Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Iphone The Courts Apple News

Federal Court Allows Class-Action Suit Against Apple Over In-App Purchases 279

suraj.sun writes "An iPhone-owner whose daughter downloaded $200 worth of 'Zombie Toxin' and 'Gems' through in-app purchases on his iPhone has been allowed to pursue a class action suit against Apple for compensation of up to $5m. Garen Meguerian of Pennsylvania launched the class-action case against Apple in April 2011 after he discovered that his nine-year-old daughter had been draining his credit card account through in-app purchases on 'free' games including Zombie Cafe and Treasure Story. This month, Judge Edward J Davila in San Jose District Federal Court has allowed the case to go to trial, rejecting Apple's claim that the case should be dismissed. Meguerian claimed that Apple was unfairly targeting children by allowing games geared at kids to push them to make purchases. He describes games that are free to play but require purchases of virtual goods to progress as 'bait apps' and says they should not be aimed at children."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Federal Court Allows Class-Action Suit Against Apple Over In-App Purchases

Comments Filter:
  • by Tharsman ( 1364603 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @05:59PM (#39728595)

    Apple is not the one "selling" the apps and then charging with IAP, the software developers are.

    It also happens in Facebook, and desktop, heck.... Valve has been doing it for a while with Team Fortress 2.

    So why go after Apple?

    Don't take me wrong, I really hope this case goes somewhere. I hate the Free2Play model where they take advantage of ignorant kids or people with compulsive behaviors. I just feel this lawsuit is miss-directed, Zynga and it's peers are the ones that should be targeted.

    I will not oppose, though, if Apple decides or is forced to remove "consumable" IAP from the app store, or force apps that require them to charge an up-front fee that removes the visibility advantage these pocket predators have by being free up-front.

  • by KPU ( 118762 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @06:04PM (#39728667) Homepage

    So why go after Apple?

    If there's a problem with a walled garden, blame the gardener. Otherwise, don't put a wall up in the first place.

  • Three Hands (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bogie ( 31020 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @06:15PM (#39728779) Journal

    On the one hand I think parents should police what their kids are doing. But is it required for them to play every game themselves and make sure it isn't one can easily charge you money? Answer that for yourself but don't be too knee-jerk about how nobody wants to take responsibility for themselves anymore.

    On the other hand I hate these "bait"/"Freeium" apps that have taken over. They are a blight on the gaming world imho. Some people like getting something for free. I'd rather pay a little and know thats the final amount and get a finished game. The whole sell a partial game/buy DLC to finish it is crap.

    On the other other hand I have little sympathy for Apple as they are absurdly lawsuit happy, plus they love to step on the little guy which I've never been a fan of.

  • Showing my age.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cazekiel ( 1417893 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @06:48PM (#39729129)

    I think the biggest problem isn't the idea that apps created to get money through upgrades exist, but the fact that a nine-year old is given the powers of an expensive phone without the parents having a clue as to what she's doing on it is eyebrow-raising. Am I the only one bugged out when I see middle-schoolers having phones and other gadgets that are worth more than my car? Criminy, my mom wouldn't let me have a phone in my room on the main home line, never mind my OWN phone number.

    And as if she didn't know she was doing wrong. Even if a child is immature in the areas of reasoning, I'm assuming any parent here would punish their kid if they found them digging into their wallet to steal cash. How is this any different? You put a LOCK on that shit, wherein any purchases made on your child's phone has to be approved by an adult first. I'm sure there's a method/service that does that. I almost never take the side of corporations like Apple, but in this case, I say the kid is grounded for six months, and double the chores in the house without an allowance. They had their fun, underhandedly. Time for parents to take responsibility for the stuff they buy their kids, especially if they don't intrinsically NEED it to begin with.

  • Re:Three Hands (Score:4, Interesting)

    by digitallife ( 805599 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @07:17PM (#39729421)

    There's a very simple reason developers are tending towards 'freemium' games: it makes more money (at least on ios). Let's be honest, as much as a developer may love making an app, if they are to invest the time and resources required to make it good, they need to get paid. So their options are ad supported, which often doesn't pay very well, a non-free app, which often won't get many downloads (unless you're a marketing guru), or IAP. IAP have the benefit of allowing a free app which gets lots of downloads, the possibility of ad generated revenue that can be disabled for a fee if the user wants, and the option for the USER to determine how much they want to give. It's (theoretically) win/win for developer and customer.

    However, the kids apps are absolutely horrible. The apps themselves are usually quick hack jobs with some manipulative child psychology tricks in them. Adults often hate them and can't stand them, but the kids love them and beg and cry to get them. Then they dress up IAP in pretty buttons and what not so every thing the kid clicks on brings up a purchase window and the kid bugs the heck out of the parents to fix it... One slip on the parents part and they accidentally make a purchase.

    Honestly, they need to go after the lecherous developers that make that trash, rather than ask apple to censor (yet more) apps from the app store.

  • by demonlapin ( 527802 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @10:29PM (#39730735) Homepage Journal
    It does so... now. It didn't in the past, which is presumably when this occurred.
  • by chrismcb ( 983081 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @11:29PM (#39731005) Homepage

    What really happens on the games is that there is no message of anything except for the game asking for a password.

    Do you have any proof of this
    I don't know how this particular game works (although one of TFA implies it works the way most do) but most games tell you that you are about to spend real money, and they tell you how much you are going to spend.
    I'm not sure that Apple is at fault here, and I think the parents need to be careful when giving the password to children. But you can't expect a child to know that when they click on "Bushel of Berries $99.99" to know they are actually spending $99.99 in hard money, and not game money. Especially since a lot of these games have game money you already spend.

  • by Trapick ( 1163389 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @11:32PM (#39731027)

    Unless you read page 9374 of the TOS and EULA for the game at download time, you would not know that someone was about to sock your account for anything. The game does not have to tell you that it is going to charge your account. It simply asks for a password.

    This is pretty much patently false for Apple in-app purchases. Unless you have any examples of apps that don't explicitly say "$0.99 for 30 coins" or whatever, because I have *never* seen such a thing.

Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.

Working...