new iPhone suit -The hits keep coming
zara
Apple Inc. is facing yet another class-action lawsuit over its iPhone, this
time from a New York State resident who claims the company failed to
adequately disclose to consumers that the handset is locked to AT&T's
network and that using the device internationally would result in
substantial data roaming
Edwin
> apple keeps humping them - but they keep coming back for more.
>
>
> Apple Inc. is facing yet another class-action lawsuit over its iPhone, this
> time from a New York State resident who claims the company failed to
> adequately disclose to consumers that the handset is locked to AT&T's
> network and that using the device internationally would result in
> substantial data roaming
"Upon returning from Mexico, Kliegerman claims to have received a bill
from AT&T with $2,000 in international data roaming charges. Being a
frequently traveler, he turned to the wireless carrier in order to
obtain an unlock code for his iPhone, but was informed that such
unlock codes would not be provided to him, according to the suit."
"Kliegerman and his attorneys at Randall S. Newman, P.C argue that had
AT&T allowed him to purchase and use a SIM card from a foreign
wireless carrier, he would have been able to utilize iPhone
internationally at fees substantially less than the $2,000 charged by
AT&T. They note that AT&T has always provided unlock codes for non-
iPhone handsets in the past when requested by a customer."
Jeez, being an iPhone owner is like getting gang raped by Apple and
AT&T!
"Yet another class-action lawsuit over the iPhone?" How many
fscking lawsuits have the got over the iPhone, when the damn thing
isn't even two months old? Does this mean nut jobs like Sandman are
going to start pretending again that the XBox 360 got lawsuits against
it too?
Alan Baker
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
1. This suit is completely laughable. The entire world knows that AT&T
is the only network the iPhone will work on.
2. Why are you complaining about this being off topic for CSMA?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Jim
This suit won't have legs other than you and ZERO's trying to make
something of it here.
From the moment of the iPhone's launch, Apple stated that it would have
an *exclusive contract" with AT&T. EXCLUSIVE. Apparently this fellow
disregarded that or didn't listen when he purchased his iPhone since it
wasn't any secret.
--
Jim
Sandman
> On Aug 29, 8:47 am, " zara" <callicoj...@aol.com> wrote:
> > apple keeps humping them - but they keep coming back for more.
> >
> > http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/08/28/apple_faces_new_class_a...
> >
> > Apple Inc. is facing yet another class-action lawsuit over its iPhone, this
> > time from a New York State resident who claims the company failed to
> > adequately disclose to consumers that the handset is locked to AT&T's
> > network and that using the device internationally would result in
> > substantial data roaming
>
> "Upon returning from Mexico, Kliegerman claims to have received a bill
> from AT&T with $2,000 in international data roaming charges. Being a
> frequently traveler, he turned to the wireless carrier in order to
> obtain an unlock code for his iPhone, but was informed that such
> unlock codes would not be provided to him, according to the suit."
>
> "Kliegerman and his attorneys at Randall S. Newman, P.C argue that had
> AT&T allowed him to purchase and use a SIM card from a foreign
> wireless carrier, he would have been able to utilize iPhone
> internationally at fees substantially less than the $2,000 charged by
> AT&T. They note that AT&T has always provided unlock codes for non-
> iPhone handsets in the past when requested by a customer."
>
> Jeez, being an iPhone owner is like getting gang raped by Apple and
> AT&T!
Agreed. This exclusivity deal really sucks. :(
> "Yet another class-action lawsuit over the iPhone?" How many
> fscking lawsuits have the got over the iPhone, when the damn thing
> isn't even two months old? Does this mean nut jobs like Sandman are
> going to start pretending again that the XBox 360 got lawsuits against
> it too?
Pretend?
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
> In article <1188399340.965572.3...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Your opinions have been duly ignored for the empty bluster they are.
> 2. Why are you complaining about this being off topic for CSMA?
Point out such complaints within my reply.
Edwin
> In article <1188399340.965572.3...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
Yet another Maccie who thinks he's the official arbiter of complaints
against Apple.
> From the moment of the iPhone's launch, Apple stated that it would have
> an *exclusive contract" with AT&T. EXCLUSIVE. Apparently this fellow
> disregarded that or didn't listen when he purchased his iPhone since it
> wasn't any secret.
Go back and read the article instead of making a fool of yourself with
remarks like the ones you posted above.
zara
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1188408189.1...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
Buy this time of day, he's to bombed to be able function on a minimum level.
Edwin
> In article <1188399340.965572.3...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Ah, you weren't serious.
--
Sandman[.net]
George Graves
(in article <alangbaker-D58C2...@news.telus.net>):
What's funny is that the hits keep coming because the Apple haters like
Edwin, Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee (AKA zara and Pratt), "PC Guy" et al keep
scouring the web for ANY anti-Apple propaganda. It's really pathetic and more
than a little sad. Me? I don't care about iPhones, and don't see why these
guys keep picking at it. Don't like iPhone? Give it a pass. I have.
Jim
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
I did eddie-lost which is exactly why I made the comment I did, that
Apple had an *Exclusive* contract with AT&T.
You don't comprehend what *exclusive* means.
Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only deepening
the delusions you have?
--
Jim
MuahMan
"Jim" <j...@NOwwa.net> wrote in message
news:jim-E2C07C.1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Oooooh the town drunk hitting you with the Burger Flipper comeback. So
fresh, so original.... so Mactarded.
Edwin
> In article <1188409974.991929.279...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>,
Ah, something broke inside your head again.
"First iPhone Class-Action Suit Against Apple and AT&T"
"It was bound to happen. It seems that a guy called Trujillo has been
the first to file a class-action suit against Apple and AT&T because
of the iPhone. The reason? You guessed it-it's the battery."
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/breaking/first-iphone-class+action-suit-against-apple-and-att-283280.php
"Another iPhone Battery Class-Action Lawsuit Filed"
"A second class-action lawsuit has been filed against Apple regarding
the iPhone battery. The suit claims that Apple and AT&T failed to tell
early buyers about battery replacement fees."
"The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California and is similar to another one filed previously
by Mr. Jose Trujillo in July."
"This time, Mr. Sydney Leung said that Apple and AT&T did not fully
inform customers about the costs of replacing the iPhone and made
assertions about the expected battery life of the iPhone which would
force the user to incur the charges. "
http://www.ipodobserver.com/story/32660
"Third iPhone Class Action Suit Filed"
"AppleInsider reports today that a third iPhone class-action lawsuit
has been filed against Apple (AAPL). This one claims that the company
failed to disclose that the device was locked to AT&T's wireless
network and that using it outside the U.S. could result in substantial
roaming charges."
"The complainant is a New York state resident named Herbert H.
Kliegerman who, according to AppleInsider, tells this story:"
" Approximately two weeks after purchasing his iPhone, Kliegerman
traveled to Mexico for a week where he continued to use his iPhone to
check emails and surf the web. He did so, according to the suit, after
reading a statement on Apple's iPhone website stating that "[y]ou can
browse the Internet and send emails as often as you like without being
charged extra.""
"Upon returning from Mexico, Kliegerman claims to have received a
bill from AT&T with $2,000 in international data roaming charges.
Being a frequently traveler, he turned to the wireless carrier in
order to obtain an unlock code for his iPhone, but was informed that
such unlock codes would not be provided to him, according to the
suit."
http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/08/third-iphone-cl.html
"Third iPhone Class Action Suit Filed"
"AppleInsider reports today that a third iPhone class-action lawsuit
has been filed against Apple (AAPL). This one claims that the company
failed to disclose that the device was locked to AT&T's wireless
network and that using it outside the U.S. could result in substantial
roaming charges."
"The complainant is a New York state resident named Herbert H.
Kliegerman who, according to AppleInsider, tells this story:"
Approximately two weeks after purchasing his iPhone, Kliegerman
traveled to Mexico for a week where he continued to use his iPhone to
check emails and surf the web. He did so, according to the suit, after
reading a statement on Apple's iPhone website stating that "[y]ou can
browse the Internet and send emails as often as you like without being
charged extra."
http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/08/third-iphone-cl.html
"Apple's iPhone to Take the Fall for YouTube's Copyright Infringement
Woes?"
"Robert Tur. You've heard of him, right? He's suing YouTube for
copyright infringement after his video clips of the L.A. riots
surfaced on the video-sharing site. He's become even more famous after
YouTube rose in popularity, and even more still when the site was
acquired by Google. What put the cherry on top for Robert Tur's fame
is the legal support he's getting from NBC Universal for his court
battles against YouTube. You'll remember that Viacom wanted to help
Tur as well, but its existing $1 billion lawsuit against YouTube
prevented it from doing so."
"While it may seem that Tur is hinting at some sort of conspiracy
between Apple and YouTube, with Apple intentionally making illegal
content available, it may be as simple as most YouTube videos being
made available in this H.264 format for use on the iPhone. If this is
the case (or even if it's not), YouTube could be held even more
responsible for the upload, conversion formatting and distribution of
its content. What a task."
Edwin
> In article <1188408189.191823.172...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
Since you're too stupid to find it for yourself, I'll paste it in for
you:
" Approximately two weeks after purchasing his iPhone, Kliegerman
traveled to Mexico for a week where he continued to use his iPhone to
check emails and surf the web. He did so, according to the suit, after
reading a statement on Apple's iPhone website stating that "[y]ou can
browse the Internet and send emails as often as you like without being
charged extra.""
He got charged $2,000 extra for browsing the Internet and sending
emails, even though Apple said he would have no extra charge. The
least they could have done is unlock the phone so he could do those
things for a lesser charge.
> You don't comprehend what *exclusive* means.
You have no business making claims about what others comprehend, given
your low level of comprehension.
> Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only deepening
> the delusions you have?
When are you going to reveal why you hate fast-food workers, Jim?
Edwin
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 08:00:30 -0700, Alan Baker wrote
>
>
>
> > In article <1188399340.965572.3...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
If you really didn't care about the iPhone you wouldn't have posted
all the libel you did above.
MuahMan
Maybe Jim the town drunk got lippy with The Burger King while he was on one
of his druken rampages and the King kicked his ass?!?!?
Jim
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Sorry loser, eddie-lost. It's still Kleigerman's own fault for not
inquiring when he purchased the phone. Any rational, thinking person who
travels and would purchase any phone would, or should, be concerned if
his/her phone would work wherever it is that they're likely to travel.
It's about thinking ahead and planning, not assuming like some dummy,
which of course you too must be since you evidently agree with
kleigerman. Note that Apple's statement said nothing as to location, so
it would be very smart to ask, before one assumes. That's what thinking
folks do.
edwin, the living delusional bobble-head, walking down the street
blissfully unaware. bla,bala,bala,bala,bala....bala....
--
Jim
nospamatall
Andy
Alan Baker
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
LOL
>
> > 2. Why are you complaining about this being off topic for CSMA?
>
> Point out such complaints within my reply.
Sorry.
Why *aren't* you complaining?
Alan Baker
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
I'll have to remember that line...
Alan Baker
> > Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only deepening
> > the delusions you have?
>
> When are you going to reveal why you hate fast-food workers, Jim?
How about after you prove how his comment proves that he does?
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > "Yet another class-action lawsuit over the iPhone?" How many
> > > > > fscking lawsuits have the got over the iPhone, when the damn thing
> > > > > isn't even two months old? Does this mean nut jobs like Sandman are
> > > > > going to start pretending again that the XBox 360 got lawsuits against
> > > > > it too?
> >
> > > > Pretend?
> >
> > >www.dictionary.com
> >
> > Ah, you weren't serious.
>
> Ah, something broke inside your head again.
>
> "First iPhone Class-Action Suit Against Apple and AT&T"
What does that have to do with your claim that I merely "pretend" that
the Xbox 360 got lawsuit against it too.
--
Sandman[.net]
zara
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-BA976...@news.telus.net...
> In article <1188419172....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> > Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only
>> > deepening
>> > the delusions you have?
>>
>> When are you going to reveal why you hate fast-food workers, Jim?
>
> How about after you prove how his comment proves that he does?
"Hate" seems a little strong. "Hold in deep contempt" fits much better. I
would surmise that after jim gets in his cups, he feels far superior to the
rest of the world. That's a typical Alky mind set.
Alan Baker
" zara" <calli...@aol.com> wrote:
Actually, it doesn't seem to fit at all, but then that's pretty much
true of everything you say.
As a matter of fact, you're too boring to bother even marking as read
when I'm done with the group...
Edwin
Yet another non-response from you.
>>
>> > 2. Why are you complaining about this being off topic for CSMA?
>>
>> Point out such complaints within my reply.
>
> Sorry.
Insincere apology rejected.
> Why *aren't* you complaining?
Why wouldn't you be asking me that if I had posted something positive about
the iPhone?
Edwin
So you can repeat in situations where it doesn't apply.
Edwin
> In article <1188419172....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> > Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only
>> > deepening
>> > the delusions you have?
>>
>> When are you going to reveal why you hate fast-food workers, Jim?
>
> How about after you prove how his comment proves that he does?
IOW, you think he was paying me a compliment by calling me a "burger
flipper?"
Why do I have to prove to you that using someone's job as insult is an
insult to the people who do those jobs, that it conveys hatred and loathing
for them? Because you're incredibly stupid?
Edwin
"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-F56F5D.08...@News.Individual.NET...
The fact you have never documented a single class action lawsuit against the
XBox 360, you've merely claimed they must exist.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> "Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
> news:alangbaker-BA976...@news.telus.net...
> > In article <1188419172....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> > Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only
> >> > deepening
> >> > the delusions you have?
> >>
> >> When are you going to reveal why you hate fast-food workers, Jim?
> >
> > How about after you prove how his comment proves that he does?
>
> IOW, you think he was paying me a compliment by calling me a "burger
> flipper?"
No. That indicates contempt for *you*, however.
>
> Why do I have to prove to you that using someone's job as insult is an
> insult to the people who do those jobs, that it conveys hatred and loathing
> for them? Because you're incredibly stupid?
It doesn't convey loathing of people who do those jobs. It acknowledges
what is simply a fact, that those jobs don't require much brain power.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Well let me help:
'A defective product class action lawsuit has been filed in Chicago
against Microsoft, the manufacturer of the Xbox 360 video console game.
The claim is that the Xbox 360 has a "defective design" in which the
power supply and CPU overheat which affects heat sensitive chips and can
cause the console to freeze or lock up.'
<http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/defective_xbox_360.html>
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
LOL
>
> >>
> >> > 2. Why are you complaining about this being off topic for CSMA?
> >>
> >> Point out such complaints within my reply.
> >
> > Sorry.
>
> Insincere apology rejected.
>
> > Why *aren't* you complaining?
>
> Why wouldn't you be asking me that if I had posted something positive about
> the iPhone?
I'm asking you because you do complain about positive posts about the
iPhone as being off topic for CSMA, yet you *don't* complain about
negative posts.
What do you call that, Edwin, if not hypocrisy?
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
<snip>
> >> > What's funny is that the hits keep coming because the Apple haters like
> >> > Edwin, Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee (AKA zara and Pratt), "PC Guy" et al
> >> > keep
> >> > scouring the web for ANY anti-Apple propaganda. It's really pathetic
> >> > and
> >> > more
> >> > than a little sad. Me? I don't care about iPhones, and don't see why
> >> > these
> >> > guys keep picking at it. Don't like iPhone? Give it a pass. I have.
> >>
> >> If you really didn't care about the iPhone you wouldn't have posted
> >> all the libel you did above.
> >
> > I'll have to remember that line...
>
> So you can repeat in situations where it doesn't apply.
LOL
Sandman
Other than, of course, the ones I did link to. D'oh!
Just because you ignore the posts when I post them doesn't mean they
don't exist, Edwin.
--
Sandman[.net]
Jeb
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article <u96dnbuio6mzBEHb...@comcast.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > "Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
> > news:alangbaker-BA976...@news.telus.net...
> > > In article <1188419172....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> > > Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> > Did one of those burgers you flip clop you in the noggin, only
> > >> > deepening
> > >> > the delusions you have?
> > >>
> > >> When are you going to reveal why you hate fast-food workers, Jim?
> > >
> > > How about after you prove how his comment proves that he does?
> >
> > IOW, you think he was paying me a compliment by calling me a "burger
> > flipper?"
>
> No. That indicates contempt for *you*, however.
You shouldnt have contempt for a fellow mac advocate. Hey Edwin, how is
your powermac 6400 doing, the bestest computer in the world according to
you? Edwin the mac advocate, his parents should of named him Edmac in
anticipation for the nets biggest mac advocate.
Of course I have been absent from this group for over half a decade....
eusto...@gmail.com
> In article <1188418719.536003.96...@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > > "Yet another class-action lawsuit over theiPhone?" How many
> > > > > > fscking lawsuits have the got over theiPhone, when the damn thing
> > > > > > isn't even two months old? Does this mean nut jobs like Sandman are
> > > > > > going to start pretending again that the XBox 360 got lawsuits against
> > > > > > it too?
>
> > > > > Pretend?
>
> > > >www.dictionary.com
>
> > > Ah, you weren't serious.
>
> > Ah, something broke inside your head again.
>
>
> What does that have to do with your claim that I merely "pretend" that
> the Xbox 360 got lawsuit against it too.
>
> --
> Sandman[.net]