apparently the Public Prosecutor of Paris thinks it's a criminal act:
<https://i.postimg.cc/B6gyHjmf/liar01.jpg>

Apologists will continue to deny all facts they don't like, but the fact
they call all facts they don't like to be "lies", is, in essence, the proof
that their _only_ response to facts, is to deny that they exist.

*Whenever Alan claims "Lies" & "Liar", he's accepting the fact exists!*
o He's simply proving he has no adult response to that fact which exists.

--
Exposing apologists for what they are by assessing their very own words.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-11 10:11 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:36:25 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>>> What would have happened Alan Baker, had Apple refused to accept what
>>> appears to amount to a "plea agreement" in that Apple accepted the
>>> punishment of 25 million plus a month of public admission of their sordid
>>> acts?
>>
>> I don't know and neither do you.
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>
> Shockingly, for a second post in a row, you didn't use the word "Liar" in
> response to facts that you had no other response to.
>
> You're improving on your _adult_ skills, so I'll continue to treat you as
> if you're an adult.
>
> As for you not knowing, clearly you didn't even bother to _look_ it up.
>
> As an adult, I already looked it up _long ago_, so I already knew, even
> before I posted this thread, that the law apparently carries a penalty of a
> maximum sentence of two years in prison and up to 5 per cent of Apple's
> annual turnover, which is something like 11 billion dollars or so
> (depending on how they calculate Apple's sales in France of the affected
> products).

None of which proves anything about:

'What would have happened had Apple refused to accept what appears to
amount to a "plea agreement"'

Why did you write it as 'what appears to amount to a "plea agreement"',
Liar?

The phrase 'what appears to amount' implicitly states that you don't
actually think it was a plea agreement; as does the use of quotes around
"plea agreement".

Do you agree that for there to be an actual plea agreement, a case must
have gone to trial?

>
> I posit that every adult already knew this, Alan Baker, because this is old
> news. The only thing that's new news is that Apple's lawyers got them a
> sweet deal of admitting to the crime for only a month, and paying a puny
> penalty that amounts to something like 3 hours of Apple's daily revenue.

Apple has not admitted to any crime.

Have you read the actual statement on Apple's French website, Liar?

I have. I'll excerpt the salient portion:

'At the end of its investigation, the National Service of Investigations
of the DGCCRF estimates that the Apple group committed the crime of
deceptive commercial practice by omission (article L. 121-3 of the code
of consumption) by not revealing to consumers and users , the presence
of a dynamic power management system included in the iOS updates from
version 10.2.1 and which, under certain conditions, can slow the
operation of iPhones of categories 6, 7 and SE , especially those with
old batteries. A crime report was sent to the public prosecutor.
With the agreement of the public prosecutor, a significant transactional
fine was proposed to the company Apple Inc., which accepted it.'

Estimating that someone committed a crime is not actual proof that a
crime was committed and it is certainly not a conviction.

Note that they do not call the "agreement" a "plea agreement".

>
> The "big deal", to all adults, particularly to French adults, is that Apple
> publicly admitted committing a crime which the Paris Prosecutor's office
> was involved in prosecuting further had Apple _not_ agreed (apparently).

That is a lie, Liar.

Apple made no such admission.

>
>> You don't know how good Apple's lawyers are, nor do you know what they
>> considered important.

How good or bad Apple's lawyers are changes nothing.

>
> Never have you heard me claim Apple is stupid, Alan Baker.
> o Neither do you here me claim Apple doesn't have the money needed.
>
> Rest assured, every human with adult cognizant abilities can rationally
> assume Apple's lawyers are the best that Apple's money can buy.
>
> Why you apologists attempt to refute the most sensible assessments, is
> beyond my comprehension - but that's what makes you an apologist after all.
>
> Do apologists really think Apple's lawyers don't realize the importance of
> public admission that Apple committed a crime?
> <https://i.postimg.cc/B6gyHjmf/liar01.jpg>
>
>> What we do know is that they were not convicted of any crime.
>> Do you agree we know that?
>
> Play all the silly word games you want, Alan Baker
> o It's what you apologists do to deny outright facts you simply don't like.

It's not a silly game.

>
> *It's shocking how fantastically _immune_ to facts apologists prove to be!*
> <https://i.postimg.cc/bvkPYvzj/liar03.jpg>
>

Interesting that you provide it in a form that can't be traced...

...and interesting too that only the words "committed the crime..." etc.
are actually in quotes.

I've provided the original source for that quote above, and the word
that's left out (among others) is "estimated".

> HINT: Programmed obsolescence is illegal in France.

HINT: Apple wasn't even being accused of that.

[Arlen Holder]

Here is a currency conversion article regarding the crime Apple admitted:

FACTS:
o France Fines Apple $27 Million for Slowing Down Old iPhones
<https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/02/11/france-fines-apple-41-million-for-slowing-down-old-iphones/>

"'The DGCCRF has indeed shown that iPhone owners had not been informed

that the updates of the iOS operating system (10.2.1 and 11.2) they

installed were likely to slow down the operation of their device.' The
watchdog added that *Apple had 'committed the _crime_* of deceptive
commercial practice by omission.'"

Lest apologists brazenly deny that direct quote, here's a screenshot:
<https://i.postimg.cc/KcVRkczb/liar02.jpg>

Why do apologists call all facts they don't like "lies"?

I don't know why.

Perhaps apologists hate Apple doesn't act as MARKETING fed them to believe.
--
Apologists hate that Apple doesn't do what MARKETING fed them to believe.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-11 10:11 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:

> I've studied apologists for years, where the facts are that the scores of
> apologists who post frequently to this ng are not like normal people.
>
> Adults will note that the apologists like Alan Baker don't even _read_
> cites before brazenly denying statements that are clearly in those cites!
> <https://i.postimg.cc/x11K1czb/liar00.jpg>
>
> Alan can brazenly deny that the cite above says "in the context of"
> o But the facts remain whether or not apologists like those facts.
>
> Alan can brazenly deny that the cites below say "committed a crime"
> o But the facts remain whether or not apologists are afraid of facts.

It's what they FAIL to quote from the source, Liar:

"estimates", as in:

"At the end of its investigation, the National Service of Investigations

of the DGCCRF ESTIMATES that the Apple group committed the crime of
deceptive commercial practice"

An estimation is not a conviction...

...and it's not even as positive as a conclusion, Liar.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-02-12 7:22 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> Here is a currency conversion article regarding the crime Apple admitted:

You start out with a lie.

Apple did not admit to a crime.

>
> FACTS:
> o France Fines Apple $27 Million for Slowing Down Old iPhones
> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/02/11/france-fines-apple-41-million-for-slowing-down-old-iphones/>
>
> "'The DGCCRF has indeed shown that iPhone owners had not been informed
> that the updates of the iOS operating system (10.2.1 and 11.2) they
> installed were likely to slow down the operation of their device.' The
> watchdog added that *Apple had 'committed the _crime_* of deceptive
> commercial practice by omission.'"

You've been told before that the word left out of the quote from the
DGCRF is "estimated"...

...and an estimation that a crime has been committed is not a conclusion
that a crime has been committed, much less a conviction.

Since you were told before, that makes this lie a "brazen" lie, Liar.

[Arlen Holder]

Notice the Apple apologists _hate_ what Apple does so much that they'll
endlessly deny even well verified facts that Apple publicly admitted!
<https://i.postimg.cc/BQZ9hZg1/crime00.jpg>

See also this thread today with an important update, thanks to JF Mezei:
o *Apple agrees to settle class action in US over throttling $500M*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/BR4edQQisYg>

=== === === Quoted verbatim from that thread: === === ===
<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/02/technology/apple-iphone-lawsuit-settlement.html>

Quote: <<"Eligible devices include any iPhone 6, 6s Plus, 7, 7 Plus and
SE that ran iOS 10.2.1 or later, or any iPhone 7 or 7 Plus that ran iOS
11.2 or later. Eligible customers had to live in the United States, and
their devices had to run the given software before Dec. 21, 2017.">>

$25 per qualified phone.
=== === === Quoted verbatim from that thread: === === ===

This is the thread that broke the news of Apple's secret, drastic, and
permanent CPU throttling due to inherently poor power-management design...
o *Report says Apple 'Powerd' code secretly slows your iOS device down to
trick you into buying a new device*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/GdEtzzrc9F0/z57KTsmWAQAJ>

See also this thread where Apple publicly admitted to the crime of
intentionally secretly lowering the life of essentially the same set of
iPhones: <https://i.postimg.cc/BQZ9hZg1/crime00.jpg>
o *Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits "Apple

committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"*

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ>

See also this thread, where JF Mezei seems to be updating as news comes in:
o *Quebec class action goes ahead (battery gate)*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/jmDdZewelrk>

Bear in mind, Apple essentially lied to Congress (as in "I didn't inhale")
when they said in their coverup that iPhone throttling wasn't "as"
necessary on the later phones, where, the facts prove Apple added
throttling in _every_ subsequent iOS release since!
o *Every iPhone CPU from the iPhone 6 to iPhone 7 were throttled, then
iPhone 8 to iPhone X were throttled & now the iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max &
iPhone XR get throttling software*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/Mzh1IvniDr8>

In addition, Apple clearly lied in their subsequent coverup, with respect
to the fact they secretly modified the release notes well _after_ the fact.
o *Evidence Apple cleverly manipulated iOS release notes on "power
management" after the fact*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/KXhivHMvrlY/OuV1lgS8AgAJ>

Given the speeds were secretly cut in _half_ by Apple...
o Apple throttled your iPhone by cutting its speed almost in HALF!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l79Xb6qx8Fs/08j5ImhABQAJ>

And given that Apple's design causes premature replacement of millions of
batteries yearly...
o *FACTS: Apple replaced 11 million batteries last year (normal replacement
is ~1.5 million batteries per year)*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/8Vica_VqdT4/TzFfpZqVBwAJ>

How is prematurely replacing millions of batteries yearly a good thing for
the environment?
o *All new iPhones might be forced to have a removable battery (Android
too)*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/4Ja4FP5eL5s>

How is intentionally shortening iPhone life good for the environment?
--
Notice the Apple apologists _hate_ what Apple does so much that they'll
endlessly deny even well verified facts that Apple publicly admitted!

[Steve]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 04:05:08 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:
>

> Notice the Apple apologists _hate_ what Apple does

[...]

Arlen Holder wrote in
Message-ID: <r2cl43$6rp$1...@news.mixmin.net>
"I'll curtail my non-UK-specific or UK-relevant posts.
o Thank you for being the rare adult on this UK
newsgroup.

--
If folks want to learn about android, I'll be on
comp.mobile.android"

Apple is not specific to the UK. Its' devices are used
worldwide. If you were discussing an Apple phone here
in the UK it would be on topic.

fu set to the on-topic group.

[Steve]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 04:05:08 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:
>

> Notice the Apple apologists _hate_ what Apple does

[...]

Arlen Holder wrote in
Message-ID: <r2cl43$6rp$1...@news.mixmin.net>
"I'll curtail my non-UK-specific or UK-relevant posts.
o Thank you for being the rare adult on this UK
newsgroup.

--
If folks want to learn about android, I'll be on
comp.mobile.android"

Apple is not specific to the UK. Its' devices are used
worldwide. If you were discussing an Apple phone here
in the UK it would be on topic.

fu set to the on-topic group.

Reposted as I messed up the followup-to and newsgroups,
duh!

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:

Given throttling news was first broken to this ng way back in 2017
o Report says Apple 'Powerd' code secretly slows your iOS device

down to trick you into buying a new device

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/GdEtzzrc9F0/z57KTsmWAQAJ>

Apple in 2020 agreed to intentionally _secretly_ shortening iPhone
lifespan:
o Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits

"Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ>

With Apple finally admitting their guilt of a purposefully crafted criminal
offense in France, you'd think their admission they intentionally secretly
shortened the life of iPhones would grease the skids on the other lawsuits.

FACT:
o Under French law it is a _crime_ to intentionally shorten lifespan
of a product with the aim of making customers replace it.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rszF8z5S/crime05.jpg>
FACT:
o DGCRF, which is part of the French government, levied a _criminal_ fine:
<https://i.postimg.cc/d11sJLYJ/crime02.jpg>
FACT:
o *Apple did not contest that _criminal_ fine the government levied*:
<https://i.postimg.cc/HnL1QKxH/crime03.jpg>
FACT:
o *Apple accepted wrongdoing & said they will pay the _criminal_ fine*
<https://i.postimg.cc/jjkFp5dV/crime04.jpg>

Given that recent seminal development that Apple admitted to that crime...
o You'd think that fact would further along the pending related lawsuits.

JF Mezei has reported on the current status of the Canadian lawsuit:
o Quebec class action goes ahead (battery gate)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/jmDdZewelrk>

And Alan Browne reported on the final status of the American lawsuit:
o Apple agrees to settle class action in US over throttling- $500M.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/BR4edQQisYg>

Where the facts are clearly shown in this post, if people believe facts:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/0zzVpdtAa_k/sYYAq6p0AQAJ>

Given those facts...
o Do you know of related lawsuits in other relevant developed countries?
--
Apologists believe what Apple says so much they hate what Apple does.

[Alan Baker]

Only children feel the need to post precisely the same drivel over and
over in multiple threads.

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:
o /Apple's Plan to Pay $500 Million to Settle Lawsuit Over Secretly/
/Throttling Older iPhones Gets Preliminary Approval today/
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/jN-h4WvWTEA>

*FACTS*:
Dateline: Friday May 15, 2020 2:44 pm PDT
<https://www.law360.com/cases/5ac6a31ee2ecf52cd9000003>

*FACTS*
o *$500M IPhone Deal Gets Nod, But Virus Delays Final OK*
<https://www.law360.com/articles/1274063>
"(May 15, 2020, 5:18 PM EDT) -- A California federal judge on
Friday preliminarily approved Apple's $500 million deal to
end multidistrict litigation accusing the company of
releasing software updates that slowed down the performance
of certain iPhones"
--
"Apple has agreed to pay up to $500 million in total"

[Alan Baker]

Fact:

Agreeing to settle is not an admission of guilt

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Agreeing to settle is not an admission of guilt

Please refer to your very many similar posts in this thread, Alan Baker:
o /Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as *Apple admits*/
/"*Apple committed the crime* of deceptive commercial practice by omission"/
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ/7leR4SkDAgAJ>

Please see also the cites in this thread, Alan Baker:
o /Apple just admitted they were trying to mask defective batteries/
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/U80sbpQr3ZI/34LYdT4XDwAJ>

And please refer to this update article dated today from MacRumors:
o /Apple's Plan to Pay $500 Million to Settle Lawsuit/
/Over 'Secretly Throttling' Older iPhones Gets Preliminary Approval/
<https://www.macrumors.com/2020/05/15/apple-throttling-lawsuit-preliminary-approval/>

Friday May 15, 2020 2:44 pm PDT by Juli Clover
"Apple in March agreed to pay $500 million to settle a class action
lawsuit that accused the company of "secretly throttling" older iPhone
models, and now the settlement has been preliminarily approved by a judge.

According to Law360, U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila in a Zoom hearing
provided preliminary approval but said that he wants to extend the final
approval deadlines due to the ongoing health crisis. Apple's lawyers have
been instructed to propose a new date for a settlement approval hearing
that will take place sometime in December.

If the settlement is approved, it will put an end to dozens of lawsuits
that were levied against Apple and ultimately consolidated into one
class-action suit in May 2018. The lawsuits were filed against Apple after
Apple confirmed that it introduced software to throttle the maximum
performance of some older ‌iPhone‌ models with chemically aged batteries no
longer capable of supporting full power to prevent these devices from
shutting down unexpectedly.

Apple 2017 released iOS 10.2.1 with performance management software that
had the throttling built in, but made little mention of the change in the
software's release notes. The throttling was discovered by Primate Labs
founder John Poole when he noticed lower than expected benchmark scores,
and there was a major public outcry after it was discovered Apple was
limiting performance.

Apple apologized for its lack of communication and ultimately launched a
battery repair program that dropped the price of battery replacements to
$29 through the end of 2018. Because the throttling kicks in when an
‌iPhone‌ has a degraded battery, a battery replacement effectively fixes
the issue.

Apple in iOS 11.3 introduced a new feature that allows users to see the
current health of their batteries, and it turned off the performance
management feature by default until an unexpected shutdown occurs. Though
agreeing to settle the case, Apple has maintained that it did nothing wrong
legally.

If approved, the settlement will provide every affected ‌iPhone‌ user in
the class with $25. The amount could increase or decrease somewhat
depending on legal fees and the aggregate value of the approved claims. If
the payouts, attorney fees, and expenses don't add up to at least $310
million, class members could receive up to $500 apiece until that minimum
is reached.

Apple has email addresses for most class members, so attorneys for both
sides believe there will be a high claims rate.

The lawsuit includes all former or current U.S. ‌iPhone‌ owners that have
the ‌iPhone‌ 6, 6 Plus, 6s, 6s Plus, 7, 7 Plus, and SE, running either iOS
10.2.1 or later or iOS 11.2 or later, and who ran these versions of iOS
prior to December 21, 2017."
--
Adults should wonder why apologists often make excuses for Apple behavior.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-15 8:45 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Agreeing to settle is not an admission of guilt
>
> Please refer to your very many similar posts in this thread, Alan Baker:
> o /Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as *Apple admits*/
>  /"*Apple committed the crime* of deceptive commercial practice by
> omission"/
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ/7leR4SkDAgAJ>
>
>
> Please see also the cites in this thread, Alan Baker:
> o /Apple just admitted they were trying to mask defective batteries/
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/U80sbpQr3ZI/34LYdT4XDwAJ>

No. They did not. Quite the reverse. From below:

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE (for the permanent Usenet record to preserve)

US Update:
o Apple's Plan to Pay $500 Million to Settle Lawsuit Over
Secretly Throttling Older iPhones Gets Preliminary Approval today
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/jN-h4WvWTEA>

No word yet on the progress of the Canadian similar cases...
--
Apologists hate that Apple is what they are and not what they say they are.

[Alan Baker]

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:

Dateline yesterday...

"five European consumer groups... are demanding compensation from Apple
and say that they want the company to pay each customer affected by the
throttling 60 Euros (equivalent to $67.47 at current exchange rates)"

"... Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Brazil"

o *(Five countries want Apple to pay consumers more money to settle #Batterygate*
<https://www.phonearena.com/news/european-consumer-groups-seek-more-money-from-apple-over-batterygate_id125726>

"Apple finally spilled its guts in December 2017"

"Apple... ended up performing the transplant operation approximately
11 million times during 2018."

"Apple offered to pay each member of the class $25 (even while the
attorneys collect a total of $93 for their wisdom). A hearing will
be held in December so that the judge can issue a final ruling"

"It appears that the European consumer groups decided to get involved
after the French government settled with Apple in February; the tech
giant paid the country 25 million Euros, equivalent to $27 million."

More in the article...

See also:
o *Five countries want Apple to pay consumers more money to settle*
*secret throttling of iPhone CPUs to purposefully shorten device life*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YKId-GJCdec>
--
Finally someone brings needed truth to typically ignorant Apple newsgroups.

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:
o How to submit your claim in Apple's half a billion dollar secret throtting settlement
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wm-8YUKl5M0>

On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:44:53 -0500, Ant wrote:
> Shouldn't it be on Apple's web site instead like in the past?

Hi Ant,

I'm pretty sure it was specified in the legal agreement where it should be,
in terms of who "controls" the web site, where nobody on this planet trusts
Apple to do the right thing when it comes to this secret throttling that
Apple did to intentionally lessen the life of its customers' iPhones.

The fact Apple intentionally attempted to lower the life of your iPhone
secretly is what Apple is desperate for people not to realize, even though
only a fool would believe that Apple was up front (and plenty of Type III
apologists claimed Apple was upfront, even though it was later proven, in
court, that Apple lied as they secretly updated the release notes well
after the fact).

To your point though, I would think Apple "could" put a cross link to the
current penalty website on the Apple website, but bear in mind Apple is all
MARKETING, and, as such, Apple isn't stupid.

*Apple doesn't want to draw attention to the facts of what Apple did.*

Keep in mind, the _last_ thing Apple ever wants to do is draw ATTENTION to
the fact they essentially lied to everyone on the planet.

Apple doesn't want to draw attention, particularly, to the fact Apple lied
to their own admittedly loyal customers about _why_ they throttled iPhones.

In contrast to the USA legal agreement, what Apple was forced to do in
France was tell the truth on the Apple French web site that they shortened
the life of iPhones on purpose, not to protect anything as they repeatedly
lied about in the press - but specifically to shorten the life of iPhones.

Apple does not want to draw attention to the fact their intent was to
shorten the life of your iPhone without you realizing that's what they were
doing (that's why it was secret, after all).

The fact is the French authorities FORCED Apple to put their admission of
guilt for the criminal offense ON THE APPLE WEB SITE (but only for a
month).

I'm sure it's long gone, and, in fact, I suspect Apple deleted their
admission of criminal intent & guilt the microsecond after that month
expired.

What's left is clear and obvious public record that Apple paid a criminal
fine to the Paris prosecutor's office for their crime of intentionally and
secretly shortening the life of customers iPhones.

BTW, you can rest assured that's the BEST deal Apple's high-priced lawyers
could get from the fact they admitted criminal intent, given only a fool
would believe otherwise.

In the USA, given the criminal laws are different than in France, Apple got
away with lying to Congress (saying future iPhone throttling wasn't "as"
necessary, and yet, in every release since iOS 10, they've added throttling
to MORE AND MORE (and more) iPhone models.

In fact, this half a billion dollar agreement, IMHO, let's Apple off cheap,
in that Apple is now free to throttle EVERY iPhone ever made!

Woo hoo!

This is the best half billion dollars Apple _ever_ spent!

They can suddenly, completely arbitrarily, throttle any iPhone "after about
a year", which is _perfect_ for their MARKETING team.

a. Build a phone that has high speed, but only at first.
b. Then, after "about a year" throttle it to about half speed.
c. Then people will buy the _next_ "fast" iPhone
(which then gets throttled after about a year).

This is one of the most brilliant MARKETING moves Apple has ever made, IMHO
o What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU>
--
Never forget, while Apple is the lowest R&D in the industry, their
MARKETING is the finest on the planet (& its customers are utter fools).

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:

o *Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amount based on settlement*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/LdDMSwt0NVE>

*Google users only get $12 but Apple iPhone owners get _double_ that!*

o How to submit your claim in Apple's half a billion dollar secret throtting settlement
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wm-8YUKl5M0>

*Some countries are asking for more than double that even!*
o Five countries want Apple to pay consumers more money to settle secret throttling of iPhone CPUs to purposefully shorten device life
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YKId-GJCdec>

*Android owners won't get much as Google doesn't pull those Apple tricks:*
o Do any Android phone manufacturers throttle (CPUs, PD Charging, Modems) like Apple consistently does?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ZTmmGoAndyM>

In France, the prosecutors office also received $27M USD in criminal files
from Apple forcing Apple to publicly admit the committed the crime of
secretly and intentionally knowingly shortening the life of iPhones:

o Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits

"Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ>

REFERENCES:
o BBC: *Apple fined for slowing down old iPhones*
<https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724>

o *France Fines Apple $27 Million for Slowing Down Old iPhones*
<https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/02/11/france-fines-apple-41-million-for-slowing-down-old-iphones/>

o *Apple Fined 25 Million Euros in France for Slowing Down Older iPhones With iOS Update*
<https://www.macrumors.com/2020/02/07/apple-fined-25m-euros-france-slowing-down-iphones/>

o *Apple fined $41 million for secretly slowing old iPhones*
<https://www.smh.com.au/technology/apple-fined-41-million-for-secretly-slowing-old-iphones-20200210-p53z9n.html>

And, given Apologists brazenly deny what Apple openly admits,
here are screenshots from those sites backing up the facts:
o <https://i.postimg.cc/BQZ9hZg1/crime00.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/d11sJLYJ/crime02.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/HnL1QKxH/crime03.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/jjkFp5dV/crime04.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/rszF8z5S/crime05.jpg>

What the apologists do is play silly semantic games trying to claim that a
criminal offense and a criminal fine to the criminal system is "not" a
crime, simply by creative use of their personal translation of French law.

Why do apologist deny what even Apple publicly admitted?
o And why do apologists always blame Google/Microsoft for what Apple does?

I don't know why, but I suspect they brazenly deny facts simply because...
o Apologists hate that Apple isn't what MARKETING highly sold them it was.
--
Facts don't, won't & can't fit into apologists' imaginary belief systems.

o What is wrong with Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0/e5J-nW0hBAAJ>

Apologists seem to hate what Apple is, so much they deny what Apple does.

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:
o Yet another set of lawsuits won against Apple's lawyers,
admittedly the best on the planet - and yet - they still lose $113M USD
(because Apple secretly purposefully shortened the life of iPhones)
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/esbnfB6OSmc>

See also:

o Apple to pay $113 million to settle state investigation into throttling
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/18/apple-fine-battery/>

o Apple agrees to pay $500M for purposefully secretly slowing down iPhones
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/apple-agrees-to-pay-iphone-owners-in-settlement-over-slowing-down-older-models/2020/03/02/c026789c-5c9d-11ea-9055-5fa12981bbbf_story.html>

o Apple admitted to the crime of purposefully secretly shortening iPhone life
<https://www.economie.gouv.fr/files/files/directions_services/dgccrf/presse/communique/2020/CP-Ralentissement-fonctionnement-iPhone200207.pdf>

--
Apologists hate facts!

[Arlen Holder]

The facts show you'd be hard pressed to find any mobile device more poorly
designed than the bulk of today's iPhones...

Simply because most iPhones _require_ throttling just to prevent them from
prematurely being unstable.

You get the unenviable choice:
a. *CHOOSE UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE*, or,
b. *CHOOSE UNACCEPTABLE STABILITY*

You must choose one.

Verbatim, because apologists hate facts, so they deny any and all facts
they simply _hate_ about Apple products (which is a hell of a lot of facts)

"Apple 'fully understood' that by concealing the issues, it could spend a
year profiting off of people who thought they needed to buy a new iPhone,
when they only really needed to replace their phone's battery
to avoid [premature] throttling or unexpected [premature] shutdowns."

o Apple will pay $113 million for throttling iPhones
<https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/18/21573710/apple-battery-gate-throttle-iphones-settlement-amount>
--
It's hard to find a mobile device more poorly designed than the iPhone is.