Second lawsuit challenges iPhone MMS advertising
updated 03:50 pm EDT, Fri August 14, 2009
Second iPhone MMS lawsuit
A second class action lawsuit has been filed over Apple and AT&T's lack of MMS messaging support, documents show. Submitted in a US district court for southern Illinois, on behalf of Tim Meeker and other unnamed plaintiffs, the suit accuses Apple and AT&T of having "misrepresented and/or concealed, suppressed, or omitted material facts as to the iPhone having MMS functionality." Representing Meeker's party is the lawfirm of Rosenblum, Schwartz, Rogers, Glass, P.C..
Apple first announced that MMS would be an option for iPhones when it unveiled the iPhone 3.0 firmware. At June's WWDC event however, the company also warned that the feature would not be available from AT&T until late summer. That fact has been left out of both companies' marketing efforts, lawyers charge, resulting in "deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation and unfair practices."
The suit is identical in many respects to one filed in Louisiana, down to the implication of damages exceeding $5 million. The size of the Illinois case's class is 10 times larger however, numbering over 100,000 people. "Each plaintiff will be claiming damages for the 3G or 3GS iPhone he or she purchased," filings read. The cost of an iPhone 3G is noted to be anywhere between $100 and $500.
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: May 2005
Where's the harm?
I've looked very hard and can't see where's that deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise and misrepresentation. Apple said iPhone 3.0 software will have MMS. When they announced it they were showing a slide with names of carriers that will support it when the software comes out. They then specifically said AT&T wasn't on the slide and the support will arrive late summer. So, what part of this statement was false promise (or any of those other qualifications).
As much as I agree with pretty much everyone that it is really crappy from AT&T to continue delaying this any further, but it does NOT merit a single lawsuit.