>A French activist group has launched a criminal lawsuit against Apple over its policy of slowing down older iPhones in a case that could see the tech giant 's executives jailed and cost it five percent of its income if convicted of the crime of "planned obsolescence".
>The move by Halte à l’Obsolescence Programmée (HOP - Stop Planned Obsolescence), an environmental association, comes after lawsuits were launched this week in the US against Apple for similar reasons.
>The suit was filed on Wednesday in the Paris prosecutor’s office, HOP said in a statement.
>“Apple has put in place a global strategy of programmed obsolescence in order to boost its sales” of new iPhones, the group said.
>HOP believes that the US firm can be sued over the sale of all iPhones in France since the introduction of a law in August 2015 that made it a crime to “deliberately reduce the lifespan of a product to increase the rate of replacement.”
>It believes Apple could be liable for a fine in line with the value of all its iPhone French sales since the law came into force.
>The suit will be heard in a criminal court if prosecutors decide it is legitimate.
>The maximum penalty is a prison sentence of two years, a fine of up to 300,000 euros, and five percent of the firm’s annual turnover.
Eli Reyes
I think the lawsuits launched against Apple will play a significant role in the flourishing of open source hardware, software and smartphone projects. The lesson we should take from here is that companies will always work against the interests of their customers, so they should not have the luxury of taking our money to sell us paperweights.
Leo Mitchell
Why the fuck does everyone use Sup Forums to repost pleddit?
Parker Rogers
>I think the lawsuits launched against Apple will play a significant role in the flourishing of open source hardware, software and smartphone projects It won't.
Apple will pay some fines in the few countries where what they did is actually illegal, and everything will continue as it always has.
Jaxon Nguyen
>be tasteless niggering monkey >buy apple because I'z be too dumb to choose anything, and they'll choose errything in my place >apple makes choice that old battery should last all day, even if it means phone becomes slower >chimp out, like a tasteless niggering monkey who would have guessed???
also, planned obsolescence isn't a thing what is a thing is cheap cunts not wanting to spend what it takes to get state of the art products, and being fucktarded enough to end up salty about what they get for what they spend
David Harris
>I think the lawsuits launched against Apple will play a significant role in the flourishing of open source hardware, software and smartphone projects.
What did you just start using computers a couple years ago? This type of thing has been happening for at least the last 2 decades. The goyim never learn.
Alexander Adams
apple argues they were doing it to extend the usable time period for batteries and therefore it is an environmental consideration
Ethan Perez
go back to your containment thread please
Andrew Morgan
underage detected
Adam Brown
hang yourself, applenigger
Adrian Cooper
id still fuck her
Camden Russell
>also, planned obsolescence isn't a thing What ever Apple bootlicker
>apple purposely gimps last years phone in order to get people to buy new phones >nooooooo that's not planned obsolescence, that's just you being a cheap ass
Grayson Edwards
what does this meme girl pic mean
Ethan Davis
ITT: apple fanboys saying apple can do no wrong and android fanboys saying apple is the devil i hate Sup Forums
Levi Richardson
I don't give a fuck about Apple, but I do give a fuck about excessive government regulations infringing on a company's right to take part in a free market.
Samuel Flores
>>apple purposely gimps last years phone because appleniggers ask apple to make choices in their place, and they're worthless animals enough for a slower phone working all day being a reasonable option, seeing they won't do shit with it anyway that they dare complaining they get precisely what they asked for, times and times again, proves appleniggers should not even remotely be considered actual Humans anyway
Lucas Wright
it's not a free market, like obama said "you didn't build that," a company takes advantage of too many things from taxpayers and the government to be given free reign to do anything
Nathan Hernandez
>like obama said "you didn't build that, Obama is a disgusting freedom hating socialist.
>a company takes advantage of too many things from taxpayers and the government to be given free reign to do anything Taxation is theft anyway.
Easton Williams
...
Jordan Gonzalez
there's something in the middle between ancap memes and marxism, it's called regulated capitalism
Landon Williams
>regulated capitalism That's an oxymoron and even the fact that you are able to suspend reason in order to utter such a thing, is a perverse distortion of reality.
Blake Morgan
t. edgy teen who unironically believes taxation is theft
Benjamin Murphy
>regulated capitalism ie state capitalism ie socialism and socialists get the helicopter ride too
Tyler Perry
Hello, I think you should shut up and never post again, have a nice day
Jack Morales
Taxation *is* theft. It's what used to be called vassal in the middle ages. Basic universal human rights dictates that you are a free and independent human being and nobody should be able to coerce you to anything.
Isaac Carter
Hello, I think you should get your looting hands chopped off, have a nice day.
Ethan Anderson
> open source hardware
LMAO. The current open source hardware can't even compete with a Commodore 64 from 1982. Get real.
Owen Flores
>ie state capitalism But that's absolutely wrong
Jayden Rogers
Not an argument.
>acknowledging the fact that you are forced to pay taxes means that you're edgy You should read up on economic history. When Franklin said that the only things certain in life were death and taxes, he was making a sarcastic comment you know.
Benjamin Walker
iToddlers have defended this.
Mason Morales
The ancaps are correct though, Apple should not specifically be targeted for planned obsolescence as ALL tech companies do it. Going only after Apple reveals the weakness of the system, as government is unable to actually prove it for other companies despite the fact we all know it's going on.
Companies should rather be free to make their products in such a way, and merely be required to inform their customers about this practice.
Brandon White
you're absolutely wrong
Christopher Johnson
they are defending the throttling of the cpu to conserve battery they aren't defending apple stores telling you that you have to change your phone, and they aren't defending planned obsolescence, which this isn't
Jackson Foster
And by "inform their customers about this practice", I mean that these companies should say something about expected lifetime of their products. It's the only fair action.
Joseph Davis
Good. No Apple for frenchtards anymore.
Jayden Brooks
About what? The fact that some regulations do not equate state capitalism? Do you even know what state capitalism is?
Adam Turner
>t. iToddler
Kevin Morgan
>Do you even know what state capitalism is? I live in France, one of the last socialist countries on Earth, so yeah, I quite know, indeed.
Luis Parker
t. green bubbles that no woman would ever chat with
David Thomas
>only apple products have planned obsolescence Look at this naive and gullible cuck.
Julian Lee
>Taxation is theft anyway. Please stop using all tax funded things now if you believe that. You'll realize quickly how taxes can be a good thing
Mason Gutierrez
>>only apple products have planned obsolescence This.
James Price
So what am I wrong about?
Hunter Sullivan
Vassalization is in no way comparable to taxation. Every society has and uses taxes. The constitution gives the government the power to levy and collect taxes
Brayden Price
>Please stop using all tax funded things now if you believe that. I would if I didn't pay taxes, but seeing how I already do I don't see how it would prove a point.
>You'll realize quickly how taxes can be a good thing Virtually every public service in my country and town is privatised anyway. The municipality is actually just an ineffective and massively bureaucratic middle man. I mean, the apartment owners in my block already pay extra for utilities such as garbage removal, since the service provided by the municipality (also from another private company) is unreliable. So I pay taxes for a service I don't use.
Same with subsidised kindergartens, I send my kids of to a unsubsidised day care which I privately arranged anyway, so I pay taxes for other people's children going to kindergarten.
It's just fucking perverse and an affront to basic human rights.
Landon Young
>Vassalization is in no way comparable to taxation. Of course it is, it is its direct descendant.
>Every society has and uses taxes. Not an argument for taxation.
>The constitution gives the government the power to levy and collect taxes Not an argument for taxation.
>well, the constitution gives the government the power to prosecute and imprison all jews, so I guess we should continue to do that
Jose Williams
you said regulated capitalism isn't state capitalism it is and state capitalism is socialism which makes regulated capitalism just sheer socialism, want it or not
Sebastian Walker
How is it state capitalism? State capitalism is when most, if not all major companies in a country's economy are owned and run by the state. "Regulated capitalism", more widely known as capitalism, is when companies are owned by private entities and have to abide by a set of laws. Can't believe I have to point these things out to a grown person.
Jaxson Diaz
pls be b8
Isaac Robinson
>need to make special laws specific to different industries in order to force privately owned companies to do the government's biddings There should be only one law, constitution should dictate basic citizen rights and penal/criminal law should derive directly from it. Regulating the market by inventing legislation out of thin air is just absurd.
Landon Taylor
>t. green bubbles that no roastie would ever chat with fix'd
Anthony Gonzalez
>pulling such fucktarded concepts as planned obsolescence out of your ass to blackmail companies is perfectly reasonable, particularly when said company just did what their customers just asked, ie make choices in their stead wew the only things laws should take care of are those concerning natural rights: self and material ownership
Noah Rivera
Cool opinions dood. Not an argument for anything you've said before though :(
Joseph Bailey
>sad, alone, shitposting on a Azerbaijan coral diving forum AND blaming women for their shortcomings in life That's MRA for ya.
Evan Hall
I'm not the guy you're responding to, I'm just pointing out the absurdity in the oxymoron you call "regulated capitalism". It's really a perverse distortion of reality to believe that such a system could exist without infringing on your liberty.
William Diaz
I've never said if I support it or not. I just wanted to point out that saying that capitalism, even if it's heavily regulated, is the same thing as state capitalism is blatantly wrong.
Josiah Cox
Not him, but you're wrong.
Oliver Young
What shall it be called then? And liberty is a very abstract concept that changes from person to person. Sometimes you have to compromise. Sure, ancapistan would be an ideological heaven for many people, but it would be a horrible place to live irl. Him, but how so?
Jacob Collins
> A French activist group I usually hate activists because they take shit way to seriously it's almost scary. But at the same time i want to see apple crash and burn so i don't mind
Mason Jenkins
and I tell you that the state role is not to regulate capitalism only to enforce it, ie to ensure that thieves get what they deserve (apple, as much as I despise them and their users, didn't steal from anyone, here: they actually just provided their clients with what they themselves buy apple shit for: itjustwerks with as little choice as possible, to do as bland and stupid things as possible, that for which sacrificing speed for battery is very reasonable) regulations aim at preventing things to do what they do on their own (for instance, here, preventing people from realizing that the very reason they buy apple shit is despicable to start with, and that if they don't like the way their ass is wiped for them, they should just vote with their shekels)
Caleb Thomas
And who are you to say what the role of the state is? Sure, I get it, it's your idea of the perfect system, and that's cool, but it's not an objective and universal truth.
James Walker
because as soon as the state does more than ensuring natural rights, it always and ever becomes a noxious tyranny
John Evans
I really don't get it, can someone to a brainlet the joke?
Justin Edwards
Give me an example of a current state that does not regulate the economy in any way, such as health regulations, taxes, quality control and so on. Or are you implying that every single government in the world is tyranny?
Jordan Wilson
>are you implying that every single government in the world is tyranny? obviously states came to be after people started giving shekels to some lord in exchange for his protection, when that lord came to get a monopoly on the protection the only differences between said lord and a mafia godfather being people willingly gave the moneyz, and that the lord wasn't protecting them from himself but from actual thugs and seeing as at least the willing part of the shekel giving hasn't been a thing for shitloads of times, states are way past walking the thin tyranny line
Asher Ross
Lmao = laughing my ass off Girl doesn't have one. Le funny maymay xdddddd
Eli Cooper
I get it, you're an ancap. What do you want from me? I won't agree with you, if that's what you're seeking. I don't think that Somalia is an example to follow.
Grayson Reed
god your paththic
Angel Clark
>you're an ancap you only realized with my last post? wew
>What do you want from me? nothing: I for one am not a socialist
>Somalia anarchy is the lack of rulers savagery is the lack of rules learn the difference (protip: you don't need any ruler to be submitted to natural rules)
Adrian Clark
Who would enforce that no rulers emerge under anarchy? Who is stopping me from building a private army, enslaving the population and become a dictator?
Andrew Sanchez
>muh NAP
Isaac Howard
>Who would enforce that competing private courts the interest being the competition if a court doesn't satisfy people, they'll leave for that competition which will serve as an incentive to serve proper justice, instead of the headless ducks we have in its place these days, ending up with forbdigging such niggeries as "planned obsolescence", which is not even a thing to start with
>Who is stopping me others like you (and hopefuly, others better than you, with such ideas as becoming a dictator) also, if you succeed, then congrats: you've become a state (ie a monopoly on violence) maybe you now get why I consider those as tyrannic, seeing as you reckon it's what soon happens when monopoly on violence begins
Jason Richardson
You just described hell. It's like a highly inefficient country that's in a civil war that has 10+ factions. These hypothetical private entities which would take up the role of the government in an anarchy would inevitably also have territorial control, which would mean that they could extort money and shit like that. Sounds a 100 times worse that what we have now. Ancaps are fucking idiots.
Luke Bennett
>have territorial control >extort money and shit that actually precisely is what all states do right now if that's so, it's no ancapism, just statism it only is ancapism as long as there are competing security businesses in the same place you can believe ancapism will end up in statism (only does so if only one does remain, though) still, what you're criticizing then only applies to statism, not ancapism (and you're the one calling others stupid...)
as to civil war, it only is in the interest of thugs, under ancapism either usual petty thugs, or even those aiming at being the only ones remaining in the end (ie aiming at becoming states) for all the others, it's the only way to ensure they won't get buggered by such fucktards as those wanting to ban "planned obsolescence", or any other shit that just came out of their ass
Nathan Flores
>that actually precisely is what all states do right now Democracy and the separation of powers ensures that governments remain as fair as possible and serve the people. In an ancap state, being a "security business" is just what it says, a business. And since there is nobody to enforce the rules, you can be as malicious as you want. Also, I cannot imagine a situation where ancapism would not end in statism as you call it. As someone who lives in a post Soviet country and knows what was going on in the 90s here, let me tell you, without a competent government, thugs will take over. People can try to pay other thugs for protection all they want, they will still get fucked over and the thugs will still have wars between one another.
Ancapism is as much a pipe dream as communism is.
Zachary Lee
>competing private courts I don’t recognize them, they stand against my interest. What are they going to do about it?
Charles Edwards
I hope the french don't surrender as per usual and win this one. Fuck Applel
Anthony Nguyen
Kill you to silence you. Since you have no wealthy relatives willing to pay the prosecutors of the competing courts to investigate the case, nothing will be done about this. Fucking rad. Imagine living in the movie "The Purge", except it's always the purge. Awesome, huh?
Camden Sanders
>Democracy and the separation of powers ensures that governments remain as fair as possible and serve the people. bullshit democracy ensures the tyranny of the largest minority separation of powers is a joke, at best
>ancap >there is nobody to enforce the rules wrong competing private businesses do think your security provider breached your contract? take the plea to another think your state breach the social contract? you can go fuck yourself
>without a competent government, thugs will take over with a competent government as well (actually, even more surely, if it's competent)
>People can try to pay other thugs for protection all they want, they will still get fucked over try to start up your own security firm, if you think you can do better that's what's best with competition
>Ancapism is as much a pipe dream as communism is nope ancapism goes along Human nature, for one while communism goes against it
>I don’t recognize them, they stand against my interest if those trying to ensure natural rights go against your interests, it means you're a criminal prepare your anus, then
Austin Nelson
they might indeed win this one all French judges are commie judges
Kayden Mitchell
So these private courts have an authority to just kill me or imprison me without due process unless I’m wealthy enough to pay them off or fight them myself? That doesn’t sound like freedom to me.
Jace Flores
Damn, who hurt you?
Oliver Hernandez
Your whole post is a big middle finger to people that aren't rich.
Gabriel Ward
>Going only after Apple reveals the weakness of the system It's only the beginning, Epson's being sued as well for the same reason
Elijah Morgan
>What's RISC-V End yourself retard.
Eli Rivera
again, what you describe is just what states do meanwhile, you seem quite fond of those, aren't you? the difference with ancapism being under the latter, no security business among the competing one has an interest in losing a client if it can avoid so
the taxman (and also the universal joke of a "healthcare", but they go along together, here)
not even do you think states exactly work for free? as said just above, for instance, I know what a state forbidding you health access outside of him amounts to: it amounts to absolutely shit healthcare for erryone I hear poor people think Merry healthcare is shit well, it really is no better under universal healthcare, so no change for them, at best it's a change for those who could afford it if they had the choice, though if it's OK to you, it just shows you actually are the one motivated by disdain for others see the analogy?
Jonathan Sanders
>The maximum penalty is a prison sentence of two years, a fine of up to 300,000 euros, and five percent of the firm’s annual turnover. not enough
jesus even france's lawmaking is fkd by corporate sponsors
Owen Nguyen
that still is quite high for an imaginary offense...
Carter Sanders
>it's another episode of commie cucks soyboys trying to destroy capitalism It's like defending net cucktrality didn't teach them anything.
Cameron Parker
What's the point of throttling the CPU if throttled CPU requires longer time to finish the tasks it's supposed to do therefore completely nullifying the benefits you obtained from the throttled CPU? CPU throttling does fuck all to the biggest battery eater - the screen and the radio modem.
Cooper Parker
Ramblings of a psycho: the post. Maybe there are upsides in an ancap state though. For example, if you're bored, you can just shoot homeless people for fun and with no repercussions. I've always wanted to know what killing a person feels like.
Jonathan Bennett
States do it too, so that makes it acceptable and free because it's a flaw shared with an entity you call tyrannical, but yours is inherently better because someone can profit from it? And what happens then of the courts? They lose a potential client when they deem me a "criminal" for not playing their little game, and send me off to an affiliated private prison who gains a new "client" and likely kicks back accordingly.
Jayden Perez
>it's yet another Sup Forumsedditor manchildren thinking they're upstanding citizens for defending the corporations fucking them in the ass everyday episode. imagine being this much of a good goy
Ryder Cooper
>What's RISC-V gutless IoT vaporware
Dominic Robinson
Yeah the benefits of CPU throttling in a phone are very little. However, your logic is not true, you should know this if you've ever tried messing about with CPU frequencies on a laptop. You can really feel the difference in battery time
Jacob Morales
>b-but muh competition >it's my fault for being scammed by you, s-sorry Mr. Shekelstein
Jace Brooks
>flourishing of open-source hardware Just because a corporation is fucking someone in the ass doesn't mean they're going to gravitate to some dated, moribund open-source hardware project that brings nothing to the table beyond complying with the ethical standards of some deluded 70 year old MIT professor and his arrogant acolytes.
At best they'll move over to Apple's biggest competitors in the Android space, equally shitty companies like Google, Samsung, LG and beyond that are no less interested in forcing their users to buy new products in whatever way possible.
Blake King
>you can just shoot homeless people for fun and with no repercussions and what makes you think there would be none? you think there won't be an investigation if someone with no security plan gets killed? if someone kills even a hobbo around places I visit, I'd sure like an investigation to catch the guy who might another day want to kill me instead
>I've always wanted to know what killing a person feels like >you're the psycho choose one
>States do it too, so that makes it invalid as a an argument in favor of states compared to ancapism, in spite of you doing just that nothing more, nothing less
>yours is inherently better because there'd be an actual incentive for security firms to do a proper job: not losing clients (notice: plurals) politics for ones don't care: establishment is establishment, and pretty much always craps the same shit, again and again
>They lose a potential client when they deem me a "criminal" that's the incentive for doing a good job, dufus a court with a reputation of being unfair will lose clients a court with a reputation of being fair, even against one of its clients, will gain others and it can only work with competition, that which you can't have with states, by definition
>not playing their little game oh yeah jamal, because not stealing, not conning, not beating, not killing, not chimping out, is sooo hard...
Thomas Wood
Ever heard of protectionism, ya dumb faggot?
Caleb Robinson
>Planned obselecence isn't a thing Stopped reading there