r/gadgets 15d ago Silver 1 Helpful 2 Wholesome 1 All-Seeing Upvote 1 Facepalm 1

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

https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/24/brazil-seizes-iphones-retail-stores-charger-requirement/
52.8k Upvotes

u/AutoModerator 15d ago

We have multiple giveaways running!

Phone 14 Pro & Ugreen Nexode 140W chargers Giveaway!

WOWCube® Entertainment System!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

3.0k

u/chrisdh79 15d ago

From the article: 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.

As first reported by Tecnoblog, Procon-DF has seized “hundreds of iPhones in different retail stores in Brasilia,” the capital of Brazil. In an action named “Operation Discharge,” the regulator aims to force Apple to comply with local law that requires smartphones to be shipped with the charger included in the box.

According to the report, the iPhones were seized at carrier stores and authorized Apple resellers. The regulator has ordered the banning of any iPhone model that lacks the charger included in the box. Although Apple stopped shipping the accessory for free with iPhone 12, the company also updated iPhone 11 with a new, more compact box without the charger.

After the iPhones were seized, Apple Brazil requested the government to allow sales of the smartphone in the country until the final decision of the dispute. The company told Tecnoblog that it continues to sell iPhones in Brazil despite the operation.

2.1k

u/azurleaf 15d ago

Million dollar fines like that are just the cost of doing business. Of course Apple wasn't going to do anything but continue to pay them.

941

u/ProperSauce 15d ago

They really need to be billion dollar fines

136

u/johnnyquestNY 14d ago

They should fine them… Brazilians of dollars

7

u/designer_by_day 14d ago

Reminds me of this old Bush joke:

Donald Rumsfeld is giving the president his daily briefing. He concludes by saying: "Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed."

"OH NO!" the President exclaims. "That's terrible!"

His staff sits stunned at this display of emotion, nervously watching as the President sits, head in hands.

Finally, the President looks up and asks, "How many is a brazillion?"

→ More replies

1.1k

u/ErikTheAngry 14d ago edited 14d ago

Fees against companies, organizations, and corporations should be based on worldwide gross revenue.

The fine is 25% of worldwide gross.

You pulled in $90.1bn in the last quarter? You owe us $22.5bn, or you're shut out of our market until the bill is paid.

Edit: Actually no. Fees against everyone should be based on gross incomes. A parking ticket should not be a convenience fee for a rich person.

Edit2: Amusingly, a lot of people seem to fixate on the 25% I said and assume that because this exact number is high, the concept itself is invalid. Pick any percent you want, as long as it's prohibitively expensive.

The point of a fine is that it should deter bad behaviour. If a company looks at a fine and views it as a simple cost of business, the fine is insufficient.

385

u/moviuro 14d ago

Fun fact: GDPR maximum fines are considered astronomical and "only" reach 2 to 4% of of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year (https://gdpr-info.eu/art-83-gdpr/)

A few countries already have proportional fines for individuals, such as Finland.

86

u/Oerthling 14d ago

Yup, same in Germany. Fining somebody €100€ regardless of whether his/her account holds -100€ or 10 Million € makes no sense.

To one person it's a crippling sum who suddenly can't get Xmas presents for the kids, to another it's a regular tip they drop on expensive restaurants.

20

u/Psycheau 14d ago

If the punishment is a fine, it's a punishment for the poor not the wealthy.

13

u/pirikikkeli 14d ago

In Finland a "rich" guy got 200k speeding ticket

8

u/MotherBathroom666 14d ago

As it should be!

4

u/pirikikkeli 14d ago

Damn right.. i got 80€ for the same speed because I'm a student

→ More replies
→ More replies

92

u/Swords_and_Words 14d ago edited 13d ago

Yeah, that number compounds massively by the time you get down to net profits

But obviously (net income)* and all profits are easy to hide, where is gross and come is really hard or impossible to hide (relatively)

edit: *this originally said 'nothing come' because voice to text

2

u/DetectiveNickStone 14d ago

gross and come is really hard or impossible to hide

Ain't that the truth...

→ More replies

8

u/Redditorien 14d ago

Anssi Vanjoki, a director at Nokia, was caught driving 75km/h in a 50km/h zone and was fined $103,000.

me, i would pay a dollar or something

→ More replies
→ More replies

83

u/Pilum2211 14d ago

I think worldwide revenue is difficult. Better would probably be domestic revenue. Imagine SanMarino charged apple 25% of the worldwide revenue for whatever potential infringement. Would probably quadruple that Nations GDP for the year.

75

u/rpm959 14d ago

More likely Apple would just not pay it, and not sell anything in that country.

7

u/Mikolf 14d ago

More like Apple spins off a subsidiary to handle sales in a country, paying royalties to the parent company.

11

u/Solid-Sector-1567 14d ago

Fine both the subsidiaries and the parent company. Modern problems require modern solutions.

5

u/AbeLincolns_Ghost 14d ago

It’s almost as if a judge can just look past a technicality of subsidiaries and order a judgment regardless

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

25

u/signifikanterOtter 14d ago

While I agree with the general sentiment, parking tickets depending on income would either create a bureaucratic monster or lead to your local PD being able to look into your tax statements as much as they like. Not sure if that's such a hot idea.

10

u/-quakeguy- 14d ago

Everyone can look into anyones tax statements as much as they like in my country. They are literally public.

3

u/FrenchFriesOrToast 14d ago

I think that makes sense in many ways, despite most people think it would be a disaster. Never understand their fear…

9

u/DnDVex 14d ago

People are worried someone else will look down on them cause they earn less.

But in truth this just opens up the ability to see inequality between coworkers or how much a given company actually pays, so you know if swapping would be profitable or you have better negotiation ability cause you can directly show that company X would hire you for Y, so you'd get a raise or move.

→ More replies

29

u/inbooth 14d ago

No need for pd access, just an automatic system where the tax agency gives a value based on the fine code

22

u/RevengencerAlf 14d ago

The problem is the pd will still attempt to target people based on apparent income vs merit of offense. They already do this all over the place targeting people they think are the most likely to pay out since the ticket money goes into their budget. The college town I went to school in regularly had police target anyone with a student sticker for a parking violation because they knew that the dispute rate for students was much lower than that of local residents.

Hell, they falsely ticketed me 5x when my car was 100 miles away at my house because they just kept copying the info they took the first time when my car was really there (although still parked legally)

The only only way this can ever be implemented in the US without making things worse is if free law prohibits the agency writing the tickets from any financial benefit from the process.

34

u/nonotan 14d ago

The police should stop benefiting in any way, shape or form from fines. Period. No reason that should ever go in their budget. That's how it works in sensible countries. Anything else is just setting up an egregious malicious incentive for no reason.

I get giving performance bonuses/commissions to salespeople, but the police force isn't a fucking door to door sales operation. Increasing the number of fines should not be a goal -- if anything, decreasing the amount of fines that need to be given out should be. And people don't choose to get fined, so you're not incentivizing being effective at selling a product, just fining as many people as humanly possible. It's extraordinarily idiotic at best, straight up dystopic corruption at worst.

→ More replies

9

u/chrltrn 14d ago

In a sane world, PDs wouldn't see a single cent of any money that comes in from their issuance of fines, so they shouldn't have any incentive in the first place.

7

u/Oerthling 14d ago

One of the many reasons the police should not get the money from fines. The police gets a budget, the city gets the fines.

US asset forfeiture laws and accompanying police practices are insane.

6

u/RevengencerAlf 14d ago

I'm not even a fan of the cities getting the fines to be honest. Too many examples of cities deliberately setting up things like trap red light cameras and artificially adding stop signs and lowering speed limits in areas that do not make sense and even make things less safe just to make a buck.

→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/ErikTheAngry 14d ago

This exact thing is already implemented in some countries.

As a work-around off the top of my head, the PD sends the citation up to the government body that handles taxation, who simply adds it to your taxation assessment.

PD doesn't see your income, isn't responsible for enforcement, and doesn't receive the money (no incentive to write tickets for revenue reasons).

Don't want to pay it? They'll just add it to your taxes at the end of the year.

3

u/gmmxle 14d ago

parking tickets depending on income would either create a bureaucratic monster or lead to your local PD being able to look into your tax statements as much as they like

Ticket code goes to tax authority, fine gets calculated, ticket gets sent to offender. The whole process can be fully automated.

→ More replies

9

u/Swords_and_Words 14d ago

Id say closer to 1-7% of gross income, because that number compounds massively when you get all the way down the line to net profits

Obv you cant base fines on profits on net income cause theyll just rack up more expenses so they have no net, and the same thing goes for gross or net profit since profit can be hidden a ton of ways. Cant escape the gross, thought, that number is solid

→ More replies

15

u/Xalenn 14d ago

Parking tickets are a scam anyway, at least the meter ones, and some others. Not including for things like double parking or parking in a handicap only spot or whatever.

Nearly all cities make more off the tickets than they do off the meters. If the intent was really to just charge people for the parking there are far more effective ways to do that, but the intent is to get people to not be able to easily pay, or figure out the requirements, and ultimately give them a ticket instead which is far more lucrative. A city that I used to live in spent more than twice as much on meter enforcement as they got in even their best year from meter revenue, but they made so much from tickets that it was still profitable.

→ More replies
→ More replies

16

u/BABarracus 15d ago

They seized the phones so Apple is losing money daily by not being able to get new customers.

16

u/GeneralUseFaceMask 14d ago

Those phones were probably made/budgeted for the region before the regulation was made. They just shipped em out to sell what they could before getting them pulled.

5

u/rutefoot 14d ago

Naw, they use universal packaging with regional labels on the back.

Those phones would have been sold anywhere in Latin America as-is or anywhere else in the world with a replacement label

Seizing a large quantity of phones is probably the worst punishment you can inflict upon them because it lowers their sales ceiling.

Unfortunately it looks like Brazil only seized a small fraction of them and only after the sales had started

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

212

u/liquilife 15d ago

They seized “hundreds” of iphones. Well that was anti-climatic.

64

u/ThaneKyrell 14d ago

They only did this in the Federal District, which is the capital of Brazil. It's basically like doing this only in Washington DC in the US. Of course the impact will be small

44

u/COMPUTER1313 14d ago

Insert joke about half of the phones disappearing when they are returned to Apple

14

u/THEBLOODYGAVEL 14d ago

Well it's a good thing they'll be returning a quarter of them after.

7

u/johnnyquestNY 14d ago

Very nice of them to return an eighth of the seized phones

7

u/Neato 14d ago

They can have 1 iphone back. As a treat.

→ More replies
→ More replies

2

u/thaeyo 14d ago

The rats! They ate all the iPhones!

→ More replies

2

u/CosmicCreeperz 14d ago

Political stunt for the press.

→ More replies

76

u/skylabspiral 14d ago

operation…. discharge lol

35

u/hegex 14d ago

Every federal police operation has a clever name, I wouldn't be surprised if they have some sort of internal competition to see how can make the most creative name

→ More replies

5

u/Astorya 14d ago

Coming up: Operation Penetration

→ More replies

257

u/Bruno_Mart 15d ago

Amazing that this is over a simple charger they could just throw in the box but Apple would rather swing its big dick around and see if it's more powerful than a nation.

122

u/MundanePurchase 15d ago

Or just bundle a charger with every sale specifically for Brazil

47

u/UniqueUsername27A 14d ago

Yes, this is trivial. They don't even need to be in the same box. In Switzerland this is standard. Many products aren't customized to the local power outlets, because the country is so small. Retailers simply throw a free adapter into your order automatically to comply with the requirement to support local power outlets.

5

u/rasg 14d ago

Fun fact: Brazil and Switzerland have the 3 pin outlet

→ More replies

2

u/mastercotcot 14d ago

Then one country after another follows suit knowing apple caves

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

86

u/Tuliojcs 14d ago edited 14d ago

Samsung handle this problem in such a better way. They don't ship the phone with a charger but if you want one you can ask for in their website and they will send you the power brick.

I'm not usually shilling for any company (chargers shouldn't have been removed from the boxes anyway), but Apple is one of the most annoying companies there is.

edit: I don't know if Samsung sending a charger for those who purchased some phones is a worldwide thing, but at least in Brazil you can go to https://www.samsungparavoce.com.br/ and fill a form to receive one.

6

u/Gerbal_Annihilation 14d ago

Is this true bc I just got an s22 ultra and could really use a charger

7

u/Tuliojcs 14d ago

I don't really know if it's a worldwide thing. But in Brazil you can access https://www.samsungparavoce.com.br/ at the bottom of the page you can submit to receive your charger.

36

u/glittersparklythings 14d ago

This I feel like would have been the way. Apple said everyone has a charging brick. And they are right. I have plenty. I went from the 7 to the 12. So I didn’t have a brick with the usb-c slot. So I got a cord with my phone

24

u/hardolaf 14d ago

Apple included a coupon for a free charging cable and brick on the boxes for Brazil. The dispute is over whether that is sufficient and this is the Brazilian government enforcing an order which is currently under appeal in their court system (no automatic injunctive relief unlike in the USA).

9

u/Mehiximos 14d ago

Can that coupon be used immediately? If so this just seems like Brazil intentionally over regulating

8

u/Sodernaut 14d ago

Yeah, if there is a solution available I think this is overreaching. Apples strategy and attitude to this could definitely be better but I can see both sides of the argument.

Having it as an optional free add on with still produce less waste and don't force to to create a different packaging and make the consumer happy.

→ More replies

6

u/hardolaf 14d ago

Yes, it can be used at the same time according to one of my friends in Brazil who bought an iPhone.

→ More replies

8

u/MoCapBartender 14d ago

Yup, this is me too, a closet full of USB-A chargers and not a single USB-C one. Apple could compromise and just use or include a USB-A cord instead of charger.

2

u/van_stan 14d ago

Charging speed is petty limited for USB-A these days comoared to what you can ram through a USB-C. I doubt Apple have any interest in including a lower spec product with a high spec phone.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/CobaltBlueMouse 14d ago

Just ask for one? I needed to buy mine.

3

u/Tuliojcs 14d ago

*In Brazil at least. I don't really know about other countries.

3

u/beachteen 14d ago

Apple is already doing that same thing, including a coupon for a free charging brick with the phone. But they are seizing phones anyways.

→ More replies

17

u/Oakcamp 14d ago

Knowing my country.. a lot of relatives of Federal officers are going to be getting new Iphone 14s in the coming weeks

→ More replies

144

u/Scrubologist 15d ago

Good! Fuck apple and their penny pinching ass methods. The cost of their phones has gone up 4x in the last decade, put the charger in the box you cheap fucks.

146

u/migueeel 15d ago

b-b-b-but e-waste!

*releases another phone the next year*

3

u/trentos1 14d ago

When people upgrade their phones they’re probably going to sell or give away their previous model. Doubt you’ll find many perfectly good iPhones ending up in landfill

→ More replies

16

u/itsaride 15d ago

Doesn’t hurt Apple, these are resellers, Apple has their money and they’re going to have to buy more to restock lol.

11

u/Gestrid 14d ago

But are they gonna buy more stock and risk getting it seized again?

→ More replies
→ More replies

49

u/alc4pwned 15d ago Heartwarming

That’s not true at all. The iPhone 5 was $650 in 2012, which is the equivalent of about $843 today. The iPhone 14 is $800, the 14 Pro is $1k.

21

u/pantiessnatchers 14d ago

Main argument you can make is that the iPhone 5 was their flagship release at $650 while their flagship today is $1k. Even then, the jump is nowhere near what OP said.

→ More replies
→ More replies

4

u/Practical-Custard-64 15d ago

A "million-dollar fine" is a rounding error for a company with the net worth of Apple.

→ More replies
→ More replies

5.4k

u/crimxxx 15d ago

I do love when companies think hey let’s just eat the fee and not comply with law getting appropriate actions. People can argue for or against the charger inclusion, but at the end of the day Apple chose not to comply with the governments rules, and as a result can’t sell there products anymore, makes sense to me.

2.4k

u/Pinyaka 15d ago

chose not to comply with the governments rules,

Some of us call that breaking the law.

1.1k

u/florettesmayor 15d ago

That's only for regular people silly

161

u/Thefar 14d ago

Poor is the new regular now. Doh!

106

u/mechwarrior719 14d ago

Always has been 👨‍🚀🔫👩‍🚀

14

u/PussyFriedNacho 14d ago

Yay I'm finally normal!

5

u/bout-tree-fitty 14d ago

He said regular, not normal.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

174

u/IONaut 15d ago

Rich people and corporations call it a convenience fee.

78

u/Newfishtanker 14d ago

And in the U.S., it's empowered by the law, thanks to judicial interpretation of tort law.

U.S. Courts normalized the entire doctrine and practice of paying fines as a normal cost of business.

It's fucking abhorrent

→ More replies
→ More replies

5

u/MagicRat7913 14d ago

Breaking the law, breaking the law

→ More replies

8

u/Law_Equivalent 14d ago

Well it wasn't a criminal violation... So it's akin to speeding a little bit and getting a ticket.

→ More replies
→ More replies

57

u/Larsaf 15d ago

As noted by MacMagazine, Judge Diego Câmara Alves, who allowed the company to continue selling iPhones in Brazil until a final ruling, believes that the company is not violating any consumer rights. The judge also claims that the Brazilian regulator is “abusing its power” with such a decision.

Operation Overcharge

→ More replies

495

u/zuzg 15d ago

People can argue for or against the charger inclusion

It's beneficial to every consumer when all smartphone use USB-C. There's literally no logical argument against it.
It won't hold back progress in any way.
If a superior standard comes around, it will slowly face to that, just like it happened with micro-USB

191

u/Bananazzs 15d ago

These devices were seized because they didn’t include a charger in the box. The port type is a separate issue.

→ More replies

561

u/nebber3 15d ago

Fully agree, but this article is referring to iPhones not coming with a power brick (even though many users still need one). But both are examples of Apple being anti-consumer for no reason other than $$$.

180

u/zuzg 15d ago

How dare you to assume I read more than the headline, haha

But yeah thanks for clarification

→ More replies

60

u/CMDR_KingErvin 15d ago

It’s been a while now that they’ve been slowly taking things away. Remember when iPhones used to come with wired headphones too? And when they used to have a headphone jack before apple decided it would be able to sell more of their AirPods and wireless beats without it.

21

u/GermyBones 14d ago

The Bluetooth in my car stereo recently started malfunctioning, so I rummaged around in my wire box until I found an aux cable. Go out to the car and realize my new Galaxy doesn't have a cable jack. 🙃

→ More replies
→ More replies

87

u/Odd_Copy_8077 15d ago All-Seeing Upvote

I bought an iPhone and don’t have enough money to buy a charger. So I could only use it until the battery was drained.

88

u/gmotelet 15d ago

Then you toss it and get a new phone with a new battery

18

u/MaximumShitcock 15d ago

Or work for the government and seize a few.

→ More replies

57

u/justanothermob_ 14d ago

That is not the point. Brazillian consumer law explicitly states that you can't sell an product that is "incomplete", that means basically that he should perform all functions expected of it on its own. Brazillian courts take consumer rights in a non-nonsense way, it was a question of when and not if Apple was going to get burnt bc of those shennannigans and Apple lawyers in Brazil 100% were aware of it, probably the cost of the lawsuit came built in the phone prices.

8

u/kdjfsk 14d ago

this is sort of ironic, as many people complain of chargers being e-waste. i know i have probably a dozen.

i totally agree Apple should follow the law, whatever it is, but i dont see the big deal in selling the charger separate.

→ More replies
→ More replies

21

u/odraencoded 14d ago

Damn, that's so sad. Why would Tim Apple do this?

→ More replies

2

u/aMinorAggrievance 14d ago

That's great and all but I couldn't afford an iPhone but I did scrape enough money together for a charger. Now I go door to door and offer a full phone charge for a dollar. If apple starts giving away chargers I'll be out of a job.

→ More replies

26

u/Darth_Abhor 15d ago

No one needs them, it's a waste and worthless add on....okay fine, here you go we can sell you one for $60 each for the 3 phones you just upgraded to. It's just 100% free money for those bastards. Don't forget you will need headphones to listen to music also. Lucky for you we didn't include those either and they are only $150 a pair.

→ More replies
→ More replies

7

u/Hour-Art3970 14d ago

What are you talking about? Nothing in your comment said anything about charger inclusion. I get that most people don't read the article anymore, but you didn't even read the headline...

→ More replies

19

u/kitten_mittens17_ 15d ago

How is it going to fade to that if a specific standard is required by law? It’s not like governments are known for their ability to keep up with new technology. You can argue for convenience of a standard all you want but don’t pretend that it won’t stifle innovation

→ More replies

8

u/ChaseballBat 14d ago

This has nothing to do with USB-C you and everyone who liked your comment didn't read anything, embarrassing.

8

u/MajesticAssDuck 14d ago

My big question is is usb-c going to be permanent forever? Is it the last connector port humam creations are ever going to have? I have concerns about laws regulating specific technology devices if those devices have any possibility of becoming obsolete.

→ More replies
→ More replies

34

u/CorporateCuster 15d ago

With the amount of companies pretending to care about the environment it’s crazy how apple makes a new phone every year but thinks a cable causes e waste.

13

u/Dividedthought 15d ago

It's simple, it's propaganda.

→ More replies
→ More replies

22

u/OptimisticByDefault 15d ago

There's no argument in my mind about this. Apple is selling an incomplete product. If their goal was to actually push for a more green agenda then you would get the option during checkout to add a charger for FREE to your iPhone order. Not including a charger with the phone means that people who want one will end up buying it separately anyway. This is just a move to cut cost not to save the environment.

2

u/unkinected 14d ago

They DO do exactly what you said. See elsewhere in this thread about how Apple sells phones in Brazil.

→ More replies

20

u/truongs 15d ago

They are so used to fucking American consumers in the ass they forget they can't do that everywhere

I guess it goes to your head when you've been fucking Americans in the ass for 50 years and they fight amongst themselves to vote for politicians that favor said ass fucking

6

u/MoCapBartender 14d ago

Do you see what happens, Apple? Do you see what happens when you fuck Americans in the ass?

→ More replies

51

u/lucellent 15d ago

They're only seized at official Apple and carrier stores, it doesn't stop third party sellers from selling them, nor does it stop people from importing the phones.

Not defending Apple in any way, only wanted to clarify that this wouldn't hurt Apple that much.

83

u/princess-catra 15d ago

It’s not gonna vanish the iPhone their but there’s a reason Apple Store are a thing, buddy. They don’t invest em just for funsies lmao.

→ More replies
→ More replies

2

u/Forsaken-Pigeon 14d ago

If the penalty is a fine, then it’s a penalty only for the poor

→ More replies

363

u/WolfsLairAbyss 15d ago

If they are seizing them from retail stores then doesn't that mean Apple already got paid for them and the store is taking the hit?

179

u/Rabid1Pro 14d ago

Don't know how many Apple stores they have in Brazil, probably a few. Those will Apple's own stock unless they are franchised. This is probably more to target future sales though.

→ More replies

12

u/Dotaproffessional 14d ago

Not necessarily. Not every store buys a product and resells it. Often the company is given the product to sell. There are different tiers of vendors

85

u/SpecerijenSnuiver 14d ago

Even if that is the case, it hurts Apple more. They have lost all trust and credibility from retail stores, who will be much more sceptic to work with Apple. Apple also cannot sell to Brazil for a long time.

8

u/German_Not_German 14d ago

It’s okay we over in Florida will still sell tons of iPhones to the hordes of Brazilians that visit out daily

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

588

u/unique_ubername 15d ago

God damn lol they are not playin

94

u/adventure_in_gnarnia 14d ago

All your IPhone are belong to us

20

u/votedbestcomment 14d ago

Doesn’t Apple have the power to brick every single one of them if that were the case?

8

u/[deleted] 14d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

2

u/OfficialDamp 14d ago

This is a even bigger joke than the fines…

→ More replies

251

u/Ludwig234 15d ago

Well this is weird

As noted by MacMagazine, Judge Diego Câmara Alves, who allowed the company to continue selling iPhones in Brazil until a final ruling, believes that the company is not violating any consumer rights. The judge also claims that the Brazilian regulator is “abusing its power” with such a decision. Apple says it is confident it will win the legal dispute and that customers “are aware of the various options for charging and connecting their devices.”

185

u/JmTrad 14d ago

In Brazil you can't sell something incomplete to force you to buy another. Houses here don't have USB sockets. Not everyone have a computer to charge. And iPhones are coming with USB-C to Lighting cables that is even more rare to find a brick compatible.

17

u/darkslide3000 14d ago

The weird part is that it sounds like a judge has ruled in Apple's favor and the executive agency is taking the phones away anyway? I mean I don't know how the Brazilian legal system works, but normally judges interpret the law to decide what's legal and what isn't, and if a judge decided this is legal the agency would have to appeal that ruling and get it overturned first before continuing to take action.

This sounds like the executive is just straight up ignoring the judicative ruling and doing whatever it wants, law be damned... which is, you know, not exactly indicative of a healthy democracy.

18

u/MartinBP 14d ago

What you're describing is a common law system like the US, which is different to Brazil's (and most of the world's) civil law system. Just because a single judge has ruled in Apple's favour doesn't mean the agency is automatically wrong. Civil law does not operate on precedent but written rules and if the regulator interprets those rules differently than the judge, it's up to the supreme court, or whichever other relevant body is in place, to confirm whose reading is correct.

3

u/darkslide3000 14d ago

I am well aware of civil law systems, but none that work this way. Common law or civil law, court decisions are still binding until overturned by a higher court. If a court said that this is legal, then normally only a higher court can change that. A party to that case can't just turn around then and say "well, guess the judge decided in the other side's favor, but we don't like that ruling so we'll just ignore it and do what we want anyway".

This is not related to precedent because precedent only applies if another different case comes up that asks a similar question. This sounds like it's the same question that was already decided by a court and the losing party of that decision just refuses to be bound by it. If court decisions weren't even binding for the very case they're deciding, there'd be no point in having courts.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

80

u/Peenork 14d ago

I feel like the big issue is not supplying a complimentary brick if it is needed. Apple will happily sell you a new brick, but they offer no voucher or credits with the purchase of a new device. Sure, I understand not needing a new brick all the time and saving space in packaging, but they made it clear that their bricks are a separate fee from the phone itself.

Imagine if they handed out complimentary charging bricks, but you got a $25 iTunes voucher or an AppleStore gift card if you opted to skip the brick. It'd be like a 'stimulus package' for the App store every September! It won't happen because it'd cost Apple more money than the seized iPhones, but one can dream.

16

u/fatbob42 14d ago

Not so bad but in the end it’ll mean that you’re paying roughly an extra $25 in real money to get a $25 gift card. If I already have a charger (most people) I don’t want this system.

20

u/aacid 14d ago

Apple should just give away charger if requested with every new purchase.

I agree with not including a charger in package as most people aready have one, but if someone is new to whole apple ecosystem it is just alienating and honestly just feels shitty that you spend thousand for a phone that you can't use without additional spending...

"do you need charger with your brand new phone? Yes? Here is one for free, you're welcome."

It is that simple... There would be no outrage and no issiues like this article...

8

u/fatbob42 14d ago

Then everyone will request the free one. Might as well, it’s no cost to them.

This is what money is for. We don’t have to come up with complicated schemes.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

700

u/TheOfficeoholic 15d ago

The US could learn something

353

u/Momoselfie 15d ago

US doesn't care as long as they keep paying the fine

98

u/windythought34 14d ago

What fine? ;)

63

u/TheMoistestWords 14d ago

They're called campaign contributions here. Aka "speech" money.

7

u/n3rv 14d ago

Would you like to donate to my superPAC?

19

u/Id0ntunderstandj0kes 14d ago

You have committed crimes against Skyrim and her people. What say in your defense?

You caught me. I'll pay off my bounty. (350 gold)

Bribe guard. (100 gold)

I submit. Take me to jail.

I'd rather die then go to prison!

6

u/JonatasA 14d ago

"I'm friends with the Jarl, you can't do this"

Apple's persuasive option.

→ More replies

12

u/Meowww13 14d ago

Yeah, heard your politicians take sundaes as bribe.

→ More replies

25

u/No_Discount7919 14d ago

I kind of feel like the families of the people that seized the iPhones all just got new iPhones lol. Like that old joke “The Brazilian regulators confiscated all 200 iPhones from the store. All 150 iPhones were checked into evidence.”

5

u/votedbestcomment 14d ago

As if Apple doesn’t control the phones through the back door. Certainly they’ll render them useless if not returned.

9

u/crazy_tito 14d ago

lol that's true but Procon really does a great job in Brazil protecting customers. Some american comoanies left or didn't even start business in brazil because of the unions and Procons, and I'm ok with that.

Unfortunatly when it comes to the police things get bad. Our country would be 100x better without police corruption.

→ More replies

2

u/staabz 14d ago

Ffs, we don't need the government involved in phone chargers

→ More replies
→ More replies

86

u/Grimley_PNW 14d ago

Today; Chinese police are arresting and beating Iphone factory workers for protesting unsatisfactory working conditions.

17

u/[deleted] 14d ago edited 11d ago

[deleted]

18

u/G00DLuck 14d ago

And Apple has a choice not to build phones where there's labor abuses of that level

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

33

u/naterninja550 14d ago

The shit should come with a charger especially at 1,000 dollar price point.

23

u/WelcomeToPunderdome 14d ago

It’s $1790 USD when you buy in Brazil

→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/WhereSoDreamsGo 14d ago

“Authorities report that a Brazilion iPhones have been confiscated so far

77

u/rocharox 15d ago

This won't stand for long. Brazilian legal system is a mess.

Whatever one judge/authority decides, another judge can dismiss

21

u/LakiL_ 14d ago

Only if the judge decides to use the law system as a political weapon.

19

u/RoyBeer 14d ago

I'm imagining two Brazilian Judges walking ten steps, backs to each other, shouldering a M72 LAW each.

12

u/LakiL_ 14d ago

Well, we did have a congressman shoot another DURING A SESSION. It was a long time ago, but still, pretty crazy.

14

u/BlondieMenace 14d ago

He also ended up missing the shot, the Senator that died wasn't the one that was targeted. That entire thing was so fucked up, and then the shooter's son became President and got impeached... Brazil is definitely not for amateurs.

3

u/LakiL_ 14d ago

All true, hahahaha. Fascinating. That family is probably deep in the cocaine business.

→ More replies
→ More replies

24

u/grandkz 15d ago

What is stopping the regulators from just continually increasing the fines till Apple cannot ignore them?

33

u/mikebailey 15d ago

Generally fines are prescribed in legislation and they’re not written with Apple-sized companies in mind

10

u/macsux 14d ago

That's why they should not be a static number but linked to revenue

→ More replies
→ More replies

17

u/Feisty_Field_8452 14d ago

In other news, the Brazilian government's IT agency reports that it will roll out brand new iPhones to 100% of its workforce after completing a large volume acquisition. While the exact sum was not disclosed, an informed source confirmed that the price paid per device is substantially lower than even the best corporate large volume pricing.

"Thanks to an incredible deal we received, our government workforce will increase their productivity by 200% thanks to leading mobile productivity devices from Apple"

6

u/LaCiel_W 14d ago

LMAO no way in hell they will give them out, more like they turn around and sell it somewhere else, selected few will pocket the money, and this might not be satire a few days later.

→ More replies

5

u/Doodleschmidt 14d ago

Someone tell me how this hurts Apple and not the stores?

4

u/Geek_off_the_streets 14d ago

When the fine is bigger than the cost to put the charger in them. That's when they'll change course.

12

u/dilldwarf 14d ago

While it might be reasonable in a world where many devices use the same kind of cable connection (USB-C) not to include it because you can assume the consumer already has one. But Apple makes the presumption that you already own Apple products that use their proprietary connector. So really I feel like Apple needs to consent to one or the other. Either go USB-C or don't include the charger. Doing both is the most anti-consumer choice you can make.

5

u/B0ns0ir-Elli0t 14d ago edited 14d ago

In this context it is irrelevant what connector is on an iPhone, they could still use the 30-pin and it would be irrelevant. What's on the other end of the included charging cable is relevant and that's a standard usb-c connector.

Additionally apple doesn't use a proprietary charging standard and supports usb power delivery. So any charger with a usb-c connector can be used to charge an iPhone as long as it supports universal usb power delivery.

→ More replies

3

u/Sailrjup12 14d ago

I am actually not surprised Apple is doing this. They are gonna milk every last penny they can get from chargers.

3

u/japanaol 14d ago

Man I f’ing love this…if only the rest of the world had the balls to do this…

27

u/billman71 15d ago

So lots of Brazilian government workers, families, and friends are getting new iPhones as gifts this year!

→ More replies

83

u/howard416 15d ago

While I'm not exactly sure if I would prefer the phones to be including a charger or not (what with the electronics waste issue), it's not like you can just ignore the laws... Good on them for having the guts/political will to take this punitive action.

160

u/Krunch007 15d ago

Suuuuure, they care a lot about electronic waste. That's why they churn out an iPhone "upgrade" every year and fuck around behind the scenes to make sure older iPhones function worse over time. It's just an excuse to milk more money out of consumers on accessories. You know it, I know it, they know it, let's not pretend here, okay?

18

u/WolfResponsible8483 14d ago

What wrong with an updated model every year? You don’t have to buy it. I’m still using an iPhone 8 from 6 years ago - had to replace the battery though.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

35

u/urbanaut 15d ago

Please take note Samsung.

50

u/JmTrad 14d ago

Samsung already gives free charger in Brazil.

→ More replies
→ More replies

8

u/Vikkly 15d ago

Just in time to give them to his family for Xmas.

8

u/eveningsand 14d ago

In other news, the Brazilian Ministry of Justice has recently rolled out brand new iphones to all of its staff!

2

u/Chronic_Samurai 14d ago

iPhones under the Christmas tree this year for some Brazilian families.

19

u/Dreadlordstu 14d ago All-Seeing Upvote

Tough issue. I agree it's nice to get the charger in the box instead of forcing consumers to pay separately. I do agree most people have several chargers already. I just got a new phone and the lack of charger in the box really is not an impact since I have so many in the house.

At the end of the day, we need to be creating and disposing less stuff. So I think I agree we shouldn't have chargers and if we want one, we buy it.

Sure companies like it because it increases their profit margin but I think it ultimately has more benefits than drawbacks for society. I'd rather a company increase its profit margin by dropping chargers than increasing prices.

→ More replies

4

u/Freezepeachauditor 14d ago

Apple: you don’t need any more usb blocks. You have plenty.

Also apple: hey here’s your new USB C to lightning cable. USB c blocks are available only $29.95.

I love my apple gadgets but…pure dick move.

→ More replies

8

u/needmorekarma777 14d ago

Good. Fuck apple

6

u/Owmince 14d ago

Seriously, fuck Apple.

Sent from my iphone

5

u/lowspeed 14d ago

Isn't this easily solved by offering a discount if bought without a charger? And if someone pays full price just give them a charger.

2

u/JmTrad 14d ago

Samsung in Brazil is selling the phone and offers a free charger separately. Apple can just do the same.

→ More replies
→ More replies

2

u/Trel713 14d ago

Where do they do with the seized iPhones?

2

u/JmTrad 14d ago

If Apple do nothing to comply will be auctioned or destroyed

→ More replies

2

u/Danmingle 14d ago

Lot of regulators and politicians with new iPhones incoming...

2

u/Xtreeam 14d ago

When is the new government sworn in?

2

u/ZiangoRex 14d ago

Why not just include a free charger per purchase?

2

u/BoonesFarmJackfruit 14d ago

anyone who can afford an iPhone in Brazil isn’t buying them there anyway 😂

2

u/OrganicAccountant87 14d ago

Good, they broke the law, they should be unable to keep selling their illegal products

2

u/banme5lol 14d ago

Good. Just like when visiting someone else’s home, Apple should abide by their rules.

2

u/grixit 14d ago

We just need to forbid proprietory connectors. Like the power plug on the Microsoft Surface.

2

u/bee144 14d ago

In other news, all Brazilian government officials have mysteriously obtained new iPhones

→ More replies