Apple voiding warranties, blacklisting hacked iPhones?

We don't foresee Apple chasing folks down that have modified their iPhone or anything, but at least one case has proven that you may want to return your handset to stock before attempting to have it serviced. According to a recent report, a handset running "some third-party apps" and operating on T-Mobile was flat out rejected when it entered an Apple store for service. More specifically, the employee reportedly said that "the warranty was voided," and added that the mobile was "blacklisted" against future service or return. 'Course, the owner did manage to coerce the Apple store manager to allow a return (albeit with a 10-percent restocking fee added on), but we'd highly recommend reverting your iPhone to AT&T mode before begging for service just in case.

[Via Digg, image courtesy of HamptonRoads]

[hempey @ Sep 21st 2007 12:20PM]

Whoever brought in a hacked phone expecting full service was an idiot to begin with. How hard would it have been just to flash it back to normal after backing up your "hacks"?

[mr mike @ Sep 21st 2007 12:22PM]

yeah thats just common sense if you ask me!
what did he think was gonna happen?

[HineyWipe @ Sep 21st 2007 1:19PM]

Ha. He bought an iPhone, alas he lacked any common sense.

[Ryan P @ Sep 21st 2007 1:26PM]

Maybe it was broken? Ever think of that?

[DorianGray @ Sep 21st 2007 2:41PM]

Likely that he bricked it and brought it in for service as a last resort...

Let's use our Thinking Caps...

[halfeatenfish @ Sep 21st 2007 3:12PM]

THink of it like this... a computer runs your car. Let's say you make mods to the program, and smoke your engine. Do you think the automaker is going to honor the warranty??? HELL F*CKING NO!!!

It's the same thing...

It's easy return it to stock before asking for service. People that hot-rod cars have known this for eons...

[LegendZ28 @ Sep 21st 2007 3:17PM]

@halfeatenfish

Actually, when it comes to cars, if you make a modification, the manfactuerer has to prove that it was the modifcation that caused the problem before they can void your warranty. Otherwise, you'd have to take your car to the dealership for services all the time and use only parts (brakes, fluids, wheels, etc) they sell/approve.

Obviously, when it comes to electronics however, we got the short end of the stick. Even if you don't open up a device, a company can still void your warranty, which is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Even still, he should have known that and restored before sending his phone in.

[Pep @ Sep 21st 2007 3:33PM]

Actually I had a similar experience. I bought an iphone to unlock it, and after the unlocking it would never catch service (on T-mob or AT&T). I restored it, bypassed activation and put my AT&T SIM, and it would catch no service either. I believe there was something wrong with the antenna or something. But when I went to service, they told me it had not been activated properly and that I should try to activate it again (which I didn't want). So I had to return it for a 10% fee too. I am sure it was defective but I had no way to prove it without telling them I had been hacking it...

[halfeatenfish @ Sep 21st 2007 4:00PM]

@LegendZ28:

True..true...true...

I was thinking more of cases where the true cause can be very ambiguous. For example: was the O2 sensor defective? or did you kill running hyper-rich all the time?

Very hard to prove without a lot of work.... consumer loses everytime.

[Johnny @ Sep 21st 2007 12:21PM]

This may hurt their sales

[mr mike @ Sep 21st 2007 12:23PM]

common sense must have escaped him for a moment! then when he saw the expression the apple guys face he thought to himself......jesus im stupid

[coffee @ Sep 21st 2007 12:22PM]

You can void the hardware warranty with software?

[IndiaTech @ Sep 21st 2007 1:37PM]

Yes for 2 reasons
1. iPhone hacks usually involve flashing the firmware and not just loading some software.
2. Hardware warranty can be voided for intentional misuse. When Apple told you, you can only use iPhones with AT & T and no other service providers, they do mean it. By using your iPhone with T-Mobile, or whatever, he has intentionally misused the phone.

[Cleverboy @ Sep 21st 2007 1:43PM]

The software on the iPhone operates the hardware. If you make the hardware perform in a highly irregular fashion and screw it up... its not Apple's fault, they never designed the hardware for the type of use you've subjected it to. Download iBrator for instance. Turn on the vibration, and then leave your phone plugged in and ON for three days. Don't think its a good idea? Me either. Ordinarily, you couldn't get the phone to do that. Just an obvious example.

[newgalactic @ Sep 21st 2007 3:21PM]

Hardware warranty can be voided by software, the above example of iBrator is a good one. However, do we know this happened here? Did Apple investigate to see what caused the hardware fault (I'm assuming it's a hardware fault for the purposes of this discussion, bare with me). Generally, the customer must create a dangerous condition from modification to void the warranty. Flashing firmware to allow the phone to be used on another network might not be considered "misuse". Flashing Firmware is something that is commonly done, and I'm not sure that it usually constitutes an automatic voided warranty. Likewise, SIM's by design are made to be replaced. I'm not sure that replacing with a non-AT&T SIM constitutes "misuse" (example: Europe, Asia). Legal President for this can probably be found in other instances. Is it legal to unlock a phone for the purpose of switching networks? Is it legal to flash firmware in computers, as long as it doesn't create an unsafe/dangerous condition? Is it legal to replace a SIM card with that of another vendor. If the person in the article brought his iPhone in because the screen went black on the bottom half, the above conditions might not be enough to void the warranty. If however, it was brought in with a blown vibrator, and iBrator was installed, chances are the warranty is hosed. Hardware and software are often altered. Just look at the Computer and Automobile industry for example. While replacing my car's stock head unit with a new Alpine will not void the warranty, putting 20'inch rims on an Accord surely will.

[oshean @ Sep 21st 2007 5:00PM]

"Download iBrator for instance. Turn on the vibration, and then leave your phone plugged in and ON for three days. Don't think its a good idea? Me either."

My girlfriend thinks it's a good idea.

[Justin Eaton @ Sep 21st 2007 12:22PM]

Sucks to have an iPhone. I can't wait until my iPod Touch is jailbroken, I doubt Apple will blacklist iPods, or be as severe. They don't involve an AT&T contract, and I think that's what Apple is more concerned about.

[DBrim @ Sep 21st 2007 12:25PM]

Then why did they make jailbreaking so much harder than it is on the iPhone?

[Justin Eaton @ Sep 21st 2007 12:30PM]

I'm sure they aren't just willing to allow the 3rd party applications, but I don't think they'll be voiding warranties like they are for the iPhone. The overall feelings seem to be strong against unlocking the iPhone's service, not just the little applications you can run.

The iPod Touch has been out for a little over a week, and the iPhone was just officially unlocked within the last few weeks. It'll take awhile, as it did the iPhone. People assume the iPod should be unlocked by now, but the iPhone took some time, and the online iPod orders haven't even shipped yet. It's all a matter of time.

[joe23521 @ Sep 21st 2007 12:29PM]

What I want to know is, is the restocking fee 10% of what you paid for, or 10% of the current price? And can you pay it with your gift card? lol.

[potato @ Sep 21st 2007 12:29PM]

Is this legal? I do believe there is a law in the US that prevents manufacturers from denying warranty service to modifications that are unlikely to cause product failure.

And unlocking the iPhone is certainly not one of those things that will brick it. Make it inoperable via software, sure, but the hardware is completely fine.

[ScottW @ Sep 21st 2007 12:33PM]

Ah, but the hardware HAS changed - it's got a different physical SIM card in it. :P

[aaron @ Sep 21st 2007 12:38PM]

you guys aren't getting it. the cost of the iphone is subsidised by the phone company and a profit-sharing arrangement. Sure, you're not harming the devices functionality but you're aquiring the device under the pretence that you're committing a certain revenue stream back to APPLE & AT&T. By hacking and taking it off their network, they lose that stream of revenue that was all but garonteed before you hacked it.

I don't think they're obligated to support a device that has been "hacked" by anyone other than Apple itself.

[potato @ Sep 21st 2007 12:50PM]

aaron: We're not talking about why Apple wouldn't like us unlocking our iPhones, we're talking about the *law*, and whether or not unlocking an iPhone represents enough risk to the hardware that Apple can justify removing warranty service.

Yes, I understand why they don't like unlockers, but the law is the law, and you can't remove warranty service because the customer is not going along with your business plans.

[Xzavier @ Sep 21st 2007 1:05PM]

When you go out and buy a product and you have no issues with it, it's Great! If you buy a product and their’s a manufacture issue with it, most of the time manufactures will address the issue. If you buy a product with non-issues and you start hacking around with it and then... uh-oh, it doesn’t work anymore, howed that happen??? well now... you might THINK that you should get service, especially if you bought a service plan with it *or your a MAC fan-boy!* but I bet you the companies Lawyers have a different take on it!

Years ago and still in a few places. Their use to be signs in stores saying... If YOU break it. You BOUGHT it!

[apeguero @ Sep 21st 2007 1:24PM]

I thought Congress passed a law requiring carriers to unlock cell phones upon request by the customer. What if, after trying that AT&T service for 45 days I realize that I just don't like their coverage and want to move to T-Mobile. By law, AT&T is supposed to unlock that phone and allow me to use it with a carrier of my choosing, right? If this is the case then what the heck is Apple or AT&T's stink all about? Instead of castigating us, why not make their plan prices and phone prices more competitive so that I won't want to leave AT&T? True, I'd have to pay the $175.00 early termination fee (of which Congress is also introducing a bill to make that fee more proportional). But, I've paid early out fees before in order to get out of crappy cell service (Nextel anyone?). Any takers? Any Law School students want to give their opinion on this? Does AT&T have a legal standing in this matter? Does their Legal agreement places them above that law that Congress passed earlier this year of which I am referring to?

[Xzavier @ Sep 21st 2007 1:37PM]

1. You *signed* a 2 year contract with AT&T.
2. You can leave at anytime and go to any other carrier you want. However you can't bring your iPhone with you because you didn't buy an unlocked phone.
3. Can you recite/point us to that *law* that you are talking about? H.R.##### S.#### or whatever it might be?

[Xzavier @ Sep 21st 2007 1:53PM]

ok... Attempting to Answer Potato's question and everybody else question about this LAW/Contract thing. Here it goes.

Apple One (1) Year Limited Warranty
___Paragraph one___
Apple Inc. (“Apple”) warrants this Apple-branded hardware product against defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of ONE
(1) YEAR from the date of retail purchase by the original end-user purchaser (“Warranty Period”). If a hardware defect arises and a valid claim is received
within the Warranty Period, at its option and to the extent permitted by law, Apple will either (1) repair the hardware defect at no charge, using new
or refurbished replacement parts, (2) exchange the product with a product that is new or which has been manufactured from new or serviceable used
parts and is at least functionally equivalent to the original product, or (3) refund the purchase price of the product.

EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS
___Paragraph 4___
This warranty does not apply: (a) to damage caused by use with non-Apple products; (b) to damage caused by accident, abuse, misuse, flood, fire,
earthquake or other external causes; (c) to damage caused by operating the product outside the permitted or intended uses described by Apple; (d)
to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized
Service Provider (“AASP”); (e) to a product or part that has been modified to alter functionality or capability without the written permission of Apple; (f )
to consumable parts, such as batteries, unless damage has occurred due to a defect in materials or workmanship; (g) to cosmetic damage, including but
not limited to scratches, dents and broken plastic on ports; or (h) if any Apple serial number has been removed or defaced.

http://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/iphone.pdf

[apeguero @ Sep 21st 2007 4:31PM]

Look it up here then: www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2006/71fr68472.html

Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 37 CFR Part 201 Docket No. RM 2005-11
Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies
Agency: Copyright Office, Library of Congress
Action: Final rule.

You can read the whole shebang there.

Now, my question is to the Lawyers amongst us who may be familiar with this: Does this Final Rule by the Library of Congress give us the authority to demand that AT&T unlock iPhones which we have purchased and activated with them in order for us to use them with another carrier? My question is not whether we can buy the iPhone and activate it with another carrier, bypassing activation with AT&T in the process. My question is valid, I do believe. As I'm sure there are a lot of AT&T customers that are not happy with their service and want to use the phone with another carrier. Is AT&T exempt from this ruling?

[alex @ Sep 24th 2007 2:40PM]

http://tinyurl.com/2u5p2u

for those of us who don't read lawyer-ese. (read... me)

[Mike @ Sep 21st 2007 12:31PM]

They may be blacklisting because the original deal is that the user is SUPPOSED to activate with AT&T since Apple gets a chunk of the monthly fees. Remember that phone contracts are used to subsidize the actual cost of the phone...

[ethana2 @ Sep 21st 2007 3:06PM]

And purchased console games are supposed to subsidize console costs... I say screw it all.

Stop doing that kind of thing already. It's artificial, it wastes hardware, locks in consumers, etc. Own your hardware. Own it all.

PC + CC-BY-SA media + penguin + copowi + OpenMoko FTW. the good life is the open life.

[Rob @ Sep 21st 2007 3:09PM]

The damn phone is $600. How much subsidy do you want?

Come on people, let's not play stupid here. A damn computer can cost you as cheap as $250. Who is subsidizing that? Consumers are not concerned about how much manufacturers pay for making a product. Consumers are concerned about how much they're going to pay for it. Apple has been making a lot of money on selling iPods and now, iPhones. Should I have to start buying songs from iTunes in order to subsidize my iPods too?

Again, Apple and AT&T are playing the corporate game. Which I don't blame them for it because they're both in business to get rich. Benevolence only goes to far in the corporate world. Apple has taken advantage of people's blind faith for anything with the fruit logo on it. AT&T is going along with it because they're guaranteed to get a lot of contracts in the process. "Apple + AT&T = $$$" "Consumers + blind faith = $$$$ (for Apple and AT&T."

[Mike @ Sep 21st 2007 4:54PM]

"The damn phone is $600. How much subsidy do you want?"

That's why the dropped the price. Analysts have estimated that the iPhone cost about $200 to build.


"A damn computer can cost you as cheap as $250. Who is subsidizing that?"

Ummm, AOL, EarthLink, etc. That's why computers, especially the cheap ones, come LOADED with trial software.


"Consumers are not concerned about how much manufacturers pay for making a product. Consumers are concerned about how much they're going to pay for it."

If you have ever run a business in your life, you would understand that your shareholders and employees DO care how much it costs to make the product since you have to compete AND MAKE A PROFIT to stay in business.

If it's to expensive, don't buy it. That's the free market economy at work.

[aaron @ Sep 21st 2007 12:31PM]

you guys are completely retarded if you thought this wouldn't happen. Apple arranged for a MASSIVE profit sharing scheme with the phone companies hosting their handset. hacking your phone and going to some other network is kind of like stealing the phone, seeing as Apple won't receive it's projected earnings when you made the inital purchase. Each time you buy an iphone, Apple makes a projection that is reflected in their revenue forcasts to their shareholders.
If they're not receiving that stream of revenue from AT&T, you're screwing their shareholders. Sure, maybe you don't give a flip but they can't develop new technologies when their core users are ripping them off.

[lathamb @ Sep 21st 2007 1:14PM]

Hey Aaron,

What you're missing is that when the iphone got unlocked it opened up a massive market of people who previously were not subscribed to AT&T (people like me in Canada). These people are all now clamoring to buy the iphone. Trust me Apple is not getting screwed here, AT&T is.

Really Apple is just trying to uphold it's contractual commitment to AT&T. Money signs lit up in Steve Jobs' eyes the day the iphone got hacked. That's why there hasn't been a fix yet. Ya herd?

Retards huh?

[Leon Ngo @ Sep 21st 2007 2:27PM]

Without the unlock, Apple wouldn't be selling as much iPhone in the first place.

[charlo852 @ Sep 21st 2007 12:32PM]

stupid mac.
who gives??

[Mitch @ Sep 21st 2007 12:33PM]

Hey TUAW what's up with the sensationalistic headline? There's no there there.

Some moron brings an unlocked phone into an Apple retail store and is surprised that they don't give him a big hug???

Next time try this - restore iPhone - replace with original SIM - go to Genius Bar with problem - great treated normally.

[John @ Sep 21st 2007 9:04PM]

Uh, yeah, that's kind of what the article says. And Apple did indeed void his warranty and blacklist his phone (allegedly). It's hardly sensationalistic i it's true.

[Mitch @ Sep 21st 2007 12:34PM]

Ooops - mixed up my blogs - I meant Hey Engadget......

[Jake @ Sep 21st 2007 12:39PM]

The only dumbass here is the customer who bought an iPhone to just 'play around' with it, and then try to return it.

[wetworker @ Sep 21st 2007 12:47PM]

LOL

[lanejasper69 @ Sep 21st 2007 12:51PM]

Well, I don't blame apple, and the guy SHOULD have restored it first before going into the store.....If I sold you a car, and you modified the shit out of it, and it went tits up.....would you expect me to give you a refund?

But I atill support hacking and c'mon Jailbreak for iPod touch!!!


Faslane

[Gadzooks @ Sep 21st 2007 12:51PM]

Of course he wasn't going to get service. first of A when you buy the phone i think in all that fine print it says you basically sign a contract saying you will only use the phone with AT&T but you have the right to do with it what ever you want. but it wont be supported if what your doing with breaches the user agreement. B if your phone is giving you software errors because of software on the phone that you installed well duh you're going to have to take that off and apple wont support it cause they didn't make it. Also if the software some how manages to brick your phone thats not apples fault cause apple doesn't make those apps obviously.

[harry.bartos @ Sep 21st 2007 12:53PM]

I smell class Action. You cant sell some one a device (cell phone) and deny them service rendering the device useless. It says no ware in the EULA about them PROACTIVLY banning/black listing its like paying for your ISP spacific modem and them denying you service after you downloaded a torrent. Its illegal for them to not buy back there propritiary technology it was a cort case here with SHAW cable they had to buy back my modem the same will happen to AT-T

[Scott @ Sep 21st 2007 1:13PM]

To the person who was like "this is the law," um it is against the law to hack your iPhone in the first place. You did sign the contract saying you may not change services (i am 100% sure you will sign such contract when you sign up with Apple), and you did it anyway. Now your hardware is broken, Apple can say it's because you hacked your iPhone, which you shouldn't have done anyway. This is with EVER electronics, if you say overclock yoru computer and it fries, no judge in the world will rule in your favor.

[DigitalDeus @ Sep 21st 2007 2:50PM]

Actually there is an exception to the DCMA (apple's favorite bit of legislation) that allows people to unlock cell phones to a new carrier. If I understand the legislation correctly the law allows for the people to hack the phone, just not advertise the hack. Therefore nothing illegal is going on with apple, just a violation of AT&T's contract which should have nothing to do with a hardware warranty on consumer electronics.

[David S. @ Sep 21st 2007 4:02PM]

Um - it's not "against the law." If anything, it would only be against their warranty. Do some research.

[anderesp @ Sep 21st 2007 1:13PM]

the only reason why Apple is making this such a big deal is because AT&T gives Apple incentive for every iPhone signed up for a two year contract. Meaning, that if Apple lets people 'hack' / go to T-Mobile, Apple is still making money-but AT&T isnt. Plus, Apple could also make more money by scaring people not to even think about hacking their iPhones just to stay with AT&T as their carrier.