If you buy something from a this link, myelectricsparks Media may earn a commission. See our Read More.
According to the court’s decision, Apple will have to pay 5 000 Brazilian reals, which is equivalent to approximately $1,080, according to current rates of conversion for the affected iPhone purchaser.
Apple will also charge an additional 1% charge per month from the time the summons was issued in the first month and an additional fine of about $21 for each day of delaying the court summons. In addition, Apple will also provide an adapter to customers.
The judge’s order categorizes the charger adapter as a mandatory accessory for running a phone. Additionally, the judge also criticized Apple’s no-charger policy as “abusive” to the rights of consumers. The judge also criticized Apple’s argument that it is unnecessary to use the inbox charger since it’s harmful to the environment.
Judge Vanderlei Caires Pinheiro of the Goiania 6th Special Civil Court has also said that Apple’s environmental worries are not based on fact. It’s because Apple continues to manufacture charging adapters and sell them separately. Apple now hawks two kinds of chargers – the USB-C brick that is traditional and MagSafe. MagSafe puck.
It’s not the first legal battle about the charging brick.
It’s not the first time Apple’s no-charger policy has been the subject of scrutiny or even sanctions in Brazil. Sao Paolo’s consumer protection agency Procon-SP handed down around $2 million against Apple for failing to include an adapter inside the retail packaging in March of last year.
In October, the agency slapped Apple with a second fine of about $2 million for the same incident using Apple’s iPhone 13 series phones. Procon-SP also requested Apple to provide iPhone twelve models equipped with charging cables within the State of Sao Paolo.
Apple’s latest legal dispute raises an issue with the Consumer Protection Code. The court states that requiring consumers to shell out an additional amount to buy a charging device is not reasonable when offered in a bundle and has an extensive history and an industry-wide standard.
However, Apple has reaped healthy economic benefits by removing its box’s charger. Apple is said to have reduced its costs by more than six billion dollars because it did not include chargers and earphones in the retail box. In addition to the lower cost and the smaller dimensions, the box also helped save Apple more money on logistics and shipping costs.
Luckily, Apple is a company that has a good reputation, and it can have to pay less than 1,000 dollars for its most recent legal battle since it was just one customer who came to the courthouse with an issue. If the case had been classified as a class action that Apple was not, it would have had to pay all the affected customers involved in the legal process.
In October the previous year, five undergraduates of Beijing University of Chemical Technology and Donghua University Beijing University of Chemical Technology and Donghua University filed a lawsuit against Apple regarding its no-charger policy to raise it to class-action status. Naturally, Apple has every money it has to prevent a situation like this concerning their controversial charging policy, particularly in light of the company’s lobbying costs at the record amount in 2022, due to concerns about antitrust.
About Author
