Judge allows class action suit against Apple over disappearing iMessages to proceed
Judge Lucy Koh -- who you might remember from her time officiating Apple and Samsung's patent trials -- ruled on Tuesday that a class action lawsuit against Apple over missing text messages can proceed.
The problem at issue arises when iPhone users abandon ship and hop on over to an Android phone or any other non-iOS device. In such a scenario, some users discovered that messages from other iPhone users weren't going through, even though the sender's would get a "Delivered" receipt in their Messages app. The underlying cause is that iMessages should have been forwarded to the new device but, instead, were being routed to what was ostensibly a still active iMessage account.
While this scenario has been a longstanding problem for some, a few solutions -- such as disassociating one's number from its corresponding Apple ID and deactivating iMessage altogether -- helped alleviate the problem for many. It's worth noting that the ultimate key to prevention, according to Apple, is to deactivate iMessage before switching to a non-iOS device.
Addressing the issue head-on, Apple yesterday released a web-based tool that enables users to deregister their number from Apple's iMessage database entirely.
Nonetheless, a frustrated Android user who initially sued Apple over the matter in May of 2014 has now been given the green light to proceed with a planned class action.
Reuters reports:
Apple was ordered to face a U.S. federal lawsuit claiming it failed to tell consumers that its messaging system would block them from receiving text messages if they switched to Android-based smartphones from iPhones.
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California said Apple must face plaintiff Adrienne Moore's claim that the message blocking interfered with her contract with Verizon Wireless for wireless service, which she kept after switching in April to a Samsung Galaxy S5 from an iPhone 4.
By inhibiting the plaintiff's receipt of text messages after switching to a competing device, Apple stands accused of violating California's unfair competition laws.
In a statement on the matter, Apple said:
Apple takes customer satisfaction extremely seriously, but the law does not provide a remedy when, as here, technology simply does not function as plaintiff subjectively believes it should.
For more details as to the legal nuts and bolts, TechCrunch yesterday posted Judge Koh's full ruling alongside Apple's failed motion which sought to dismiss the suit altogether.
