The 23rd Civil Court of Santiago declared acceptable the lawsuit filed by the Organization of consumers and users of Chile (Odecu) against Apple for actions that shorten the useful life of these smartphones.
The situation is comparable to what has already been condemned by consumer groups in Europe and North America. The lawsuit is directed against Apple Chile, MacOnline and Reifschneider, where the purpose of the case is to “protect the collective interests” of those who purchased the iPhone from 2014 to 2017. Injured models with this practice will be iPhone 5C, 6, 6 Plus. , 6S, 6S Plus, 7 and 7 Plus, in addition to the SE model.
In his lawsuit, Odeka demanded that Apple pay $ 126 thousand pesos to every user in Chile who has an iPhone and was influenced by programmed obsolescence. In addition to repairing or redeeming their devices.
Lawyer Sebastian Reyes, who is leading this lawsuit, explained that "we ask the court to repair all the iPhones that are in the lawsuit and that had problems with slowing down."
Regarding possible financial compensation, Reyes noted that “if it cannot be repaired or repairs are expensive, we ask the court to award compensation to consumers, consisting of buying out devices at the market value they have”. now. "
Reyes added that "we are requesting one more compensation for the loss of time that consumers have suffered due to the slowing down of the device, which is equivalent to 126 thousand pesos."
According to Odecu, various iPhone models "had poor performance, either because of premature fading or because of slower performance." The latter was due to the fact that the hardware operating systems were updated with software fixes transmitted by Apple remotely via the Internet and intended, among other things, to "drown" the processor and slow the equipment down to the last model. "
The operation of the apple company, according to Odek, “was never brought to the attention of the users of this equipment and, on the contrary, was deliberately solved and carried out by the manufacturer Apple”.
Through justice, information was requested from government agencies such as the Deputy Minister of Telecommunications and the National Customs Service, as well as from operators Entel, Movistar, Claro, WOM and VTR.