Apple is being sued because 2FA "takes too long"

[Noctus]

2 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

 so someone can sue them for not having it? 

Shhhhh, that was going to be my plan..... 

[Noctus]

Just now, Fez_Boy said:

Thanks for the idea, I'm going to get my lawyers ready.

oi, MY PLAN. 

[FezBoy]

Just now, Noctus said:

oi, MY PLAN. 

As first commenter, I have dibs. Sorry 

[IceCold008]

Welcome to the 21st Century and entitled cry babies. 

[Cheezdoodlez]

Hm. How often do the average apple user actually need to use their 2FA codes though? 

From my perspective you only really need it when setting up a new device. Or if you for some reason would be logging in the apple/iCloud websites. But who does that on a regular basis? 

[Noctus]

16 minutes ago, Fez_Boy said:

As first commenter, I have dibs. Sorry 

Fight me !

 

edit: saw your @. It's america, could sue them even without an apple device lol

[wANKER]

Apple's 2FA is my favourite, and takes the least amount of time if anything. 

 

Google auth: Unlock phone, open app, find code, {wait for it to expire if it's close}, type it in, complete Captcha OH FUCK I TOOK TOO LONG 

 

Apple: Unlock phone, accept push notification, woop

[Arika]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

Each login process takes an additional estimated 2-5 or more minutes with 2FA.

What a load of bullshit, just like the rest of the suit. 

 

Maybe the guy was bored one day and was trying to think of something to do, and for some reason he landed on sue apple because of some perceived delay when logging in to his favourite porn suite. 

 

HOW valuable is this guys time that you would sue over minutes... Which unless you're an idiot 2fa doesn't take that long 

[Bouzoo]

1. Saw a dumb lawsuit
2. It has to be in US
3. Checked the Article
4. California
5. Jackpot

[Curufinwe_wins]

Yeah this is stupid.

[Curufinwe_wins]

29 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

1. Saw a dumb lawsuit
2. It has to be in US
3. Checked the Article
4. California
5. Jackpot

In fairness to California... for decades a severe plurality (upwards of 40%) of the maliciously dumb IP lawsuits occurred in the Eastern Texas Court (Marshall, Texas). However, a 2017 supreme court ruling meant you couldn't choose where to have the suit, and that has dramatically changed since then.

 

Hilariously, the judge involved (Rodney Gilstrap, after he tried to bypass the Supreme Court ruling with a bogus residency 'test') was handed some pretty amusing language slapdowns from higher courts afterwards.

 

Quote

The statutory language we need to interpret is “where the defendant . . . has a regular and established place of business.” 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). The noun in this phrase is “place,” and “regular” and “established” are adjectives modifying the noun “place.” The following words, “of business,” indicate the nature and purpose of the “place,” and the preceding words, “the defendant,” indicate that it must be that of the defendant. Thus, § 1400(b) requires that “a defendant has” a “place of business” that is “regular” and “established.” All of these requirements must be present. The district court’s four-factor test is not sufficiently tethered to this statutory language and thus it fails to inform each of the necessary requirements of the statute...

 

...As noted above, when determining venue, the first requirement is that there “must be a physical place in the district.” The district court erred as a matter of law in holding that “a fixed physical location in the district is not a prerequisite to proper venue.” ... This interpretation impermissibly expands the statute. The statute requires a “place,” i.e., “[a] building or a part of a building set apart for any purpose” or “quarters of any kind” from which business is conducted. William Dwight Whitney, The Century Dictionary, 732 (Benjamin E. Smith, ed. 1911); see also Place, Black’s Law Dictionary (1st ed. 1891) (defining place as a “locality, limited by boundaries”). The statute thus cannot be read to refer merely to a virtual space or to electronic communications from one person to another. But such “places” would seemingly be authorized under the district court’s test.

 

[Syntaxvgm]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

What a load of bullshit, just like the rest of the suit. 

 

Maybe the guy was bored one day and was trying to think of something to do, and for some reason he landed on sue apple because of some perceived delay when logging in to his favourite porn suite. 

 

HOW valuable is this guys time that you would sue over minutes... Which unless you're an idiot 2fa doesn't take that long 

pissing takes 2-5 minutes of you pinch and hold for a while. Sue Mansfield for your UTI. 

[iLostMyXbox21]

So we can sue for anything now?

 

 

 

watch out Apple. I dropped my iPad on my nose and sneezed like 80 times in a minute. 

 

Imma sue them for personal damage. So like, $50k? Yep. Imma sue Apple 

 

 

/s

[captain_to_fire]

2 hours ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

Hm. How often do the average apple user actually need to use their 2FA codes though? 

From my perspective you only really need it when setting up a new device. Or if you for some reason would be logging in the apple/iCloud websites. But who does that on a regular basis? 

You need to login to the browser every 30 days even after trusting the said browser and that’s only for iCloud. But for changing details like credit cards and addresses on appleid.apple.com, one needs to login afaik. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

A user is suing Apple, claiming that Apple's 2 Factor Authentication system takes too long and is disruptive to users.

I don't think he gets the point of 2FA

[Guest]

Idk, but I feel like the answer to this is Jeff Bezos nudes.

[CTR640]

America got the most fucked up laws. So you can even sue someone who farts at the bus stop??

You can get 5 million in damage because you almost died due to his/her extremely stinky fart gas??

[CTR640]

2 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

This is nothing new in the US.  Does nobody remember the guy who sued because he didn't know the difference between cruise control and autopilot?

Can't they sue the guy back for being stupid as hell?

[Blademaster91]

6 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

This is nothing new in the US.  Does nobody remember the guy who sued because he didn't know the difference between cruise control and autopilot?

IIRC people were hurt or killed from the autopilot feature from the car crashing. And well Tesla shouldn't have called it "autopilot" because that would mean you can let it drive for you with no input needed.

[TopHatProductions115]

TopHatProductions115.exe has stopped working

[Crunchy Dragon]

What about the time on on Epic Games' 2FA? It takes almost 14 days for them to send the 2FA email as it is

/s

 

I'm in the same boat as @TopHatProductions115

[Maticks]

It only asked when you login to a device you haven't logged into from before. 

What is this guy doing?

 

Why does he have so many devices ongoing He clearly isn't a standard use case.

 

[BuckGup]

5 hours ago, fasauceome said:

Yes, people have been known to sue for frivolous reasons, but i will actually have to reserve judgement, and here's why:

 

Remember that woman who sued McDonald's for hot coffee? Yes everyone remembers her as a hack who tried to get some free cash for something mundane.

Only here's the problem. After her coffee spill, she suffered 3rd degree burns and actually went into a coma for a few days. She won the lawsuit and got something like 5 million dollars from McDonald's, but they're done so much to make the case look ridiculous to protect their public image.

 

@DrMacintosh nothing against your reporting but I'm not sure these details are to be trusted quite so soon, there may be more to come to light.

Not the same at all lol

[Fasauceome]

11 minutes ago, BuckGup said:

Not the same at all lol

The only similarity is the classification as a frivolous lawsuit, but that's significant to me.

[ryao]

By the time, the court hears this case, his account will be eligible to turn off 2FA. I wonder if his case will be thrown out of court.