Apple Hit with Another iPhone 4 Antenna Lawsuit

| News

Apple and AT&T are facing another lawsuit over iPhone 4 signal reception issues. This class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of Dr. Thomas Gionis by Carp Law Offices and alleges that the two companies are selling the iPhone 4 with a defective antenna.

“The complaint revolves around the defective antenna installed in the new iPhone 4, and Apple and AT&T’s refusal to correct the issue or to accept returns of the phone without restocking fees or contract penalties for attempting to void the service agreement before the contractual two year period has run,” the law firm said in a statement.

Some iPhone 4 owners began complaining of signal loss issues when their hand covered the lower left corner of the combination iPod and smartphone. Apple claimed there wasn’t an antenna issue, and then suggested that users experiencing signal strength problems should hold the phone differently, or buy a case that covers the stainless steel antenna band.

Apple has since issued a statement claiming the problem is actually the formula used in the iPhone’s software to calculate signal strength and display signal bars.

“Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong,” Apple said in its statement. “Our formula, in many instances, mistakenly displays 2 more bars than it should for a given signal strength.”

Apple plans to release a software update in the coming weeks for the iPhone 3G, 3GS and 4 that changes how signal strength is calculated.

Carp isn’t the first law firm to go fishing for a class action lawsuit over iPhone 4 reception issues. A federal lawsuit filed in Maryland alleges Apple and AT&T have been selling iPhones knowing that there are antenna-related problems.

The lawfirm of Kershaw, Cutter & Ratinoff has been actively looking for iPhone 4 owners for their own class action lawsuit over reception issues, as well, and is presumably working on filing a case.

The Carp lawsuit is asking the court for class action certification, and an injunction blocking Apple from manufacturing the iPhone 4 “until the problem is acknowledged and repaired.”

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

Comments

geoduck

?Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong,? Apple said in its statement. ?Our formula, in many instances, mistakenly displays 2 more bars than it should for a given signal strength.?

That will be the basis of the next lawsuit.
And people actually wonder where the idea for the Vampire as pop culture icon comes from.

mehrman

It may be hot here today.  I need to file a class action lawsuit against a deity.  Any lawyers want to handle this for those of us that live here?  Let’s get real here.  Prove the problem exists, such as if my Droid, Blackberry, Nokia, etc. all have 5 bars no matter how I hold the cell phone and my iPhone 3GS, iPhone 3G, iPhone original all have 5 bars no matter how I hold the phone but my iPhone 4 has say 4 or 5 bars and when I hold it a certain way it has no or a couple of bars then I say hey, we have a valid issue.  Prove the issue first, then file the suit.

geoduck

Prove the issue first, then file the suit.

Unfortunately these lawyers, and I’ve talked to their ilk over the years, will say that the place to prove the issue is in court.

Dean Lewis

“Carp Law Offices”

Carp? As in fishing? They aren’t even trying anymore… smile (I see Jeff picked up on it as well, heh heh…)

FlipFriddle

Can I file a class-action suit against McDonalds because I disagree with the way they designed the Big Mac and feel that it doesn’t perform like a hamburger should and that they misrepresented its flavor as being good?
Good Lord I hate these kinds of suits; waste of time and exist solely to generate revenue for law firms.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

No Flip, don’t be a dork. You can’t sue McDonalds because their Big Mac did not intentionally display more bars than you actually have, nor does it drop calls when your moist hands bridge its external antenna gap. Even Gruber sees what Apple tried to get away with here.

scott

No Flip, don?t be a dork. You can?t sue McDonalds because their Big Mac did not intentionally display more bars than you actually have, nor does it drop calls when your moist hands bridge its external antenna gap. Even Gruber sees what Apple tried to get away with here.

still, i’ve yet to get a big mac that looks like the picture in the ads.  misrepresentation to the max!!!

Constable Odo

Return the iPhone 4 and pay the $10 restocking fee.  It seems like a pretty straightforward and simple solution for those that feel that the iPhone doesn’t live up to their standards.  There’s no guarantee that they’ll be happy with any product they buy.  Then they can go out and select their Android smartphone of choice.  Why are these people getting bent out of shape?  I know people that return stuff all the time that they’re unhappy with. Filing a lawsuit within a day or two when you have 30 days to return a product makes little sense.  Is it that they’re too cheap to pay the restocking fee?

Brad

I just bought a pair of jeans that says there my size, but they don’t fit. The other pair I bought is the same size and fits just fine. Can I sue Levi?

David

This is a pretty could case of defective design—or, if not defective, certainly misleadingly advertised in terms of basic functionality.  From first hand experience, have own every model of iPhone, this is marked problem that didn’t exist before, and probably reflects ineffective field testing.  As a lawyer that defends class action cases, Apple’s first response—get a bumper—was the honest response, and it’s going to put them in deep water in these lawsuits.  Yes, you can simply return your iPhone, and that will be one of Apple’s arguments.  But, it would stop the class from being certified (at great expense to Apple in legal fees), and will like end up with Apple being required to provide bumpers free (or a payment sufficient to cover the purchase of one).  These bumpers, by the way, are so cheap to make—pennies in materials—that Apple should have simply provided them to all who complained.  The fact that they sell the bumpers for $30 is a pretty good example of gouging.  The ability to return a product is not a legal defense to a product defect claim (or a false advertising claim).  You’re entitled to get what you pay for—consistent with what is advertised. It may be a sensible individual move for those who are okay with it, but the law obliges companies to sell products that work as advertised.

Log-in to comment