Apple admits in open court to reuse old parts from damaged phones, in new ones

[zMeul]

4 hours ago, Centurius said:

I honestly would object to companies not reusing parts. Recycling is almost never 100% and as long as it can pass the same quality tests as a completely new thing it should be fine.

I am agreeing for products that need repairs in post warranty, but absolutely not agreeing for products that are still under warranty

[elfensky]

Honestly I'd rather they reuse and thereby recycle old and still useful old parts instead of just creating more trash.

[Sakkura]

7 minutes ago, Volbet said:

Do you have case numbers for that? Becuase the law doesn't at any point mention value when it comes to damaged goods, and the cases I've been able to find haven't been clear on this subject.

As already stated, the law only say the refunded ware has to be in accordance with sale agreement, which it could be argued that a refurbished phone is.

Also, a refund and a redelivery are two very different things, atleast by the letter of the law. 

 

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you nor the alleged industry representatives. 

My only interst is in the outcome of the case. It will set a president in an area that I still consider to be murky. 

I'm really just trying to consider Apple's side, since they are on the defensive coming into this. 

Yes, it has to be in accordance with the sale agreement, in which he bought a new phone. A refurbished or remanufactured phone is not a new phone, and Apple's own representative admitted in court today that it's worth less.

 

Refund and redelivery are different, but they are specifically meant to put you in the same positions as the purchase concerned - either with X amount of money, or with Y product. The things you and the retailer exchanged at the purchase.

 

Apple is not on the defensive here. They are the plaintiffs, the ones suing a guy who they already screwed over with 2 broken phones and straight-up lies.

[Volbet]

Just now, Sakkura said:

Yes, it has to be in accordance with the sale agreement, in which he bought a new phone. A refurbished or remanufactured phone is not a new phone, and Apple's own representative admitted in court today that it's worth less.

But what if the refurbished phone is 100% indistinguishable from a new phone?

 

I would also still like those case numbers that refere to the valuation of damaged good.

 

2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Refund and redelivery are different, but they are specifically meant to put you in the same positions as the purchase concerned - either with X amount of money, or with Y product. The things you and the retailer exchanged at the purchase.

Sure, they are meant to put the consumer in the same position, but as I said, in practice they are treated very differently. 

A return is seen as much less intrusive and is therefor seen as the best methode of dealing with damaged goods. 

This is why § 78, stk. 3 specifically states that the consumer can't demand a refund if the seller has offered repair or redelivery.

 

6 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Apple is not on the defensive here. They are the plaintiffs, the ones suing a guy who they already screwed over with 2 broken phones and straight-up lies.

I'm not argue what role Apple has in the court case. I know they're the plaintiffs.

What I'm saying is that Apple goes into the case with a ruling against them, which means they pretty much has to bring their A-game.

[79wjd]

12 minutes ago, zMeul said:

I am agreeing for products that need repairs in post warranty, but absolutely not agreeing for products that are still under warranty

So if I have a problem with my GTX780 (which is still under warranty), I should expect to get a brand new 780/970/1060? I'm sorry, but no. Even if I just bought a brand new 1080 I would fully expect to get a refurbished card back if I had to RMA mine and it was beyond repair.

[ShadowCaptain]

meh i personally dont care if my replacement is a refurb, it makes no difference to me and is good for the planet

[BuckGup]

So that's why my sisters "new" iphone already had a battery that only charges to 75%. I think my iPhone is going to be the last Apple product I buy. Honestly it has gotten to the point of being stupid. Removing ports you need. Not updating 4 year old hardware you still charge for the same price as day 1

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, Volbet said:

But what if the refurbished phone is 100% indistinguishable from a new phone?

 

I would also still like those case numbers that refere to the valuation of damaged good.

 

Sure, they are meant to put the consumer in the same position, but as I said, in practice they are treated very differently. 

A return is seen as much less intrusive and is therefor seen as the best methode of dealing with damaged goods. 

This is why § 78, stk. 3 specifically states that the consumer can't demand a refund if the seller has offered repair or redelivery.

 

I'm not argue what role Apple has in the court case. I know they're the plaintiffs.

What I'm saying is that Apple goes into the case with a ruling against them, which means they pretty much has to bring their A-game.

It doesn't matter whether it's indistinguishable. And as for the value, Apple's representative stated explicitly in court that these phones are worth less than factory new ones.

 

No, in practice they are not treated differently. What is the best method for buyer and seller depends on the situation - that's also why the seller can refuse to replace or repair a damaged item if it would be too costly for them.

 

Apple is not on the defensive, as you said. They are suing a single consumer, with their A-game as you say, because they don't want to abide by the law. Even though it's so crystal-clear that even the industry representatives, who would normally be on their side, instead sided with the consumer here.

[zMeul]

5 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

So if I have a problem with my GTX780 (which is still under warranty), I should expect to get a brand new 780/970/1060? I'm sorry, but no. Even if I just bought a brand new 1080 I would fully expect to get a refurbished card back if I had to RMA mine and it was beyond repair.

absolutely you should expect a brand new card or a newer model equivalent one

 

if the product has hardware issues, then the warranty period is absolute bull crap and the manufacturer should pay for it

next time, they should design the product better or lower the warranty period

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, zMeul said:

absolutely you should expect a brand new card or a newer equivalent one

 

if the product has hardware issues, then the warranty period is absolute bull crap and the manufacturer should pay for it

next time, they should design the product better or lower the warranty period

They're fulling honoring their warranty, but why should you get a brand NEW product to replace your USED product? 

 

This isn't limited to the tech industry. The insurance industry works the same way. Prorating is a thing. This is how the vast majority of industries work and tech shouldn't be any different. 

[zMeul]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

They're fulling honoring their warranty, but why should you get a brand NEW product to replace your used product? 

 

This isn't limited to the tech industry. The insurance industry works the same way (protating). 

it is bullshit and anti consumer

 

in the cases with the burned out EVGA GTX1070 and GTX1080s, those people should receive back repaired cards .. yes ?!?!?!

abso-fucking-lutely not!

[Volbet]

11 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

It doesn't matter whether it's indistinguishable. And as for the value, Apple's representative stated explicitly in court that these phones are worth less than factory new ones.

Source?

 

11 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

No, in practice they are not treated differently. What is the best method for buyer and seller depends on the situation - that's also why the seller can refuse to replace or repair a damaged item if it would be too costly for them.

Case numbers?

 

By the letter of the law and in practice, repairs and redeliveries are seen as the least intrusive methodes and are therefor the prefered methode.

The consumer has, by the letter of the law in §78, no say in what methode will be used untill the item has been redelivered or repaired a number of times (spanning from 3-7 times). 

 

11 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Apple is not on the defensive, as you said. They are suing a single consumer, with their A-game as you say, because they don't want to abide by the law. Even though it's so crystal-clear that even the industry representatives, who would normally be on their side, instead sided with the consumer here.

They don't want to abide by the law because they think the law is unclear. 

If they were certain that they were breaking the law, then they wouldn't have dragged this case to court. 

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, zMeul said:

it is bullshit and anti consumer

 

in the cases with the burned out EVGA GTX1070 and GTX1080s, those people should receive back repaired cards .. yes ?!?!?!

abso-fucking-lutely not!

Sure, lets all live in this wonderful world where business replace your 2.9 year old part with a brand new part off the assembly line, and things aren't prorated for how much you use them. In this world businesses also don't charge you for things -- everything is free! There are no taxes. You don't have to work. You can get whatever you want and do whatever you want! There's only one small problem....it's a fucking ridiculous expectation. 

 

And I'd have no issue being given a replacement card that was refurbished since that's just how replacements work in virtually every industry that exists. If there are refurbished parts available, then that's what you'll get. 

[zMeul]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Sure, lets all live in this wonderful world where business replace your 2.9 year old part with a brand new part off the assembly line, and things aren't prorated for how much you use them. In this world businesses also don't charge you for things -- everything is free! There are no taxes. You don't have to work. You can get whatever you want and do whatever you want! There's only one small problem....it's a fucking ridiculous expectation. 

 

And I'd have no issue being given a replacement card that was refurbished since that's just how replacements work in virtually every industry that exists. If there are refurbished parts available, then that's what you'll get. 

you are confusing refurb with repair

 

and yes, if that card is one hour still in warranty, the client should receive and brand new replacement

the manufacturer should, next time, re-adjust the warranty period to actually match the hardware lifespan of the product or eat it

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, zMeul said:

you are confusing refurb with repair

No. If I send something of mine in for repair, I fully expect to get a refurb back if it's beyond repair. So under that same expectation, I would also expect refurb parts to be used in the repair. 

 

It's ridiculous to think you're entitled to a brand new replacement part for something of yours that's not brand new. 

[zMeul]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

No. If I send something of mine in for repair, I fully expect to get a refurb back if it's beyond repair. So under that same expectation, I would also expect refurb parts to be used in the repair. 

refurb product and replacement parts not the same thing

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, zMeul said:

refurb product and replacement parts not the same thing

Try reading again. I said refurb parts.

[zMeul]

4 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Try reading again. I said refurb parts.

I know exactly what you said and it's wrong

refurb means re-validated and repaired - you cannot repair components (capacitors, ICs, diodes, resistors, inductors, etc ...)

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, zMeul said:

I know exactly what you said and it's wrong

refurb means re-validated and repaired - you cannot repair components (capacitors, ICs, diodes, resistors, inductors, etc ...)

refurb does not necessarily mean repaired. It can just be repurposed/revalidated. And you're right, you can't repair certain parts -- those go in the garbage/scrap. But those that can be repaired are fair game. 

[zMeul]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

refurb does not necessarily mean repaired. It can just be repurposed/revalidated. And you're right, you can't repair certain parts -- those go in the garbage/scrap. But those that can be repaired are fair game. 

as I said, components cannot be repaired they can only be replaced

 

and refurb is a term that applies to products, not components

[79wjd]

Just now, zMeul said:

as I said, components cannot be repaired they can only be replaced

what the fuck are you even trying to say.... 

 

Either the part is not repairable or it is. If it's not repairable then you'll either get a brand new part or one from a refurbed device where that part wasn't the problem. Or the part is repairable, in which case you'll get a refurbed part if available. 

 

I really don't see an issue where.

[Misanthrope]

35 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

So if I have a problem with my GTX780 (which is still under warranty), I should expect to get a brand new 780/970/1060? I'm sorry, but no. Even if I just bought a brand new 1080 I would fully expect to get a refurbished card back if I had to RMA mine and it was beyond repair.

Except this is not what's being discused: if you have a problem with your 780 you should get your card (or a similarly refurbished card) that was repairing using new parts and not just recycling parts from some other board i.e. your card has a bad mosfet so they replace it with a new one not a used one that they say "oh this one still works"

 

The card itself can be repaired by them at their discretion but it putting used parts on a used cards is asking for trouble no matter how many validations you do.

[zMeul]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

what the fuck are you even trying to say.... 

 

Either the part is not repairable or it is. If it's not repairable then you'll either get a brand new part or one from a refurbed device where that part wasn't the problem. Or the part is repairable, in which case you'll get a refurbed part if available. 

 

I really don't see an issue where.

really!? so is that a refurb product or spare parts?

I don't know any outlet that would tear apart a fully functioning refurbished product to replace components in a similar defective product - that's the very definition of insanity

[Noctus]

43 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

They're fulling honoring their warranty, but why should you get a brand NEW product to replace your USED product? 

 

This isn't limited to the tech industry. The insurance industry works the same way. Prorating is a thing. This is how the vast majority of industries work and tech shouldn't be any different. 

Because in some countries that is an entitlement the consumer is allowed. So we take it. If you don't like that, tough shit.

[79wjd]

Just now, Noctus said:

Because in some countries that is an entitlement the consumer is allowed. So we take it. If you don't like that, touch shit.

I mean it's fine, I'm not the one who gets reamed up the ass in upfront purchasing costs.