Just bought a year or two of Apple's mobile phone, with the use of more and more slowly or even Caton crashes, which is a lot of Apple consumers have encountered problems recently, Apple made a statement acknowledging that the user is indeed unknown Of the case, the intention to make the old model processor down-running, the purpose is to protect the handset hardware.Many consumers do not buy it, that Apple's unauthorized intervention in the user's device, is a violation.And consumers questioned, Apple company in the end to protect the old cell phone, or intended to allow consumers to buy new products?
Has infringed the user's right to know?
Apple recently said in a statement that its approach is entirely for the sake of users, if the phone CPU also retains the previous performance, then because of the inherent defects of lithium batteries, the battery will not look durable, so doing so is to protect the battery, the protection Mobile phone hardware to prevent the phone automatically shut down.
Even Apple has its own legitimate purpose of doing so, but privately slowing down the speed of older models of Apple's mobile handsets is fair to consumers and infringes the rights of consumers?
According to media reports, a few days ago, five Apple mobile phone users filed an indictment in the Federal Court of Chicago alleging that Apple had concealed the information that should be disclosed, and said that if the Apple company explained in advance only need to replace the battery can make their old phone Faster, then they will not spend more money to buy a new Apple phone.
'The Law on the Protection of Rights and Interests of Consumers in China stipulates the' nine rights of consumers '. The primary one is the right to know. Without the right to know, there is no choice but to choose and not to mention the right to fair trade.' Institute of Commercial Law, Renmin University of China Director, Law School Professor Liu Junhai said Apple has the obligation of information disclosure, any technical treatment of mobile phones should be informed of consumers in advance.China University of Political Science and Law Institute of Civil Law, Institute of Civil and Commercial Law Professor Liu Zhihui also pointed out Apple did not give any information on the case of the old phone to use 'artificially slow down the phone' technology, even if its purpose is to avoid the cell phone battery aging caused by accidental destructive shutdown, it is also suspected of infringing on the user's The right to know.
Is it in violation of the contract of sale?
Apple has always claimed that its core competitiveness lies in the 'user experience'. So what is the subject of the purchase contract for the purchase of an Apple mobile phone by consumers? Is it limited to the Apple mobile phone itself or should it include the high-performance experience of service life?
Although there is no explicit agreement in the contract for the sale of Apple's mobile phones, the purchase of Apple mobile phones by consumers considering the selection and demand habits of consumers should also be considered as purchasing a high-performance experience for the corresponding service life. But Consumer Interest Even if it includes the high-performance experience it deserves, Apple's approach may not necessarily be considered a violation of the contract of sale, as it involves the specification and interpretation of specific parameters of a high-performance experience, and the contract of purchase and sale No clear definition of high-performance experience standards. 'Liu said that if' the ultimate user experience 'is just Apple's advertising slogan, high-performance experience has not become a specific contractual standards executable, then from Lawfully, Apple did not breach the sale contract, but at least contrary to the principle of good faith.
Who decided to maintain high performance or to protect the battery?
Some consumers value the battery life, some consumers value the speed of the phone, then Apple's pointed out that to maintain the high performance of mobile phones and battery life can not have both cases, it is not by the consumer to make a choice, in the end is Reduce phone performance or to replace the battery?
'Of course the right to choose belongs to the consumer, the Apple company as a business should not be the alternative of consumers.' 'Liu Junhai said precisely because the right to information is not protected, resulting in no choice to exercise, if consumers are informed, it can be based on Its preference is to choose between running at reduced speed to extend battery life and battery replacement to maintain high performance.
'Do not respect the right of consumers, but also lead to violations of fair trade rights of consumers.' Liu Junhai said after the release of the new phone, the performance of older phones down, consumers will mistakenly think that out on the phone, and Not the battery, which cost several thousand dollars to buy a new cell phone, while consumers could only spend a few hundred dollars for the battery.
Liu Junhai also pointed out that without the knowledge of consumers, Apple's 'for the sake of users' unauthorized intervention in consumer mobile phone speed is a serious violation.