Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 403 posts

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#31

Post by black_puppydog »

bityard wrote: post #23

I hate to be so cynical, but here's exactly how this is going to play out, or I'll eat my hat: 1. Apple and Amazon will add language to their Terms and Conditions stating that regardless of the phrasing on their websites and apps, access to the media that customers purchase will be revoked if their account is terminated. And since it's in the agreement, it's binding: in general, you can't sue to get out of a contract…

I'm afraid you might be right about 2, but wrt 1 I think you can absolutely sue your way out of a contract if it was made after blatantly false advertising, no?

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#32

Post by [deleted] »

lettergram wrote: post #13
dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really surprised to see Apple taking this approach. You'd think they could have come up with something less offensive to their users. This is the exact same line Sidney Powell is using in her defense against Dominion: "'No Reasonable Person' Thought Her Election Fraud Claims Were Fact" [0]. Amused but not surprised to see this from her, I am quite aghast to see this from Apple. The fact is, just like any reasonable p…

Not sure why Sidney Powell was brought up here, but that’s ongoing litigation and neither side has emerged victorious. Further, the claims in that article were odd and don’t seem to match the filing Sydney Powell actually made: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699/... So I don’t think that’s necessarily a great source to cite. EDIT: In either case, these are lawsuits. There’s a few things that…

[deleted]

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#33

Post by fortran77 »

I remember when I worked for Disney and they had some "lifetime" products, like "Leave a Legacy" (i.e., personalize a brick or small plaque in Epcot). If you read the fine print, they were only obligated to preserve your "legacy" for 20 years.

In fact the plaques were taken down after 20 years, but eventually reinstalled somewhere else:

https://www.laughingplace.com/w/news/2021/02/09/leave-a-lega....

The TOS for these media “purchases” would be more honest if they had a time limit, e.g.: 10 years. You are “purchasing” a 10 year license.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#34

Post by gambiting »

bityard wrote: post #23

I hate to be so cynical, but here's exactly how this is going to play out, or I'll eat my hat: 1. Apple and Amazon will add language to their Terms and Conditions stating that regardless of the phrasing on their websites and apps, access to the media that customers purchase will be revoked if their account is terminated. And since it's in the agreement, it's binding: in general, you can't sue to get out of a contract…

In general, contracts can say literally whatever they want, and it doesn't mean they will stand up in court. If the court agrees that Apple selling $25k worth of stuff and denying access to it isn't "fair", then it isn't fair, end of story, regardless of what the contract says. The court might of course disagree, but you can't be certain until the case happens.

I do however believe that Apple will just settle this out of court, specifically to avoid such a ruling.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#36

Post by thathndude »

black_puppydog wrote: post #31
bityard wrote: post #23

I hate to be so cynical, but here's exactly how this is going to play out, or I'll eat my hat: 1. Apple and Amazon will add language to their Terms and Conditions stating that regardless of the phrasing on their websites and apps, access to the media that customers purchase will be revoked if their account is terminated. And since it's in the agreement, it's binding: in general, you can't sue to get out of a contract…

I'm afraid you might be right about 2, but wrt 1 I think you can absolutely sue your way out of a contract if it was made after blatantly false advertising, no?

That’s correct. Am a lawyer, not giving legal advice.

A very common term in contracts is what is called a merger clause, and what it says essentially is that the contract forms the entire agreement of the parties, and that any oral representations not contained in the contract are irrelevant and to be completely disregarded. But there are courts that hold that a merger clause is not absolute and has its limits.

Make no mistake, contracts and their waivers are powerful. However, there are lots of court rulings where the courts have held that you can’t say X explicitly and have the contract say Y. In those situations, the courts will often enforce the X promise.

But then you get into a practical issue here. If you were an effected individual, you’re going to have to hire a lawyer to make that argument, and even with $25,000 on the line, that’s probably not a situation where the math works out.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#37

Post by baryphonic »

dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #4
realusername wrote: post #3

> Apple countered by arguing that “no reasonable consumer would believe” that content purchased through iTunes would be available on the platform indefinitely Remember this sentence to change your mind for the next time you see some movie to buy online.

Really surprised to see Apple taking this approach. You'd think they could have come up with something less offensive to their users. This is the exact same line Sidney Powell is using in her defense against Dominion: "'No Reasonable Person' Thought Her Election Fraud Claims Were Fact" [0]. Amused but not surprised to see this from her, I am quite aghast to see this from Apple. The fact is, just like any reasonable p…

> This is the exact same line Sidney Powell is using in her defense against Dominion: "'No Reasonable Person' Thought Her Election Fraud Claims Were Fact" [0]. Amused but not surprised to see this from her, I am quite aghast to see this from Apple.

The sentence in the filing is true: no reasonable person would see her opinion about an event as a fact. Opinions are not facts. Powell's problem is that her "facts" used to support her opinion are flaming dumpster-fire ridiculous and Loony Toons level crazy. (My opinion, also not a fact, is that she had a really bad filter for technical information, and so ended up filing complete trash in court.)

Apple is also making an opinion claim here: "buy" in an Apple context does not mean "buy" in the colloquial context. I think it's a dumb argument mostly unsupported by facts (don't know how well supported it is by law), but, again, it's their opinion.

Only the judge's opinion really matters, as well as the customer's when she decides not to "buy" this crap from hostile streaming services.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#38

Post by Retric »

mc32 wrote: post #26
realusername wrote: post #3

> Apple countered by arguing that “no reasonable consumer would believe” that content purchased through iTunes would be available on the platform indefinitely Remember this sentence to change your mind for the next time you see some movie to buy online.

Historically media has had a limited play-life. 78s, 45s and 33 warped, broke or got scratched, etc., tapes wore out, broke, got tangled etc., CDs scratched or deteriorated after some time. There are exceptional specimens for all the above, but a good number don’t survive long unless owned by an aficionado who took care of their media. With digital you can have backups and in theory they could last forever as you con…

For CD’s it’s legal to make backup copies in the US which are digital and thus don’t degrade.

Many of the oldest recordings still work, and can be played indefinitely with an optical needle. The time value of money means the possible purchase by a small fraction of buyers 20+ years out isn’t worth much at the time of sale. It’s only moving forward in time that makes anyone care about these sales.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_turntable

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#39

Post by bityard »

black_puppydog wrote: post #31
bityard wrote: post #23

I hate to be so cynical, but here's exactly how this is going to play out, or I'll eat my hat: 1. Apple and Amazon will add language to their Terms and Conditions stating that regardless of the phrasing on their websites and apps, access to the media that customers purchase will be revoked if their account is terminated. And since it's in the agreement, it's binding: in general, you can't sue to get out of a contract…

I'm afraid you might be right about 2, but wrt 1 I think you can absolutely sue your way out of a contract if it was made after blatantly false advertising, no?

Well, that's what the court case is about. I would certainly _like_ for the result of the case to be either Apple (Amazon, et al) stops using the word "Buy" in their apps, or better yet but even more unlikely, for the companies to start providing media as DRM-free downloads.

But like I said: the cynic in me says neither is going to happen.

Re: Apple sued for terminating account with $25k worth of apps and videos

#40

Post by [deleted] »

baryphonic wrote: post #37
dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really surprised to see Apple taking this approach. You'd think they could have come up with something less offensive to their users. This is the exact same line Sidney Powell is using in her defense against Dominion: "'No Reasonable Person' Thought Her Election Fraud Claims Were Fact" [0]. Amused but not surprised to see this from her, I am quite aghast to see this from Apple. The fact is, just like any reasonable p…

> This is the exact same line Sidney Powell is using in her defense against Dominion: "'No Reasonable Person' Thought Her Election Fraud Claims Were Fact" [0]. Amused but not surprised to see this from her, I am quite aghast to see this from Apple. The sentence in the filing is true: no reasonable person would see her opinion about an event as a fact. Opinions are not facts. Powell's problem is that her "facts" used…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN