the iPhone

[abcNKH]

SAN JOSE, California (AP) -- A New York woman is so angry at Apple Inc. for lopping $200 off the price of the iPhone that she's filed a lawsuit seeking $1 million in damages,
Dongmei Li of Queens, New York, claimed the company violated price discrimination laws when it slashed the price of the 8-gigabyte iPhone by a third, from $599 to $399, within two months of the gadget's June debut.
Apple lowered the iPhone's price on September 5 and also said it would stop selling the $499 4-gigabyte model. Hundreds of early customers who paid full price didn't expect a reduction so soon and complained.
Apple issued an apology the next day. Under its return policy, Apple refunded the $200 difference for those who bought the phone within 14 days of the reduction. And in a move to make peace with those who purchased the higher-priced phone before that period, the company offered a $100 credit at Apple stores.
According to Li's lawsuit, filed on September 24 in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, the price reduction injured early purchasers like herself because they cannot resell the product for the same profit as those who bought the cell phone following the price cut.
Li purchased a 4GB iPhone for $499 and alleged that owners of the 4GB model were given less favorable terms than those who bought the 8GB model at the premium price, according to the lawsuit.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/10/02/apple.iphone.lawsuit.ap/index.html
<!--startclickprintexclude--><!-- PURGE: /2007/TECH/10/02/apple.iphone.lawsuit.ap/art.iphone.hand.afp.gi.jpg --><!-- KEEP -->

thoughts??

[kingclick]

I think the woman is an idiot.
Early adopters pay a premium to be an early adopter.

[Terrell]

I think the woman is an idiot.
Early adopters pay a premium to be an early adopter.

What KC said. You're going to pay a premium price to be the first guy/lady on your block to have that hot new item, whatever it is.

[abcNKH]

and I am wondering where the $1M came from? I see maybe $100 at MOST, and to be honest, I wouldn't even award her that. In fact, I might sock her with court costs too for filing such a frivolous lawsuit. I understand that she might be mad, but Apple and AT&T haven't done anything wrong. They are not responsible for her ability to resell the phone...

[holychicken]

Yeah, she is a moron. What she wanted was a status symbol and it turned out to not be the status symbol she wanted it to be. Too fucking bad. Unless the contract she signed said that they would not drop the price of the phone, she has no case, IMO. Although, I will NOT be surprised if some idiot court decides that she is right.

[jitobear]

Dumn dumn dumn.

By the way - anyone seen that phone in action? It totally deserves the hype. Very very very cool little gadget.

[Def.I.Nition]

God. This is the kinda crap that gives tort claims a bad name.

[ehartsay]

Nods - if their was something shady going on that damaged the property value, that is one hting, and should be looked at -


BUT

one million, when you did not even pay a QUARTER of that???!?!!??! What a dishonest fruitcake, I mean REALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This reminds me of that pants moron!

[ArcticPhoenix]

WHAT DAMAGES?!

What an idiot. I can't believe she's found a lawyer to represent her. But anyone who buys a new high-tech toy when it first comes out is an idiot. Everyone knows that there are always more bugs in the first shipment of high-tech stuff than in later shipments. And they're more expensive. Gimme a break.

[BAmaracas]

The price you pay for an item is the price it is. Why do people have such trouble understanding this basic idea?

[Jokimoto]

Hmmm, because they use Bistromath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bistromathic_drive)?

Bistromathics itself is simply a revolutionary new way of understanding the behaviour of numbers. Just as Albert Einstein's general relativity theory observed that space was not an absolute but depended on the observer's movement in time, and that time was not an absolute, but depended on the observer's movement in space, so it is now realized that numbers are not absolute, but depend on the observer's movement in restaurants.

Further explanation of the theory behind bistromathics:
The first nonabsolute number is the number of people for whom the table is reserved. This will vary during the course of the first three telephone calls to the restaurant, and then bear no apparent relation to the number of people who actually turn up, or the number of people who subsequently join them after the show/match/party/gig, or to the number of people who leave when they see who else has shown up.

The second nonabsolute number is the given time of arrival, which is now known to be one of those most bizarre mathematical concepts, a recipriversexcluson, a number whose existence can only be defined as being anything other than itself. In other words, the given time of arrival is the one moment of time at which it is impossible that any member of the party will arrive. Recipriversexclusons now play a vital part in many branches of mathematics, including statistics and accountancy, and also form the basic equations used to engineer the SEP Field.

The third and most mysterious piece of nonabsoluteness of all lies in the relationship between the number of items on the bill, the cost of each item, the number of people at the table and what they are each prepared to pay for. (The number of people who have actually brought any money is only a sub-phenomenon in this field.)