Recently, “the law students in Beijing and Shanghai sued Apple for not sending chargers” aroused heated discussion. Starting from Apple’s cancellation of chargers and earphones for the iPhone 12 series, in recent years, more and more mobile phone merchants have begun to follow this approach. Some people support the lawsuit against law students, while others think that it is purely enthusiastic and meaningless. Do the actions of mobile phone manufacturers infringe consumer rights?
Increase profits in the name of environmental protection?
Law student sues Apple for not sending chargers
According to media reports, due to Apple’s new products no longer donating power adapters, in May this year, students from Beijing University of Chemical Technology and Donghua University teamed up to take Apple to court and request Apple to deliver them.cell phoneCharger, and bear the liability for breach of contract, pay 100 yuan for breach of contract and bear litigation costs.
The case was opened in the first instance in September this year. In the court, both the plaintiff and the defendant conducted proof and cross-examination. At present, the case is still in the stage of supplementary evidence and written materials.
“The first feeling is that it’s a beautiful job!”iPhone12 Mobile phone users told Chinanews.com that they felt very unreasonable when they heard that they bought a mobile phone without a charger. “When I buy a mobile phone, I have to spend a few hundred more on a charging head!”
It can also be seen from the comments of netizens,Many people have deep grievances about buying mobile phones without chargers.
In fact, this is not the first time Apple has been sued for chargers.
In 2020, Apple’s “environmental protection” and “everyone has readyAccessories”For the reason, after canceling the power adapter and earphones that came with the iPhone 12 series products, in January 2021, “Apple was sued for not sending the charger” to the hot search.
From the company’s Weibo.
According to news from Qicha’s official Weibo on January 27, Mr. Yang, a consumer in Xi’an, raised a substantive challenge with Apple regarding the fact that the new mobile phone accessories did not include a charger, and took Apple to court.
Mr. Yang made several major demands: According to law, the defendant (Apple) was ordered to replace the USB-C to lightning cable with a USB-A to lightning cable free of charge; the defendant Apple was ordered to provide a USB-A to lightning cable compatible with the USB-A to lightning cable. Matching charging adapter.
But this case did not see the following. Qicha Weibo mentioned that the Qicha APP showed that the court date was January 26, but Apple did not arrive in court in time and did not respond.
Since then, many domestic mobile phone manufacturers have begun to follow this approach.
A mobile phone brand.
Chinanews.com asked at the official flagship stores of many well-known mobile phone brands. One brand store customer service said that in the store, the “official standard” version of the mobile phone does not have a charger and data cable, while the “package one” has a charger and data cable. The price of “Official Standard” is 200 yuan lower than “Package One”.
Another brand’s customer service replied: “In response to environmental protection, chargers and data cables will not be provided”, and you can choose to purchase the package. The package it provides shows that the price is the same with or without a charger.
“Apple’s behavior is just under the pretext of environmental protection to increase corporate profits by reducing consumers’ necessary accessories.” In this lawsuit, a law student from Beijing University of Chemical Technology mentioned that Apple promoted MagSafe wireless under the iPhone 12 sales interface. charger. And wireless charging is the charging method with the lowest conversion efficiency.Apple’s vigorous promotion of wireless charging is to put the practical value of wireless charging before the environmental value; instead of attaching the power adapter, it puts the practical value of the charger after the environmental value.
According to previous media reports, Apple’s new smartphone iPhone 13 may soon face penalties in Brazil because it does not come with a free charging plug.
According to reports, in March of this year, Brazil issued a fine of US$1.9 million to Apple for similar issues, and Apple also lost a related civil lawsuit in Brazil. In the eyes of the Brazilian consumer protection agency, the practice of not attaching a charger to Apple’s mobile phone is equivalent to a price increase in disguise.
Lawyer: This is also defending the rights of other Apple consumers
After the news came out, many netizens expressed their support for rights protection, and some netizens questioned: Is there really no way to use them? “Buying a mobile phone without a charger is the same as buying instant noodles without seasoning. I have never heard of buying a special seasoning.”
There are also people who think that since it is stated in advance that the charger will not be sent, there are so many brands, why not buy it? Think that this behavior is only for bloggers’ attention.
Regarding the legal issues in this incident, Zhang Xinnian, a lawyer from Beijing Zhongwen Law Firm, said in an interview with Chinanews.com that in fact, it is well known that without a charger, a mobile phone cannot be used normally. The charger should belong to The mobile phone is standard; in law, the mobile phone can be regarded as the main item in the purchase and sale contract, the charger belongs to the subordinate item, and the Apple mobile phone can only be adapted to the Apple charger.
“therefore,Even if Apple told consumers not to provide chargers in the standard terms, it was suspected of breaching contractual obligations.“
Zhang Xinnian said that prior to this, all merchants, including Apple, have distributed chargers when consumers buy mobile phones. This has already formed market trading practices and Apple should abide by them.
Regarding the “bo eyeball” argument, lawyers believe that consumers have the right to seek judicial relief when they believe that their legitimate rights and interests have been infringed, and to bring a lawsuit to the court in accordance with the law. Students’ rights protection actions should be affirmed.
“This lawsuit has public welfare value, and the students are actually defending the rights of other Apple consumers.” Zhang Xinnian said that once the lawsuit is won, Apple should also resolve the same problems faced by other consumers.
Rush to the hot search! Five female college students teamed up to sue Apple! Because there is no charger
Daily economic news
Every edited by He Xiaotao, Yi Qijiang, Gai Yuanyuan
On October 26, the topic of “law students suing Apple” rushed into hot searches and attracted attention.
According to the Shanghai Rule of Law News, a French student Fang from Beijing University of Chemical Technology bought an iPhone 12 Pro Max mobile phone. After discovering that the mobile phone was not equipped with a corresponding charging device, he chose to use legal means to protect his rights and interests. “According to the transfer of items from the main item and social transaction habits, the purchase of a mobile phone should be equipped with a charger.”
Five female students from Beijing University of Chemical Technology and Donghua University teamed up to take Apple to court. In May 2021, Fang and his team members reported to the people of Dongcheng District, Beijing, where Apple Electronics Commerce (Beijing) Co., Ltd. is located. The court filed an application for filing a case. Request an order to order Apple to deliver mobile phone chargers; assume responsibility for breach of contract, pay a penalty of 100 yuan and bear litigation costs.
It is worth noting that during the survey, the team of students Fang found that most consumers around them have the same incomprehension and resentment, and even Apple employees said that it is difficult to explain to consumers. But most people still became the silent majority. Student Fang also sent an email to Tim Cook, asking “Is this really for environmental friendliness?” and asked him to “return the charger to us”.
She said: “We hope that through this case, with the courage to’know what it is impossible to do’, we will awaken consumers’ awareness and enthusiasm for safeguarding their legitimate rights and interests, and actively join the rights protection team.”
In September of this year, the case was tried using ordinary procedures at the Beijing Internet Court’s electronic litigation platform online court trial, and the trial lasted 2 hours.
Image source: Shangguan News
5 female college students take Apple to court
According to Shangguan News, Fang said that Apple’s agent is a large firm like King & Wood Mallesons, and there are two lawyers, one man and one woman. “Facing us, I’m still very nervous!” Fang said, for her and the team members, this is the first real court trial.
According to the above report of Shanghai Rule of Law, first of all, Apple’s agent believes that the iPhone 12 pro Max’s packaging box has clarified the complete package content of the iPhone 12 pro Max, that is, it does not include a charger and is equipped with USB-C to Lightning. Connect the line. Therefore, the purchase and sale contract of the two parties does not include the power adapter. “Apple’s hints on power supply design are not significant.” Student Fang compared the description of the power supply design and product advertisements on the Apple mobile phone packaging box. The text styles were very contrasting in size.
Subsequently, Apple’s agent came up with a proposal from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology to guide consumers, sales companies, and production companies to change their concepts and promote the separation of mobile phones and power adapters. But Student Fang clearly pointed out that the proposal itself is “a proposal to unify the connection plugs and ports between mobile phones and chargers”. Under the premise that the connection plugs and ports between the mobile phone and the charger have not been widely unified, it is difficult to realize the separate sales of the mobile phone and the charger.
It is worth noting that, unlike most mobile phone manufacturers, Apple’s mobile phone side charging interface has never used a Micro USB interface, and has always been a unique lightning interface (lightning interface); its mobile phone products are always connected to the power adapter side, which is always USB -A interface, which has become a USB-C interface since the iPhone 12 series. It is completely different from other charging products on the market and cannot be used interchangeably between different models of mobile phones and chargers.
Apple’s agent pointed out that in the product’s “power supply and battery” description, Apple made it clear that consumers can use USB to connect to a computer or power adapter to charge.
Student Fang also refuted this statement: “From this web page, it is impossible to know what kind of computer or power adapter needs to be connected to charge, and it is also impossible to know whether the fast charging function can be realized by connecting to the computer through USB. In addition, consumption It’s impossible to use a USB-C to Lightning cable to connect to the original Apple power adapter for charging as advertised by Apple.”
In addition, Apple’s agents believe that separate sales are common in mobile phone sales. But in fact, before the launch of the iPhone 12 series, mainstream mobile phone manufacturers on the market were equipped with chargers. Not only that, but after searching, Fang found thatMilletWhen selling their mobile phone products, Meizu, etc. provide 3 packages for consumers to choose from, including chargers, without chargers, and with mobile phone chargers and earphones. The prices of the three packages are different, giving consumers their own choice. s right. This is obviously different from Apple’s separate sales.
“Environmental protection” is also a term repeatedly mentioned by Apple’s agents. But is not equipped with a charger out of environmental considerations, or to expand profit margins?
Apple advertises the MagSafe wireless charger at the bottom of the iPhone 12 sales interface. In the eyes of classmate Fang, this is an ironclad proof of Apple’s “double-faced man”. “Apple only uses environmental gimmicks to sell its new product MagSafe.” Wireless charging is the lowest conversion efficiency charging method. Apple’s vigorous promotion of wireless charging is to put the practical value of wireless charging before the environmental value; instead of attaching the power adapter, it puts the practical value of the charger after the environmental value. Therefore, student Fang believes that Apple’s behavior is just under the pretext of environmental protection to increase corporate profits by reducing the necessary accessories for consumers.
“According to the relevant provisions of the Civil Code, the graphic information on Apple’s official website is a format clause. The defendant cannot use this as a reason to refuse to deliver the power adapter. As said, using the existing power adapter for charging can neither match nor use the fast charging function normally.” At the end of the court hearing, classmate Fang stated.
At present, the case is still at the stage of supplementary evidence and written materials.
In recent years, many college students have used the law to defend their rights
Netizen: Apply what you have learned! support!
From the State Property Agency and CNKI to Disney and New Oriental, in the past few years, these college students have provided a reference path for many consumers to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests through litigation.
In May 2018, when Xiao Liu, a junior at Soochow University, downloaded a document titled “Chinese Medicine” on CNKI, the web page prompted a fee of 7 yuan. However, the “Recharge Center” of CNKI has set a minimum recharge amount limit.” Xiao Liu recharged 50 yuan in order to download this 7-yuan document. After purchasing the document, Xiao Liu wanted to refund the balance, but was told The rejection of the net.
Xiao Liu believes that CNKI’s “minimum top-up amount limit” and not refunding the balance is infringing on consumers’ right of free choice and fair trading. Therefore, CNKI’s operator is Tong Fangzhi.com (Beijing). ) Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as CNKI) went to court, requesting it to revoke the minimum recharge limit and refund the entire account balance.
In the end, the court ruled that the provisions of the CNKI Recharge Center on the minimum recharge limit were invalid, and Xiao Liu won the case. CNKI also updated the payment page of the website and added custom recharges.
In early 2019, Xiao Wang, a junior student at East China University of Political Science and Law, brought a petition to Shanghai Disneyland in court because he was blocked by the park staff for carrying snacks.
On September 12, 2019, according to the Shanghai Pudong New Area Court, the two parties voluntarily reached a mediation agreement, and the defendant Shanghai International Theme Park Co., Ltd. compensated the plaintiff and the plaintiff by RMB 50 (payment in court). The mediation agreement has been signed by both parties to take effect.
In addition, because the “Cheetah Eye Care Master” and “Software Manager” were bundled and installed when downloading the “Kingsoft Internet Security” software, Huazheng’s 2017 student Xiao Li and four of her classmates sued “Kingsoft Internet Security”.
After the verdict and appeal in the first instance… In September 2020, the case finally came to a conclusion. After the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court presided over the mediation, the defendant paid the plaintiff 700 yuan in compensation.
Edit|He Xiaotao Yi Qijiang Gai Yuanyuan Wang Jiaqi
The daily economic news is integrated from the Shanghai Rule of Law News,
Shangguan News, China Youth Daily, etc.