Brazilian regulator seizes iPhones from retail stores as Apple fails to comply with charger requirement

[CirnoFumo]

Summary

 

Because apple didn't comply with the requirement of offering free chargers on Brazil, a consumer regulator seized the iPhones from retail stores.

 

 

Quotes

Quote

The Brazilian Ministry of Justice ordered in September the suspension of iPhone sales in the country after concluding that Apple harms consumers by not offering the power adapter included with the device. Even after million-dollar fines, Apple still fails to comply with the requirement – which has now led to the Federal District-based consumer protection regulator seizing iPhones from retail stores.

 

My thoughts

 I find that this is too little, they should do more harm to Apple. Apple isn't above the law, every company follows this requirement, so Apple should follow it too. People like to use Samsung as an example because they don't put chargers on the boxes on phones like the S22 but they follow the law, anyone who gets a Samsung phone that doesn't come with a charger can request a free charger for free at Samsung website, where it's considered acceptable by the ruling.

 

Sources

https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/24/brazil-seizes-iphones-retail-stores-charger-requirement/

[heimdali]

Why should there be laws that require the production of more chargers than needed?  Just plug the device into your computer or one of the chargers you have amassed over time anyway.  If you really need yet another charger, you can always buy one.

 

They need to make laws against non-replacable batteries and against unnecessary chargers instead.

 

[Holmes108]

I'm not 100% sure how I feel about the law, but that's beside the point. If the law is the law, then I agree with you, Apple needs to be accountable. Especially when there's some flexibility to the method, like you mentioned with Samsung, which sounds like a very reasonable solution. Many people with extra chargers at home likely won't even request the free one.

[CTR640]

Good, that's the way how a country should treat companies like that. You don't comply? GTFO then.

[CirnoFumo]

3 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Why should there be laws that require the production of more chargers than needed?

It doesn't, like with samsung, they don't need to put a charger on every box, they just need to have a way where people can ask for one for free

[DuckDodgers]

I don't know how significant is the Brazilian market for the iPhone, but the fact that Apple didn't comply on time with the regulation, indicates that the sale losses and fines are something that's worth resisting over establishing a legal precedent.

[heimdali]

3 minutes ago, CirnoFumo said:

It doesn't, like with samsung, they don't need to put a charger on every box, they just need to have a way where people can ask for one for free

Funny, as if you would get anything for free.  Does Brazil think that chargers grow on trees in the jungle and put themsevles into the packages of phones?  Even if they did, someone owns the jungle and would have Apple pay for the chargers.  Then Apple would say they refuse to pay for them and Brazil would have to seize the trees from the jungle to provide Apple with free chargers.

 

 

[Applefreak]

17 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Why should there be laws that require the production of more chargers than needed?  Just plug the device into your computer or one of the chargers you have amassed over time anyway.  If you really need yet another charger, you can always buy one.

 

They need to make laws against non-replacable batteries and against unnecessary chargers instead.

 

One may not be able to just buy one right away. Chargers cost the same as elsewhere but the average wage is really low in comparison. So either buy a charger or eat for a month. Depending on what iPhones are on the market, they might need an Apple specific one. Not all markets are USB-C compatible. Not everyone has a laptop or a computer. Try charging a smartphone battery on a less powerful computer with a USB 1.1/2.0 500mah port (12+ hours), most high end phones do not even recognize the connection anymore or only provide a data link. 

[Lightwreather]

[Holmes108]

7 minutes ago, Applefreak said:

One may not be able to just buy one right away. Chargers cost the same as elsewhere but the average wage is really low in comparison. So either buy a charger or eat for a month. Depending on what iPhones are on the market, they might need an Apple specific one. Not all markets are USB-C compatible. Not everyone has a laptop or a computer. Try charging a smartphone battery on a less powerful computer with a USB 1.1/2.0 500mah port (12+ hours), most high end phones do not even recognize the connection anymore or only provide a data link. 

I don't disagree with any of that, but I don't see why a company can't choose to sell a phone without a charger if they like, assuming it's clearly stated. And customer's everywhere that don't like that should be able to tell them to take a hike.

[heimdali]

16 minutes ago, Applefreak said:

One may not be able to just buy one right away.

Then don't force one to buy one.  The charger isn't for free, you pay for it through the price of the phone.  Sell the phone for less and let everyone use the chargers they have, or buy one later.

16 minutes ago, Applefreak said:

Chargers cost the same as elsewhere but the average wage is really low in comparison. So either buy a charger or eat for a month.

And either buy an iPhone or eat for 20 years?  Nobody needs a cell phone, and when I run out of money, it's the first thing that goes away.

16 minutes ago, Applefreak said:

Depending on what iPhones are on the market, they might need an Apple specific one. Not all markets are USB-C compatible. Not everyone has a laptop or a computer. Try charging a smartphone battery on a less powerful computer with a USB 1.1/2.0 500mah port (12+ hours), most high end phones do not even recognize the connection anymore or only provide a data link. 

It's not Apples fault when people have bad computers or none at all.  Apple should make their devices compatible, but so should lots of other manufacturers.  I keep saying for over 30 years that when someone wants to sell software or hardware that requires Windows, they need to supply me with a copy of Windows and a computer to run Windows on --- or provide a version of what they want to sell that works with Linux.  Same goes for anyone saying I should do something with a cell phone: Provide me with one with all spyware and tracking features disabled and give me all source code so that I could verify if my privacy is protected or not, and I'll think about it.  Do something over/with the internet?  Ok, provide me with the means to, protect my privacy and I'll think about it.

 

[Applefreak]

1 minute ago, Holmes108 said:

I don't disagree with any of that, but I don't see why a company can't choose to sell a phone without a charger if they like, assuming it's clearly stated. And customer's everywhere that don't like that should be able to tell them to take a hike.

Yes but there is some debate about that. Because you need a charger in order for the device to operate while it is under warranty, one might argue that if it runs out of battery it is broken. Further more I believe you are supposed to do an initial charge on a new phone in order to not void the warranty (I might be wrong on that one, just believe that was somewhere in the EULA). Not providing charges just saves them money and you buying one, probably from them (that is most companies right now) nets them extra profit because no charger is worth that much to just throw one in. It's not like their packaging has shrunk either to not accommodate one. Certain markets require chargers and they get them. Why not there, maybe Apple disagrees with the leadership but let's not talk world politics here. 

 

In short, companies can do whatever they want up to a point. If they are not willing to comply, they are to seize operating in said region. This particular move looks more like robbery to me. At least that is how I would have done it. Go in broad daylight and claim new phones on the account of some law they have broken an then quickly sell them off. Not saying that happened but that would make for a better story.

[Applefreak]

5 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Then don't force one to buy one.  The charger isn't for free, you pay for it through the price of the phone.  Sell the phone for less and let everyone use the chargers they have, or buy one later.

Well if the phones would have gotten cheaper by the amount the charger costs, sure why not. I have no actual numbers on USB-C chargers but Micro-B chargers, quality ones, are about 1.50$ a piece if you buy them in bulk, probably less for a huge company order. It's just them making more money because at some point you will a need a new one, especially if the old one is not as fast charging as the new one is. But why not bundle the charger with the phone in a sperate box and just increase the price and when someone does not need it, don't give them the charger and give them a 20$ gift card for the app store instead. 

[heimdali]

12 minutes ago, Applefreak said:

Well if the phones would have gotten cheaper by the amount the charger costs, sure why not. I have no actual numbers on USB-C chargers but Micro-B chargers, quality ones, are about 1.50$ a piece if you buy them in bulk, probably less for a huge company order.

Check prices on ebay, you get to pay about $10 for one.  For someone in Brazil, that's a lot of money.  Cell phones have always been an expensive luxury.

12 minutes ago, Applefreak said:

It's just them making more money because at some point you will a need a new one, especially if the old one is not as fast charging as the new one is. But why not bundle the charger with the phone in a sperate box and just increase the price and when someone does not need it, don't give them the charger and give them a 20$ gift card for the app store instead. 

Why tie someone to some store?  Let them buy food or whatever they need from the money saved.  $20 is a lot money.

 

Chargers don't suddenly charge slower unless they're broken maybe.

 

Maybe let's do it this way:

 

I buy a bottle of beer at a grocery store.  Make a law that the brewery has to give me the beer for free along with the bottle.  If they refuse, seize all beer bottles from grocery stores.  It's necessary because not all beer is compatible with me.

 

[Arika]

4 hours ago, Holmes108 said:

I don't disagree with any of that, but I don't see why a company can't choose to sell a phone without a charger if they like, assuming it's clearly stated.

They can, they do in other countries, but in Brazil they are not allowed to,  because a country is allowed to make their own laws to force what they deem to be the best for their population.

 

5 hours ago, DuckDodgers said:

I don't know how significant is the Brazilian market for the iPhone, but the fact that Apple didn't comply on time with the regulation, indicates that the sale losses and fines are something that's worth resisting over establishing a legal precedent.

Sure hope they included the seizure of their iPhone into that calculation. We shouldn't be rooting for our praising companies for skirting a country's laws.

 

Also regardless of their significance in the consumer market in Brazil, it's probably a bad idea to piss off the country where you manufacture some of your phones

[Holmes108]

3 minutes ago, Arika S said:

They can, they do in other countries, but in Brazil they are not allowed to,  because a country is allowed to make their own laws to force what they deem to be the best for their population.

 

 

Well.... yeah. I was just giving my 2c on such a law.

[dizmo]

Apple should just follow Samsung and how they do it. Or have them available in store if requested. Lots of easy answers to this. 

5 hours ago, DuckDodgers said:

I don't know how significant is the Brazilian market for the iPhone, but the fact that Apple didn't comply on time with the regulation, indicates that the sale losses and fines are something that's worth resisting over establishing a legal precedent.

Seems like it's already been set with Samsung. 

5 hours ago, Applefreak said:

One may not be able to just buy one right away. Chargers cost the same as elsewhere but the average wage is really low in comparison. So either buy a charger or eat for a month. Depending on what iPhones are on the market, they might need an Apple specific one. Not all markets are USB-C compatible. Not everyone has a laptop or a computer. Try charging a smartphone battery on a less powerful computer with a USB 1.1/2.0 500mah port (12+ hours), most high end phones do not even recognize the connection anymore or only provide a data link. 

I don't agree with this at all. If you can't afford the charger, you couldn't afford the iPhone, and should have gotten a cheaper device. 

[igormp]

42 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I don't agree with this at all. If you can't afford the charger, you couldn't afford the iPhone, and should have gotten a cheaper device. 

That's not only about iPhones tho. Apple and Samsung tried to do it and our government forbid it, because otherwise it'd create a precedent allowing every entry and mid-range phone to not come with a charger.

[SimplyChunk]

35 minutes ago, igormp said:

That's not only about iPhones tho. Apple and Samsung tried to do it and our government forbid it, because otherwise it'd create a precedent allowing every entry and mid-range phone to not come with a charger.

Which is where..(lets be honest i'm still grumpy i didn't get a charger with my Pixel 6a) we're all heading

[dizmo]

36 minutes ago, igormp said:

That's not only about iPhones tho. Apple and Samsung tried to do it and our government forbid it, because otherwise it'd create a precedent allowing every entry and mid-range phone to not come with a charger.

Good.

Most people don't need a charging brick. I haven't taken the cable or charger out of a phone box (or, really, anything else USB C based) in probably 5 years.

Those that do, can either buy one (which they will then keep moving forward), or request one for free. Though even this I take slight issue with.

 

We don't need 5 or 10 charging bricks at home. Most sitting around doing nothing.

[igormp]

30 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Most people don't need a charging brick.

[citation needed]

30 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I haven't taken the cable or charger out of a phone box (or, really, anything else USB C based) in probably 5 years.

You can't assume everyone's experience is like yours, specially when talking about a different country you have no knowledge of.

31 minutes ago, dizmo said:

or request one for free.

This would be ideal, giving the consumer the option to have it or not, everyone would be happy in this case.

[Heliian]

7 hours ago, DuckDodgers said:

how significant is the Brazilian market

It's big enough that they've paid huge fines and are fighting with the courts to keep selling them. 

[Skiiwee29]

<-- Thread Cleaned -->

 

No need for hostilities. If you have nothing nice to say or be on topic, then leave and find something else to do.

[Kisai]

9 hours ago, DuckDodgers said:

I don't know how significant is the Brazilian market for the iPhone, but the fact that Apple didn't comply on time with the regulation, indicates that the sale losses and fines are something that's worth resisting over establishing a legal precedent.

Apple produces Brazil iPhones in Brazil. It's a big deal. Import taxes is the reason why, but it's also the most expensive iPhone market (sometimes trading places with some other countries, but the reason it's so expensive is entirely because of Brazil laws.)

 

Now it might be questionable, overall, if losing the Brazil market over what is ultimately a super-cheap item is worth it, but while this might "impact Apple" lightly, it will crush others who do not have a big presence, and have removed chargers to save shipping/packaging costs for the customer who orders the phone instead of picking it up from a store.

 

At any rate, Brazil is also clearly in the wrong here. While it's a fair argument to say "Apple should permit iPhone buyers to get a charger for free, if it's their first iPhone", it's not a fair argument to say it should always include it, because you never have to throw away the chargers for previous models that had USB-A ends. The ones that have USB-C ends, yes you might have to get "one" charger the first time you buy a USB-C phone, but it doesn't have to be Apple's.

 

To the extent that it matters, we're in the cross-over space between USB type-A and type-C for chargers, so once everyone is USB-C, (including Apple), the argument that the phone should include a charger is completely eliminated because they will likely already have had picked up and upgraded a USB-C device with one since. It will just be assumed that people buy the type of charger they want (eg 67w laptop charger, portable battery-containing chargers, UPS systems with type-C ports, etc.) So I don't feel the "need" to include a charger will persist past 2025, regardless of the country. 

 

Any country that forces the manufacturer to include a charger if it's NOT chargeable directly by USB-C would be the reasonable law, because by definition that's a proprietary charger. You can make this argument for the "lightning" phones, but not the USB-C iPads and AppleTV units.

 

[Donut417]

9 hours ago, CirnoFumo said:

I find that this is too little, they should do more harm to Apple.

How? The only thing they can do is regulate within their own border. They seized the phones, Apple cant sell those devices, so lost sales. Its not like you go to jail for not following regulations. Generally with regulations like this there are monetary penalties, which was the seizure of iPhone from stores. Apple will likely be fined, and because they are worth like 2 Trillion dollars and have like $200 billion in the bank, its not going to hurt them pretty much at all. If any thing its going to hurt people in Brazil that are employed by Apple if they dont take care of things quickly. Im not sure how many people are employed by Apple done there or what percentage of iPhone sales happen in Brazil. Like with any regulation a company or person for that matter will determine how much is made by breaking the law vs following.