Federal Court allows $2.25m iPad fine for Apple

 

Precedent for global ad campaigns.

Apple will pay a $2.25 million fine for implying its latest iPad was compatible with local 4G networks after the Federal Court allowed a settlement between the consumer giant and the competition watchdog.

Justice Mordecai Bromberg dismissed the three-month case from a Melbourne court room on Thursday morning after hearing last week from Apple and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which argued advertising the iPad as "Wi-Fi + 4G" was misleading to Australian consumers.

Apple has faced similar litigation globally since releasing the third iteration of the tablet in February.

The two parties approached the court with an agreed settlement of $2.25 million last week but Justice Bromberg urged Apple to provide confidential sales figures on the iPad locally before agreeing to the settlement.

He described sales in Australia as "very substantial".

However, the figure is significantly less than the $4.4 million maximum fine the Federal Court could impose on Apple for four contraventions of consumer legislation.

Apple will also pay ACCC's legal costs to the tune of $300,000.

In his judgment (Scribd), Justice Bromberg acknowledged that Australian carriers did not use the term "4G" to describe existing HSPA mobile broadband networks – as many US carriers have done – while LTE networks referred to as 4G in Australia operated on different spectrum frequencies than those the iPad is compatible with.

He found the iPad "could not directly connect with the only commercially available LTE network understood by Australian consumers to be '4G' network".

Apple had previously agreed to withdraw 4G advertising from the iPad worldwide in favour of a "Wi-Fi + Cellular" branding in early May, while also allowing Australian consumers who felt misled by the original advertising to return their iPad for a full refund.

"Apple's admitted contraventions were not trivial, and the penalty to be imposed requires serious and careful consideration", Justice Bromberg said.

He said multi-national corporations that introduced global advertising campaigns in Australia needed to take Australian consumer understanding into account "and ensure that representations made by such campaigns will not served to mislead".

"The penalty imposed in this case, needs to make that message clear," he said.

Copyright © iTnews.com.au . All rights reserved.


Federal Court allows $2.25m iPad fine for Apple
 
 
 
Top Stories
Myer CIO named retailer's new chief executive
Richard Umbers to lead data-driven retail strategy.
 
Empty terminals and mountains of data
Qantas CIO Luc Hennekens says no-one is safe from digital disruption.
 
BoQ takes $10m hit on Salesforce CRM
Regulatory hurdles end cloud pilot.
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...
Latest articles on BIT Latest Articles from BIT
Microsoft is offering Azure for Disaster Recovery to Australian SMBs
Feb 10, 2015
If you haven't talked to your IT provider about disaster recovery, it might be worth discussing ...
The 2015 Xero Roadshow is on: here are the locations and dates
Feb 6, 2015
The 2015 Xero Roadshow kicked off this week - see where you can attend at locations around ...
Microsoft Outlook is now on iPhone and iPad: why could this be useful?
Jan 30, 2015
Microsoft today released Office for Android and Outlook for iOS - complementing the other Office ...
Franchisees, here's something you should know about
Jan 23, 2015
You need to know the Code if you are a franchisee or franchisor as the penalties are significant.
Xero users rejoice! Quoting has finally arrived
Jan 23, 2015
It has taken years, but Xero has at last added integrated quoting to its online accounting software.
Latest Comments
Polls
Who do you trust most to protect your private data?







   |   View results
Your bank
  35%
 
Your insurance company
  5%
 
A technology company (Google, Facebook et al)
  9%
 
Your telco, ISP or utility
  8%
 
A retailer (Coles, Woolworths et al)
  4%
 
A Federal Government agency (ATO, Centrelink etc)
  18%
 
An Australian law enforcement agency (AFP, ASIO et al)
  15%
 
A State Government agency (Health dept, etc)
  7%
TOTAL VOTES: 4085

Vote
Do you support the abolition of the Office of the Information Commissioner?

   |   View results
I support shutting down the OAIC.
  26%
 
I DON'T support shutting the OAIC.
  74%
TOTAL VOTES: 1393

Vote