Apple & Customs STOLE Louis Rossmann batteries - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 08:44:48 pm
content: Do not know how it will end up... but it got my 100% attention.From what I know I tend to stay at Louis Rossmann side...#righttorepair

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 08:56:22 pm
content: Time to register Right to Repair (RTR) party and go to next elections.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 08:57:50 pm
content: I didn't watch the video (Rossmann just gets on my nerves TBH), but I did read the letter he received. As far as I'm concerned, as long as there's evidence that the items with Apple logos on them aregenuineApple parts, then Apple should have no legal basis on which to block the import. But it seems that on this specific issue (of whether a company can bar gray-market imports of products manufactured abroad), US law is somewhere between "undefined" and "leaning towards the side of the trademark holder".I suspect that, from a legal standpoint, this is not a "right-to-repair" question, but one of gray-market imports in general.

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 09:15:23 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2018, 08:57:50 pmThere used to be regular pictures in newspapers and news magazines of bulldozers running over boxes of fake Rolex watches and similar counterfeit merchandise at the ports of entry. As far as I know, the copyright holder CAN get legal permission to seize and destroy counterfeits bearing their trademark, but it is entirely up to the trademark owner to know when the counterfeits are coming in and direct customs agents to hold the shipment and wait for the trademark owner to get a court order.Anybody who is importing shady trademarked merchandise should be VERY cautious about it, and it is almost certain that if you buy Apple-trademarked bare batteries from China, they are either stolen or counterfeit.Jon

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 09:19:43 pm
content: This has nothing to do with Right to Repair. You cannot import trademarked products without the written consent of the trademark owner, plain and simple. Fluke did something similar with some yellow and black meters (apparently they own the yellow black multimeter design trademark), so it is not only apple. Any company must protect themselves from this kind of activity.

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 09:21:16 pm
content: @OP, I suggest you edit the Subject of this title because you are making a false accusation and you can get into trouble

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 09:40:37 pm
content: Quote from: TK on October 19, 2018, 09:19:43 pmExactly.It's real simple Louis, buy Chinese batteries that aren't marked as "Apple" batteries. Generic labeled batteries work just as well as the brand-labeled ones. If unmarked ones aren't available you could even have your Chinese supplier scrape the fake Apple label off before sending them.Or where you planning on re-selling them to unsuspecting customers as a genuine Apple product??? Since I doubt that you needed fifty battery packs for your own use.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 09:41:19 pm
content: Quote from: TK on October 19, 2018, 09:19:43 pmPlease quote a law which says that. I'm pretty sure it doesn't exist because it goes straight against the principles of a free market. For example: think about buying a Keysight scope from Ebay and import it to a different country ? ? ? ? it just doesn't make sense to have such a law. Also if such a law existed then Apple would have referred to that and not lied about the batteries being fakes. Unfortunately the US isn't the only country where the customs department functions as an extension to big companies.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 09:51:32 pm
content: My guess is that crApple told the customs people that because they refuse to sell the batteries, anything that comes in must be fake, despite it being quite possible that they are genuine second-hand ones.Apparently the Chinese suppliers normally remove the Apple marks but forgot in this case.

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 10:17:26 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 19, 2018, 09:51:32 pmUnfortunately, that's Apple's prerogative, the same as it's the prerogative of any company that owns a trademark and that marks it on their parts. If you don't like then don't buy their product. Personally I don't like companies that don't allow their products to be repaired and that don't supply at least some service information so I don't buy their products. It's why I own an old Miller 180 SD welder and a Miller Synchrowave 300 welder instead of a cheap Chinese welder or any of the newer inverter welders. And no, I don't own any Apple product because of their closed architecture/technology and I haven't since I sold my Apple Lisas many years ago.QuoteShow me where Louis states that they ARE second hand ones.I think Customs is capable of figuring out whether the items are new and are counterfeit or are old and used. If Louis thinks the parts are genuine, either old or new, used or not, he can certainly take his case to court and present his evidence.

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 10:17:51 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 19, 2018, 09:41:19 pmFree market is an economic concept, there is no such thing as free market (as in free speech) in the real world. Free market does not mean anyone can sell or trade anything that they want, just imagine what would happen to drugs, guns, etc. Keysight can track the authenticity of the item with the serial number. If the apple batteries can be traced to be original, I am sure Louis can get them from customs. Any trademark law protects companies from this type of situation.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 10:31:47 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on October 19, 2018, 10:17:26 pmUnlikely - they probably consult the trademark holder, who will tell them whatever is in their best interests.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2018, 10:39:35 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 19, 2018, 09:51:32 pmWell, "we stopped making these years ago and our supply chain ran dry ages ago, so if they are new and have our branding, they must be fake" is a fairly credible argument. I don't think it's terribly likely that there are many used batteries around that are in such good condition that they could pass for new. (Remember, "vintage" is Apple's status for machines that have been discontinued for 5-7 years. So any NOS batteries are likely to be somewhat old, too.)Apple, like any other trademark holder, must diligently protect its trademarks against counterfeiting, or else they risk losing the trademark if a pattern of non-enforcement stands for long enough. (Disclaimer: IANAL and that's basically a summary of the summaries I found while researching this reply.) IIRC, it's the same reason why Fluke insisted on not allowing those Sparkfun meters into USA, even though Fluke freely admitted they didn't like having to be so hard about it.So with that said, I think the real question is whether they're actually genuine Apple products or not. If they're fake, then yeah, they should be seized. (I have no issue with third-party parts, they just need to be labeled honestly.) If they are genuine, whether new old stock or used, then I think they should be allowed in regardless of Apple's opinions on the matter.Where Rossmanreallyhas a point (made in the prior video, his rant while biking) is this: Does an item that was originally genuine, but which has been repaired using third-party components, cease to be a genuine article? Because in that video, he talked about screens being seized thatwereoriginal Apple screens, but which had been repaired (cracked front glass replacement) in China. So no, the part isn't 100% original any more, but it mostly is, and the third-party part is not one where the OEM is of much significance. Replacing Apple glass with aftermarket glass doesn't make the remaining parts (such as the flex cable with its Apple logo) any less genuine. Nobody would argue that, say, an iMac whose original hard drive was replaced with a third-party hard drive is any less an Apple product now than before, and I think similar logic should apply to all parts. (In the interest of honesty, I would support rules requiring a disclaimer to the effect of "This item has been repaired using third-party replacement parts.") Yet apparently, those parts have been seized for bearing an Apple logo — a logo which was applied by Apple itself.One final thought: I do not buy Rossmann's claim of convenient timing. 1) His prior rant about this was before the CBC piece aired, and 2) I don't think that a trademark holder can tell Customs to target a specific entity, not in this way. AFAIK, a trademark holder basically tells Customs to watch for certain types of fakes, and then Customs decides what shipments to inspect. In other words, I wonder to what extent Customs itself is making mistakes in identifying fake items. (And of course, Apple isn't going to go out of its way to prove the authenticity…)

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 01:01:38 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2018, 10:39:35 pmI agree 100%, I don't think US customs (or any government agency) can act so quickly.

author: alpher
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 02:25:12 am
content: Quote from: TK on October 20, 2018, 01:01:38 amNot sure about US, but let me tell you about canadian customs, not only they will act on the slightest "hint" ,they will hold your shipment for a minimum a couple of weeks, then you will have to pay an inspection fee (no matter if they find your shipment to be perfectly legal) of a few thousand $, and only then release your shipment further.So if your "competition" knows in advance of your deal it can kill it right there.So if your margins are small, better keep it to yourself, certainly dont post it on youtube.It's hard enough to deal with the government, let alone apple lawyers.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 02:34:08 am
content: Its all about buying rights to territory. If MegaDeafCorp buys the right to your country's market (and you) they have the right to prevent any government allowing any circumvention of their property rights.Suppose they bought a right to a hot new cancer drug and you had cancer, went around the law and bought it from India, saving yourself a million dollars. Where does that leave them?Quote from: nctnico on October 19, 2018, 09:41:19 pm

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 10:15:04 am
content: Quote from: cdev on October 20, 2018, 02:34:08 amEmpty handed because such deals are unenforceable. Some big companies try to do that by denying customer service on products brought outside the country but there is no legal way to stop it. Also companies like to spread FUD about buying abroad being illegal but it isn't (again: which is why Apple is playing the counterfeit card).What you describe is happening on a large scale already and saving people a lot of money on medicines.PS: I'm writing about non-counterfeit items here.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 02:09:22 pm
content: Just remember Rossman makes a lot of YouTube revenue shitting on the company.Not suggesting they are an angelic company by any means (name one that is!) but the point here is that Apple isn’t doing anything wrong here. Louis imported grey market products that had Apple logos on, refurbished or new or whatever. That’s a risk and it didn’t play out well. He clearly doesn’t understand the market or risk and is spinning it.This is the same as literally any import scenarios where a brand is involved.Fans are lapping it up though. Hate is easy to sell.

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 02:26:38 pm
content: And the Canadian TV program Rossmann mentions at the beginning, it looks fishy to me. It is certain that apple genius bar just run a software diagnostics to reach the repair cost conclusion, I am sure they did not open the macbook and checked all the possible hardware failures. Rossmann finds a display cable PIN that is BENT, repairs it and the macbook comes back to life... the display error was already there when the TV crew brings the macbook to the apple store, so somebody opened the macbook before and they voluntarily or involuntarily BENT the display pin. It sounds to me that somebody CREATED the situation to show an extreme case of "THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS" quoted by apple VS "ONE BENT PIN ON THE DISPLAY CABLE" that was fixed within 5 minutes by Rossmann... It looks suspicious to me. When Rossmann fixes macbooks by looking at the schematics and swapping chips, that is credible... a BENT display pin and he goes directly to it as soon as he opens the macbook??The video here:

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 02:35:38 pm
content: QuoteIt's almost as if he's done this for years and knows what to look for.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 03:34:04 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 19, 2018, 09:41:19 pmThe applicable section of USC is given in the letter. I'm not going to look it up but, rest assured, there is a law!And they're fake unless Apple says they're real, that is, you buy them from Apple.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 04:13:23 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 03:34:04 pmYou just fell for the FUD companies are spreading!

author: GeorgeOfTheJungle
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 04:31:08 pm
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on October 20, 2018, 02:35:38 pmYes the screen connector is the first thing you'd check if the screen is failing, but a pin can't bend itself, somebody has had to bend it...

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 04:43:46 pm
content: I really don't get what the fuss is about - when someone imports a container load of shoes with Adidas or Nike logos on them or yellow & blue soldering stations with Hakko's logo, they will also get seized as counterfeit.That's not only in the US, this works very much the same in Europe like this too. That's the entire purpose of having a trademark registered - preventing others from using that mark to sell items that look like the ones made by you (and potentially profit from your reputation).That the battery was once Apple made and had an Apple logo on it doesn't mean it is OK to have it torn apart somewhere in China, have the guts replaced with who knows what and import it back looking as a genuine Apple article, logos and all. All the repair and stifling competition stuff aside, Apple would be foolish to not act on this because if the battery blows up, it would be their reputation at stake given that it was an "Apple" battery that has gone bang.That Louis and a lot of other people don't get this and don't understand the law is really not Apple's problem. All he had to do was to ask the refurbisher/seller to remove the Apple markings. But controversy sells.Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 04:13:23 pmNo, it is sadly you who has no clue what you are talking about. Try to import such goods to Netherlands and you will see what your customs will do with it. FYI:https://www.government.nl/topics/export-import-and-customs/counterfeit-seizures

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 04:51:22 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 04:13:23 pmHave you read the 19 USC 1526 section? Well here it is!https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1526QuoteSo, yes the IS a law that precludes importing goods that violate trademarks.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:06:04 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 10:15:04 amAnd, in terms of medicines, how do you determine that they are legitimate - before you die? Thank you, I'll just depend on my local pharmacy and health insurance. Somebody local that I can sue!SCUBA gear is the same thing. I pay a LOT more for ScubaPro regulators in the US than they sell for in, say, Italy. Yet I'm not supposed to order one from Italy because my local dealer shouldn't and probably won't support it. Yes, they check serial numbers! And in general, the manufacturers don't sell repair kits. Only authorized repair centers can get the parts. In some ways, this makes sense. At least in terms of parts.Same thing with textbooks. I can buy a text in the US for, say, $200. I can find the same exact book, printed in India and imported back to the US for $20. And on the cover it will say "Not For Import To The US". Yet they wind up on Alibris as "used" books categorized as "new". Same book but the Indian version might use lighter paper and a lesser quality binding but, still, 10% of the cost.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:29:47 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 05:06:04 pmAgain you are falling for the FUD spread by companies. Please stop doing that and think for one second. I never wrote to order medicines yourself. I wrote about the local pharamacies buyingapprovedmedicines from cheaper sources. In the NL the government is actively forcing pharmacies to buythe samemedicines with thesame qualitylevels at lower costs. Ofcourse you don't believe that because you have been spoonfed FUD for decades and allow yourself to be robbed. In the NL buying cheaper medicines saves about 10 euro per person annually for cost of medicines alone. In the US that can probably be 50 to 100 dollars per person and in turn saving 12 to 25 billion dollars of health care costs annually without reducing health care quality.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:37:07 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on October 20, 2018, 04:43:46 pmFYI: Louis is importing genuine Apple batteries NOT counterfeits. In his video he explicity states that he wants to use NOS batteries for fixing his client's devices. He is not that stupid to import counterfeits and then complain about being caught! It is just Apple who pulled some strings in the customs department and put Louis' address on the black list for extra checks.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:39:53 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 04:51:22 pmAnd where is Louis violating trademarks? He is buying batteries made by Apple from abroad.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:40:10 pm
content: Guys, stop mixing stuff like medicines and textbooks into this. It has nothing to do with it.Medicines are generally protected bypatents(that's why you typically can't import and sell a cheaper generic even under a different name!) and textbooks are protected bycopyright, where the rights owner may or may not license the printing of the book under different conditions for different territories.Either of this has zero, zilch, nada, nothing whatsoever with Luis' problem. Trademarks are different from copyrights and patents, different laws and different rules apply.If you don't like the law lobby your parliament members to change it. But talking about "corporate fud" when you obviously don't understand even the basic difference between the different types of IP is really counterproductive.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:52:31 pm
content: Trademark law only restricts import of goods made for/by a different company using the same name / brand / logo but that isn't the case.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:57:21 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 05:39:53 pmNo, he isnot buying batteries made by Applefrom abroad. That's the entire problem.Apple stopped making this type of battery long time ago because it is for an older model of laptop. What he has done is that he has bought some refurbished (or more likely aftermarket) but Apple-branded batteries.His claims that these are batteries taken from recycled or demo laptops somewhere in China, packaged up and sent to him in volume, are rather difficult to take at face value.Even a brand new, unused lithium battery made 5-6 years ago by Apple (given that we are talking about machines Apple doesn't support anymore) would be pretty degraded already and not something you could put into a client's machine and warranty it as new. A battery from a store demo laptop or, even worse, recycled from an old laptop? Suuure and monkeys fly.Whether these were originally made by Apple or not is really irrelevant at this point, because they have been either extensively modified (if nothing else then the insides were replaced) or most likely weren't even Apple made to begin with. So Apple understandably objects to have something like that imported (and sold to customers) with their logo on it. That's all.He is playing ignorant and talks about that case with the repaired displays - but that's not at all the same thing. Those parts were provably Apple-made and only repaired. How do you repair a worn out lithium battery? Right, you can't unless you replace the guts.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:59:08 pm
content: Once parts are legally sold by a company, they don't really have much say over them. Ignoring the DMCA shenanigans that sometimes go on, but this doesn't appear to be such a case.I assume Apple will need to conclusively prove these are fake batteries. It seems unreasonable you can just claim they're fake because you won't sell them when there are hundreds of thousands of batteries out there.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 05:59:22 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 05:29:47 pmI couldn't care less about $100 per year. Our health care isn't socialized (yet!) so I pretty much pay for my own drugs through my HMO. Yes, the cost is fixed at $10/refill (90 or 100 days) but I'm betting the HMO isn't losing money. They buy multiple millions of dollars worth of meds per year so I suspect they get some kind of deal. If generics are available, that's what they dispense. They won't usually carry brand name drugs.There are still patent restrictions on imports. While I disagree with the way drugs are priced in the US and then sold a lot cheaper in other countries, unless the FDA certifies a foreign source so my HMO can buy from them, I'm not interested in the issue.But, true, this has nothing to do with the trademark issue of the imported batteries.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:03:40 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 05:59:08 pmNo they won't. That's not how the law works.The onus is on theimporterto show to the customs that they have permission from the trademark holder to import it (e.g. because they are doing it on the trademark owner's behalf or because they have got a license or something similar).All Apple needs to do is to say to the customs when they call that they have found a package full of Apple-branded merchandise that it isn't theirs and that that importer doesn't have their permission to use the trademark. Case closed.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:04:25 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on October 20, 2018, 05:57:21 pmIt seems Apple will need to prove they're fake or modified. Batteries have a much longer shelf life than you are supposing here and importing parts manufactured by Apple isn't a trademark violation. When they're repaired or refurbished it gets a little more interesting, but even then Apple may not have a claim. Can you imagine every car with new tires being imported confiscated by customs?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on October 20, 2018, 05:57:21 pmThat is just speculation at this point. According to Louis these are genuine Apple batteries and that is all the information we have. Again: I wouldn't expect Louis to make a big fuss about batteries which are less than genuine parts.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:09:26 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on October 20, 2018, 06:03:40 pmYou don't need permission from a party to import goods manufactured by that same party. That's not a trademark violation. It'd be totally undesirable too. Imagine every company having legal say over every product they ever sold entering or leaving the country. It'd become a shitfest.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:11:53 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:04:25 pmThe part about Apple having to prove it I have answered above in the meantime.The problem is that how do you prove something is genuine Apple made? Only Apple can say that. And they are claiming that those batteries aren't genuine already.Can you imagine some sort of expert witness trying to convince the manufacturer that something has been made by them when the manufacturer claims the opposite? That's going to be one heck of a tall order, especially when there is no paper trail proving where the components came from.The tires analogy doesn't work - if you buy e.g. a BMW you aren't buying BMW tires (BMW does not make tires) so BMW cannot claim a trademark violation because the importer has used Continental instead of Pirelli tires on it.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:14:35 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:09:26 pmExactly! Trademark protection is only there to prevent having two brands with the same name AND product operating in the same market space. Nothing more, nothing less.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:16:38 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:09:26 pmYes but the problem is that Louis cannot prove those are genuine Apple parts. The onus is on him to prove it (that's what the law says), not on Apple to prove they are counterfeit. If he had paperwork showing that the parts are original (e.g. an original Apple invoice from his supplier) then all he would need to do is to call customs and show them the paper to have the shipment released.He has only the word of his Chinese supplier, *wink wink*. He didn't say where the batteries came from, only alluded to that they were maybe pulled from some demo laptops or old stock and what not. So he either doesn't know, or, more likely, knows well that the batteries are not 100% genuine but doesn't care because they work.Just this time he got unlucky because his shipment got inspected and seized.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:38:29 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on October 20, 2018, 06:11:53 pmApple can do plenty of things to prove they're fake batteries. It's very unlikely they will have been perfectly reproduced or remanufactured, so if they can't demonstrate any differences their story comes into question. They will also have heaps of paperwork showing where batteries from various batches would have went. If they can show discrepancies there, their story becomes plausible. If not, it doesn't seem to be a likely story. They are making a claim here.Conversely, Louis can't prove they're original parts. You can't prove a negative. He can prove that there are no differences between his and official batteries, which makes his story likely.The car comparison is apt. Just imagine a non BMW oil filler cap being used and the car being confiscated as a consequence. Or it having an aftermarket exhaust. Everyone understands that's ridiculous and gives companies a lot of undesirable power. After they sell the product, they don't have a say over what you do to it any longer. It all boils down to the same power grab we see time and time again, with companies wanting to dictate how and when we use, repair and discard their products. Our own products, which we bought and own.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 06:52:53 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:38:29 pmWhen push comes to shove Louis will have to prove that the batteries are genuine. This can be done by comparing a real battery (from a known genuine source) to the ones he want to import. He'll probably need to hire a third party expert for that.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 07:27:19 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:09:26 pmYes you do! Read the applicable section of the US Code above.Even if it is the very same manufacturer, slipping some units out of the current production line so they are genuine in every respect, they still can't be imported if they violate the trademark laws. In other words, the only legitimate destination for those batteries would be Apple itself. Because the manufacturer didn't have Apple's permission to use the trademarks for those side-stream batteries.It's really pretty simple, the law exists, and it's pretty easy to read and it absolutely precludes any manufacturer from using Apple's trademarks without permission.Rossman's going nowhere with this...

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 07:30:51 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:38:29 pmOf course they can but theydon't have to. What is so difficult to comprehend that it is theimporterwho needs to prove that they have the right to use the trademark in this case? It is written very explicitly both in the letter Louis has received or in the law itself. Whether by showing they have permission from the mark owner or because the goods are actually genuine. The mark ownerdoes not need to do anythingin this case.This is not a court case with a plaintiff and defendant where the plaintiff is accusing the defendant of something and thus the burden of proof is on them. This is customs seizing an item because they suspect it being counterfeit and are requiring the importer to produce documentation that they have the right to use the trademark otherwise the item will be destroyed.Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:38:29 pmHe could easily prove that the components are genuine e.g. by producing an invoice from Apple (or Apple OEM) supplied to him by the seller that sold him the batteries.Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 06:38:29 pmYou are completely off-base here. A better analogy would be customs confiscating a box of oil filler caps with BMW logos on them. Or a container full of exhausts with BMW logos on them.Thisis notabout something having an aftermarket component installed, this is about the Apple mark (likely company name & logos) being used on an item that is suspected being counterfeit. Your car analogy would work if customs were confiscating a shipment of Apple laptops with aftermarket batteries in them. Which obviously isn't the case here.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 07:37:21 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on October 19, 2018, 09:40:37 pmSure you did not watch the video. Those were genuine batteries pulled out from scrap. Also there is an issue that Genuine LCDs which were refubrised (replaced glass) get seized because apple put their logo on the flex cable. And nope, generic batteries do not work as well.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 07:40:49 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 07:27:19 pmYou claim here something completely different. Illegally produced batteries != legally produced batteries (say pulls from defective laptops) imported through unofficial channel.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 07:48:14 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 20, 2018, 07:37:21 pmAnd you actually believe that claim - that a battery pulled out of a scrapped old machine would be as good as new. Without doing anything to it.Furthermore, Louis didn't really say this was the case. He has only said in the video that these are original batteries that could have come for example from demo units or recycled computers. I.e. he does not really know where they are from! (or knows but didn't say).The deal with the LCDs was different - that was about provably genuine parts that were sent to China to be repaired (broken glass replaced) and got intercepted on the way back by the customs. Not about LCDs of who knows what origin with an Apple logo slapped on them.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 07:57:56 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 07:27:19 pmFortunately trademark laws don't work that way. Please read more about it!What is possible is to register a trademark in a country so other companies can not sell similar products under the same name. Usually this is done by importers. But that doesn't prevent others from importing (genuine) articles from that manufacturer. For sure importers try to prevent that (by spreading FUD) but they have no legal grounds to do so.

author: ChunkyPastaSauce
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 08:06:23 pm
content: Customs probably be sending samples and/or photographs of the batteries to Apple and Louis (assuming he follows procedure). Before 2015 they only sent to trademark owner, who would give a yes/no on whether it's counterfeiter or not. Now customs gives the importer the ability to review evidence."(d)Disclosure to importer of unredacted photographs, images, and samples.CBP will disclose to the importer unredacted photographs, images, or an unredacted sample of imported merchandise suspected of bearing a counterfeit mark at any time after the merchandise is presented to CBP for examination. CBP may demand the return of the sample at any time. The importer must return the sample to CBP upon demand or at the conclusion of any examination, testing, or similar procedure performed on the sample."https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/19/133.21part d CBP=customs & border protection

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 08:10:05 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 07:57:56 pmNico, I suggest thatyouactually read something about it otherwise you wouldn't talk such nonsense. Trademarks have nothing to do with any "importers" or "importers usually doing it". Importer is almost never the owner of the mark so they hardly can do that.The only time anything "import" comes into play when customs and borders are concerned because customs are typically charged with preventing counterfeit items from entering the market.However trademarks can be (and are) routinely enforced domestically and across borders too. And it is not only the same name but also design, plus the offending mark doesn't even need to be identical, it is enough if it is sufficiently similar to be confused with the protected design/logo/name etc.E.g. the well known trademark dispute between Apple Corps. (owned by the Beatles) and Apple Computer over the "Apple" trademark. Apple (the computer company) has actually lost a few of those lawsuits and had to pay to the other Apple over the years.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 08:25:30 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on October 20, 2018, 08:10:05 pmThis is exactly what I'm writing! AFAIK importers do register trademarks if that has not been done by the OEM yet to protect 'their' market against counterfeiters.Either way a trademark claim is not going to hold up against parallel import of genuine goods.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 09:26:42 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 07:27:19 pmThat honestly sounds like utter nonsense. If you buy an item from a manufacturer, the manufacturer doesn't get a say in what you do with it next. You don't need permission to import goods from a manufacturer after they've been sold by that manufacturer.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 10:02:41 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 09:26:42 pmThe manufacturer is Apple, the people building the batteries are just job shops. The job shop doesn't own the design, they just assemble the thing under contract to Apple. Read that again! "Under contract to Apple". If Won-Hong-Low wants to sell batteries into the US, they can use their own trademarks.Without doubt, the contract doesn't allow side-streaming of product but it happens. As long as it stays in China there isn't much to be done about it. But when the job shop puts an Apple logo on the product and attempts to import it to the US, there's a trademark problem.Why is everybody so resistant to just reading the law?It's right there, there are no really big words, no Latin legalese at all and there is no reason to get confused. They can not ship fake trademarked goods into the US - it's really just that simple. It doesn't matter if the product is EXACTLY the same as the Apple branded product, identical in every conceivable respect, coming off the same assembly line, they can't use Apple's trademark to sell the product. The product is fake if Apple says it's fake.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 10:13:11 pm
content: Quote from: TK on October 20, 2018, 02:26:38 pmI remember news stories years ago where they used to try to show how dishonest repair shops were by putting a blown fuse into a VCR and then taking it in for repair. Naturally most of the shops took a guess as to the cause of the fuse blowing and replaced some parts, because fuses don't just blow on their own, at least not very often. Any competent tech is going to try to find and fix the underlying fault and prevent a repeat failure. They aren't going to be expecting a deliberately induced fault.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 10:32:35 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 10:02:41 pmI'm not sure whether insisting on "side-streaming" is malicious intent or being obtuse. We can go back and forth all week, but it really is no use. As far as we know Apple sold the products, so they can be shipped wherever the owner pleases. Apple doesn't have a say in where its products get shipped after selling them.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 10:53:44 pm
content: As tempers are flaring I thought I'd do a little fact finding. According to a page written by a law firm specializing in US trademark law it turns out that the procedure for seizing goods is well defined and has a couple of steps. A summary would be below.*Customs suspects counterfeit goods and seizes them and notifies the importer. The importer has 30 days to deny the counterfeit nature of the goods or otherwise loses them.*Customs then proceeds to inform the copyright owner that the goods will be released to the importer after 30 days and provides a sample of the goods to the copyright holder. The copyright owner then has to both file a demand for the exclusion and pay a bond that will cover any losses the importer may suffer when the goods turn out not to infringe copyright.*Both parties then have an additional 30 days for discovery and submission of legal briefs. The burden of proof is on the party claiming that importation contains piratical goods.*The Commissioner of Customs will receive the evidence and decide whether trademark has been infringed.Note the third point, which is copied verbatim from the article linked. It appears that it is indeed Apple upon whom the burden of proof rests.https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=22d97bbe-887c-4740-9af5-0b6e9e75a961

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 11:04:16 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 10:02:41 pmSorry but this is just an assumption to hyperbole your remark to be true. According to Louis' video the batteries are genuine Apple products sold by Apple and that is the only factual information we have right now. Unless you have more knowledge by investigating the actual batteries now held by customs your remarks are nothing more than pure speculation.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2018, 11:48:23 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 11:04:16 pmThen all we have to do is wait a couple of months and see how it works out. Win or lose, Rossman will post something about it!

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 02:44:14 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 11:04:16 pmYou'd better go back and listen to Louis' rant again. He never says that they ARE genuine Apple products, he says that theycouldbe. Big difference!I also wouldn't put a lot of trust into what Louis says as being entirely "factual"!

author: Beamin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 06:18:17 am
content: A follow up video where apple wants 1200 or 780 or both to do a 2 min repair:

author: GeorgeOfTheJungle
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 07:17:39 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 10:02:41 pmThen this business is illegal:https://www.vegeuk.com/en_uk/QuoteAnd any refurbished 2nd hand Mac on ebuy too...

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 07:57:17 am
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on October 21, 2018, 02:44:14 amWatch again yourself.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 09:43:17 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 20, 2018, 07:27:19 pmYep. And as someone who is simultaneously a long-time Apple user (and small-time AAPL investor), but who also believes in fairly free markets and trade, I really don't like how the US Code above (as well as its similar equivalents everywhere else) prevent gray market imports. I absolutely believe in a company's right to protect itself against actual counterfeits, but I don't think they should have any say on gray-market imports of genuine articles. (And as I said above in more detail, I do agree with Rossmann that even parts repaired with third-party components don't suddenly become "counterfeit".)

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 09:48:17 am
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on October 20, 2018, 09:26:42 pmUnfortunately, the way the laws are written, in many countries, only the manufacturer (or their designated assignees) canimporttheir products, regardless of provenance.The concept you're referring to (that the manufacturer has no say, once they've sold it) is, in the United States, enshrined in law as the "first sale doctrine", and initially, I assumed this would apply. But apparently, it does NOT apply outside of USA, so if the sale occurred outside USA, then the US first sale doctrine cannot apply (SCOTUS ruled on this long ago and decided it cannot apply, as it would be extra-jurisdictional application of US law). And so then the aforementioned US Code section applies, regarding trademark.I don't like this situation, but legally it's fairly clear. :/

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 09:58:15 am
content: Quote from: Beamin on October 21, 2018, 06:18:17 amThe key quote there is the one to the effect of "We don't offer partial repairs". And since it's an out-of-warranty product, Apple can pick and choose which types of repairs they choose to offer. For sure, I can understand that offering partial repairs exposes one to higher risk than just saying "If we're fixing it, it's to bring it up to factory condition", and they can choose to not take on that risk exposure.An AASP (Apple authorized service provider) can choose its own policies in this regard, and still perform repairs using Apple parts, so there's an entire other avenue the CBC never explored.<rant>As someone who worked for several AASPs in my early career, I a) understandwhyApple has massively curtailed AASPs (because quite a substantial percentage offered bad customer service that sullied Apple's reputation), but b) really dislike that Apple has restricted AASPs so much, since most of them really tried hard and did good work, and it was that dealer network that held Apple afloat during all the hard times. (I simply do not approve of things like disallowing AASPs to keep service parts in stock — Apple stores have substantial spare parts inventory — or making them wait longer for parts than Apple itself must. The AASPs deserve Apple's gratitude, not a hard time.)</rant>

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:16:11 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 09:58:15 amWhere did you see partial repair there? Also they do things like replacing desktop Mac motherboard together with CPU and RAM even though those are removable and don't have any issue (AASP cannot order motherboard separately). Of course repair price is just ridiculous.https://youtu.be/LwEInwvFbwk

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:21:48 am
content: The problem appears that the parts have a trademarked logo on them. And since the trademark owner doesn't have those parts made anymore, they are ipso-facto "counterfeit". This does NOT appear to be the same situation where legitimate Apple parts are "refurbished" and re-imported. In that case I agree that the parts are NOT "counterfeit", but Apple is simply trying to make 3rd party repair impossible using their gang of lawyers.If Louis imported the same parts WITHOUT the logo, then the trademark owner would have no legitimate complaint. Now, it seems likely that this isn't his first rodeo and he knows that already. Perhaps the manufacturer sent Apple-marked batteries when Louis wanted generic, no-mark parts. In that case it would the the supplier/shipper's mistake and they should eat the loss. Since the parts are internal, the customer will never know (or care) whether the replacement part (battery or whatever) has a piece of fruit with a bite out of it marked on the side.And it seems extraordinarily unlikely that Rossman is advertising that he is using "genuine" Apple parts as a marketing attempt to attract customers. Simply offering sensible repair services (compared to the Apple customer no-service) appears to be generating more business than he can handle.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:22:44 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 09:48:17 amDoesn't this conflict with anti-monopoly law ?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:29:06 am
content: Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 10:16:11 am2:40 in the video: "…we can't do partial repair." As I said, that's Apple's choice, and you can choose to go to an AASP who is willing to do a partial repair.Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 10:16:11 amSince the price of the service partis based on the old part being returned, whether CPU and RAM are swapped together really doesn't matter. Where it does is if an AASP fails to return the old part, triggering the no-swap prices, which are intended to prevent AASPs from buying service stock in advance, as well as to prevent boards repaired by third parties from being easy to find. I don't agree with this policy, but it is what it is. :/Also, please don't move the goalpost.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:39:21 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 21, 2018, 10:22:44 amI don't think so, in that anti-monopoly (antitrust) laws are designed to address anindustry. Apple clearly does not hold a monopoly in any major industry they operate in (having a minority market share in personal computers, mobile phones, set-top boxes, media streaming, etc). Other vendors sell such items as well, so there's no monopoly issue here. Microsoft ran into issues with antitrust laws in the 90s when Windows and IE each held >90% market share, and it was successfully argued that Microsoft had accomplished that through anticompetitive measures likerequiringPC vendors to buy a Windows license for every single PC they sold, even if the customer actually wanted an alternative OS like OS/2, OpenStep, or another UNIX variant.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:50:28 am
content: Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 10:16:11 amP.S. Linus's iMac Pro drama never made total sense. They broke it doing a teardown (while powered up, IIRC!), causing lots of damage, and then discovered that service parts cost a LOT more than those parts do when sold as part of a finished product. The same as how if you were to buy all the spare parts to build a particular car, you'd be spending over $100,000 to build a car that costs $30,000 to buy new. So when Apple determined that they'd caused damage so extensive that the cost of parts and labor exceeded the cost of an entire new unit, that's what they recommended.That's not news, that's how things work. Spare parts cost a LOT extra, due to the far more complex logistics and completely different cost and labor structure of spare parts.All of us here understand why it is that when we order 10 pieces of a component from Digi-Key, we are payingfarmore per piece than an electronics vendor who orders 10 million pieces directly from the manufacturer. It's the exact same thing with subassemblies of a computer. But Linus's business is getting clicks, and whining about Apple is a reliable way to do that.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 11:26:07 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 10:39:21 amI simply meant that only Apple being able to import genuine Apple-branded parts is anti-competitive

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 11:51:14 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 10:50:28 amWho in sane mind replaces very expensive Mobo, CPU and RAM as a single part?(again, each of those is removable). It's a freaking computer, 30 minute labor of computer technician doesn't cost several thousands of $.QuoteFirst Apple would not fix it at all because LCD could not be ordered. And again, why the hell they cannot replace motherboard separately and replace basically all internals when any other MFG can do this for an order of magnitude cheaper products.Also why in the hell they do not allow AASPs to keep components in stock?QuoteWhy basically anyone else do not have this issue while selling much wider range of products?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 11:57:56 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 21, 2018, 11:26:07 amThere is more to that. The trademark owner has a right to first sale. If a product has not been sold through an authorised channel then it may be considered counterfeit. This is to prevent producers to sell trademarked items themselves directly.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 12:16:13 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 21, 2018, 11:26:07 amRight. But the question you actually asked was "doesn't this conflict with anti-monopoly laws?", and the answer to that is "no", because the laws are designed to protect a different aspect from this. Theremightbe other laws it conflicts with, but at the moment, I doubt it, insofar as it is other laws (namely, intellectual property laws) thatcausethe anti-competitive situationon purpose.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 12:29:38 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 11:51:14 amFirst of all… dude, calm down a bit! Your entire post is full of rage! It's just a computer, and one you probably don't even own.So as for how the parts are swapped: Who cares?!? As I explained, the normal situation with major Apple parts is that spare parts are sold on the basis of aswap. So if (totally random number here), Apple charges $1000 for the board swap itself, what difference does it make that the CPUs and RAM came with it? In the end, for the $1000, you end up with one working board, one set of CPUs, and the same RAM. You received one, and you sent one back. You do not end up with extra CPUs and RAM.I literally do not understand why this matters. You aren't paying any more or less due to this.Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 11:51:14 amWas the screen not offered as a service part at all, or was it just delayed?As for the "why the hell…" thing: If the repair costs more than a new unit, why do it?!?Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 11:51:14 amThey doallowit, they just make it prohibitively expensive. But honestly, I don't know why they do this, to me it makes no sense.Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 11:51:14 amWhat? Uhhh, in ANY mass-produced product that can be repaired, the spare parts cost FAR more as spares than as a part of a finished product!! Whether it's a car, a TV, a kitchen mixer, a phone, a computer, a piece of furniture, clothing, or literally ANYTHING ELSE that is made up of individual parts, you WILL pay more (usually FAR more) per part when buying them as spares than you pay for that part when buying the finished product. This is not particular to Apple, it is literally a core principle in mass-produced products: making them in large amounts so you benefit from economies of scale. The economies of scale vanish when you have to create alternative, low-volume supply chains for spare parts, which must be individually packaged and sold.

author: petert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 12:51:04 pm
content: People who say this is just hating on Apple should read this news:https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/a3yadk/apple-sued-an-independent-iphone-repair-shop-owner-and-lostApple puts logos on every little part (including internal ones where it will never be seen by a user) to prevent anybody else from repairing their devices, playing the counterfeit card if they are bought used.Knowing there are no other substitutes, this effectively prevents independent repair.Apple also lobbies against the right to repair.

author: petert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 01:04:40 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 10:39:21 amThe repair market is another one than selling new units.If only Apple can supply spare parts, this could well be considered a monopoly. It's the same with car repair, where at least in the EU, it has been ruled illegal to force customers to only go to mechanics officially selected by the manufacturers. They try to get around that with a lot of tricks, such as making it hard to get spare parts or make them incompatible, but the intent of the law makers are clear, and there are constantly new cases that deal with these tactics.

author: Terrius
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 12:29:38 pmThe screen was not offered at all. Apple held the device for a period of time after agreeing to service it and then outright refused all support. This is what caused Linus' initial outrage.Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 12:29:38 pmIt doesn't, the Apple OEM components (replacing everything) would still cost less than a new unit.Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 12:29:38 pmThey do this to control the supply chain and prevent third party access to "Apple authorized" components.Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 12:29:38 pmThis is only accurate if you are comparing Third Party pricing for the spare parts. First Party pricing costs little more than the original assembly of the unit (there are added shipping costs for parts).There seems to be a misconception that Apple is selling these devices for less than it costs them to make. Apple doesn't pull Sony/Microsoft console moves with their devices (Xboxs and Playstations are sold at a loss but make back their money via game liscensing). Apple makes a large margin off every device and the actual device cost for them is far lower than the sticker price consumers end up paying. There is no possible way that even with replacing every single component it would "cost more to repair than buy a new device". The reason they push for a "it is too broken you need to buy new" is that they make far more money from that than they would the repair service. This is why Right to Repair is so important.

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 01:18:31 pm
content: Quote from: petert on October 21, 2018, 12:51:04 pmThis was common practice with all the manufacturers that can afford volume production, HP used to have all the ICs used in test equipment labeled with HP part number, every single one of them, including common TTL, ECL, OpAmp, etc.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 01:24:42 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 09:48:17 amSo local USA recycling center can export its electronic APPLE trash to African/China recycle centers while Luis are denied to import back the same trash?

author: petert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 01:38:32 pm
content: Quote from: TK on October 21, 2018, 01:18:31 pmYou can't compare that. HP sold many ICs separately, so they had an interest to protect them against being counterfeit. Additionally, there are/were many alternatives for those items from other manufacturers. Many of the Apple items are made only by Apple (at least in a compatible form) and only available in complete products.That they sue a repair shop that explicitly does not try to brand it as Apple original, makes pretty clear that they try to control their market.Quote

author: petert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 01:50:22 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on October 19, 2018, 09:40:37 pmApples sues even when the logos are covered up, and nothing about original parts or warranty is even marketed or implied. They lost their case, but their intent is obvious. I don't get why people defend this, or try to criminalize perfectly normal behavior of repair shops.https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/a3yadk/apple-sued-an-independent-iphone-repair-shop-owner-and-lost

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 02:15:55 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 12:29:38 pmAnyone else is able to establish spare part stock of much cheaper parts than these, with more than an order of magnitude more different parts. Offering $2000+ mobo swap with returning your original CPU and RAM to apple in insane. They need to carry each variation of mobo/CPU/RAM config so likely there are even more part numbers to carry in stock. And in case warranty sticker on the mobo was damaged -> fuck you our dear customer, no repair for you.In the not so distant past I myself worked in manufacturer authorized service center. We were authorized by apple (I repaired other brand) as well in the last years I worked there, and they were a special snowflake among all others. Basically preventing doing actual repair.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 02:17:19 pm
content: Quote from: petert on October 21, 2018, 12:51:04 pmInteresting case!If the Chinese refurbisher/manufacturer just said on the batt/screen package; this is not a APPLE product just a third part replacement battery for this and this Apple product (Logo scraped off in case of refurbishments), everything wouldbe fine and APPLE could not do a damned thing i suppose.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 02:21:43 pm
content: Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmOK, without really wanting to get into all the details of the Linus debacle, since I think he's a clickbait prick with questionable ethics, but I checked a few different summaries of what happened, and the gist of it is this:1. Apple releases iMac Pro2. Linus cracks the screen, and in investigating that, also breaks the logic board and PSU. This voids the warranty.3. Linus goes to Apple to request repair and gets an estimate which is already at the cost of a whole new unit. (So the prices for repairs are already established.)4. It turns out Apple has not yet, at that point, made all of the module-level parts available yet. (Presumably, warranty repairs at this point would be fulfilled by simply replacing the whole unit, which could be refurbished at a later date.)5. Apple informs Linus that they can't perform out of warranty repairs at this time.6. Linus makes video, since Apple-hating gets clicks.7. Profit!The situation does raise the question of how Apple would handle accidental damage cases at that time. Presumably, for sensible repairs (i.e. ones that don't approach or exceed the cost of a new machine), they'd do what they've done in the past, and simply offered a whole machine swap for the price of just the repair that is needed.They didn't want to do that with Linus's machine because the damage was too extensive, and it was entirely self-inflicted damage. The machine's warranty was voided, and they were under no obligation to perform that repair, even if he was willing to pay.I don't blame them. If someone showed up with a box of parts (as apparently was essentially what they did) and said "how much to fix this" I'd probably tell them to go away, too.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmThe cost of providing a customer a finished machine is FAR lower than that of essentially shipping it piecemeal and assembling it in the store. Do you not understand that spare parts DO NOT cost the same? They must be packaged individually, warehoused individually, orders collected and shipped, and then the returned parts must be diagnosed, repaired if necessary, retested, packaged, and warehoused to prepare them to re-enter the parts inventory? All of that is COST which must be added onto the cost of the part itself.And that's before even considering the labor to order and install the replacement parts, take the old ones and ship them back, plus the labor to interact with the customer, store overhead, etc. It all costs money.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmYes, but AASPs aren't allowed to sell spare parts anyway. They're only allowed to sell them as part of a repair.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmCompletely untrue, read on:Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmNo. You are confusing thecost of the part in mass productionvs. thecost of a part as a spare part. When a company (say, Apple) orders 500,000 modules at $10 each from a supplier, they're bulk-shipped, directly to the factory that will integrate them into a finished product. The bulk-packed modules enter the assembly line and are installed into products, combined with all the other parts that constitute the product. The finished products are packaged and shipped. (Apple keeps a very lean supply chain, so finished goods do not sit around at the factory for more than a day or so, but even parts are only around for a few days before being built into a product.)Now, suppose Apple diverts 10% of those modules for spare parts. Now, each of those modules must be transferred from bulk packaging to spare parts packaging, such as an individual box. Each box is labeled. Then they must sit in a warehouse somewhere (because you don't know how many spares will be needed), for up to the 7 years required by some jurisdictions. Then, when ordered, it must be prepared for shipment, including order picking (handling) and shipped. All of that takes labor. All of this costs money. A lot of money. So now, that $10 part may have had another $30 in costs added to it, and that's before making a cent of profit on the sale of that part. Now imagine doing the same thing for every single part in the product. It's a TON of added cost. (And yes, companies do add profit margins onto spare parts, and that's not unreasonable.)Another approach would be to place separate spare parts orders from the supplier, with them already pre-packaged. So maybe it'd be $15 per module instead of $10. But the warehousing and logistics are still going to add on a lot and you'll end up with perhaps $25 total cost instead of $30.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmExactlynobodyis saying that. What you don't understand is the difference between apartand aspare part. They have radically different cost structures.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmHumor me: choose a current car model you like. Any brand. Get a service manual for it. Compile a complete list of all the parts you need to build that car. Now go to the dealer's spare parts counter and get an estimate for that list of parts. You'll find that it exceeds the cost of buying the finished car, many times over. And that's before you even spent dozens of hours assembling it.It's the same withanymass-produced product. You're getting a massive savings buying the finished good versus a complete set of spare parts.This is, by the way, precisely why cars get stolen: they are worth FAR more as parts than it is as assembled cars,even when already used. This is absolutely true of Apple gadgets, too, so I'm sure that some units are purchased simply to be parted out for repairs.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 02:32:32 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 02:21:43 pmNo humor there. Other manufacturer components are expensive but they don't ship them in such bundles to make repair even remotely not viable. Other manufacturers don't help doing 3rd party repairs but do not proactively prevent them either, and even if they do, not to this surreal extent. Servicing car comparison is irrelevant, it takes much more time to begin with. Motherboard swap is not something you'll spend several hours to do. FYI, for 2 of such MACs you can buy a brand new car, with a lot more parts to replace.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 02:48:44 pm
content: There's more hypocrisy:https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/yp73jw/apple-recycling-iphones-macbooks. Very green and eco-friendly, isn't it?Independent repair shops would love to buy the old hardware for getting spare parts. No need to buy parts from dubious sources anymore. But large companies always try to gain full control of the complete life cycle of their products. The customer doesn't buy a product which he will own, he licenses only the usage for an unspecified time.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 03:03:45 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 09:48:17 amHave you seen the summary of the process of seizing goods and link to a page by a trademark law firm I posted before? Combined with the fact that we're not seeing the prohibiting of grey imports on a large scale, it doesn't appear that companies do have this power. Luckily so I'd say, but how I feel about it isn't entirely relevant to how things actually work.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 03:04:38 pm
content: As posted before: according to a page written by a law firm specializing in US trademark law it turns out that the procedure for seizing goods is well defined and has a couple of steps. A summary would be below.*Customs suspects counterfeit goods and seizes them and notifies the importer. The importer has 30 days to deny the counterfeit nature of the goods or otherwise loses them.*Customs then proceeds to inform the copyright owner that the goods will be released to the importer after 30 days and provides a sample of the goods to the copyright holder. The copyright owner then has to both file a demand for the exclusion and pay a bond that will cover any losses the importer may suffer when the goods turn out not to infringe copyright.*Both parties then have an additional 30 days for discovery and submission of legal briefs. The burden of proof is on the party claiming that importation contains piratical goods.*The Commissioner of Customs will receive the evidence and decide whether trademark has been infringed.Note the third point, which is copied verbatim from the article linked. It appears that it is indeed Apple upon whom the burden of proof rests.https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=22d97bbe-887c-4740-9af5-0b6e9e75a961

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 03:07:57 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 02:21:43 pmHumor everyone:How many third party car repair shops have been sued by the original car manufacturer?.......for repair works related to trademark breach i guess zero!? The car thats get stolen for parts is not average Joe car Nissan Micra those Baltic , Polish (not so much anymore) Russian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Albanian, thief clans goes only after very specific cars, at least here they do, less specific they are stolen assembled. Nissan Micras not stolen at all, so "any brand" is not stolen for parts or assembled. BMW and Apple can be said to be specific brands.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 04:28:00 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 02:32:32 pmActually, diagnosing computer problems can beextremelytime-consuming. Several hours is absolutely a realistic amount of time for diagnosing many problems. And many car companies ARE only selling larger and larger modules and fewer individual components, so the trend in both industries is exactly the same. I'd say the car and computer industries are far more alike than they are different, in this regard.Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 03:07:57 pmI'm not aware of any cases involving repair shops as such, but there are ample cases involving parts vendors:http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/09/19/oem-trademarks-aftermarket-exploring-boundaries/id=101163/Those are very similar to the case here. (Though trademark has nothing to do with my point about the cost of spare parts vs cost of the total vehicle… And don't ignore that I have said hererepeatedlythat I do not believe that companies should be allowed to block imports of genuine parts!!!)Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 03:07:57 pmBullshit.You are confusing theft for resale of the whole car vs. theft for parting out.The cars that are stolen for resale as a whole car are indeed special models.The cars that get stolen the most are stolen for parts, and it's the same cars that are the most popular, because they then also get into the most accidents and thus need the most parts. (And of course, the most popular cars are also the most plentiful!) The most-stolensedan in USA is the Toyota Camry, which is also the best-sellingsedan. This is no coincidence.https://autoweek.com/article/car-news/sum-parts-greater-whole-car-thievesexplains:Quote$14K just for the 14 most replaced parts. Never mind all the remaining parts!Could this be different by country? Of course. But the same market forces apply. Auto parts are anincrediblylucrative crime to be in, no matter where you are.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 05:19:40 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 04:28:00 pmThen please explain how Louis can make a living from doing component level repairs while being located in one of the most expensive areas you could find. Are apple techniciansnot able to distinguish their head from their assso dumb they cannot figure out if it's either motherboard, RAM or CPU is faulty in a reasonable amount of time? FYI computer tecnichians are usually paid <15$/h, even in expensive areas. If they replace $1000 mobo for $2000 and spend a whole day doing that on single computer, they still would be profitable. No, they are supposed to be so dumb (according to apple) they are only able replace mobo/RAM/CPU altogether.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 05:37:00 pm
content: About doing component level repairs on consumer devices.... a couple of months ago I was in a small shop which is apparantly the official service center for Samsung. I noticed they had a whole bunch of SMT rework gear in a neatly organised lab. So even in a country with high labour costs it makes sense to do component level repairs on smartphones.Also I disagree about time needed for diagnosis. I have some repair department experience myself and you quickly learn what the common defects are. The first diagnosis of a new device / unknown fault may take long but subsequent devices with the same symptoms are repaired quickly.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 05:39:28 pm
content: It's not realistic to expect every tech to be as skilled as Louis, he's clearly an expert in this particular area.All of the current Apple products have the CPU, RAM and storage soldered to the motherboard, so of course they will be replaced as a unit by the standard field techs. This is the primary reason though that Apple won't get my money for a computer. I rather like the Macbook Pro I have as a work laptop but I would never spend my own money on a computer that is not upgradeable.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 05:44:33 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on October 21, 2018, 05:39:28 pmPerhaps, but Louis appears to be able to teach repair techniques to a wide variety of ordinary citizens without any formal electronics training, from primary-school kids to bored grandmothers. Louis himself has no formal technical education, IIRC.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 06:00:16 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 05:19:40 pmSheesh, way to latch onto probably theleastimportant part of my entire reply above, and then come back with a completely non-seguitur response!You said that computers are quicker to fix than cars. I'm saying that's not always the case. That's it. (You say you worked in IT repair, but honestly, if you don't know that SOME failures take unusually long to diagnose, and how and why this is the case, I don't believe you.)As for pay, computer techs and car mechanicsearnsimilar hourly wages (though IT varies wildly depending on the employer), and they bothchargesimilar rates. Note that the hourly wages and the hourly rates are worlds apart. In USA, for example, a common hourly rate for competent computer and auto repairs is about $100/h.As for how Rossmann prices things, let's assume Rossmann charges that, and bases his per-job prices around that. He says many repairs are around $300. He's very experienced at the types of repairs he specializes in, so he'll be able to do most of them very quickly, making him a surplus at the promised price. The handful of cases that take longer are subsidized by the many more that are done quickly.Apple has a totally different business model. They are in expensive, high-traffic, high-rent locations, and the bulk of their work is warranty repair. As such, they want to reduce labor cost in those expensive high-rent locations as much as possible. This means getting repairs donefast, and that's done by NOT doing component-level repairs! If you have an out-of-warranty repair, then going to Apple directly is often not the cheapest option. And that's OK!By doing basically module-level repairs in the store, they minimize the overhead of the high-rent location. Then they can do the component-level repair offsite at a repair depot in a lower-overhead location, with people with a different set of skills and tools.Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 05:19:40 pmLet. It. Go.It only matters if you're buying the part and not returning the used one. It's got nothing to do with intelligence of the staff, it has do to with logistics and business decisions.Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2018, 05:37:00 pmIf you actually have repair department experience, then you also know that SOME failures take a long time to diagnose. I NEVER said that ALL diagnostics take that long!!!

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 06:05:52 pm
content: Spot on.Mantra is if you’re doing repairs charge by the hour not for the job.Despite what people want and that’s fair, we live in a society where FRU replacement is so cheap it’s not worth replacing it. Humans are expensive and repairs are risky (another problem with board level repair). My iPhone 6s had a white patch on the screen. walked into Apple store and they just gave me a new handset.Today is about insurance.If your machine packs in Apple replace it. I’ve thrown tens of machines and iOS devices through them with no trouble or questions asked.If you break it, you’re an idiot if (a) it’s not insured or (b) you can’t afford to replace it.Louis fixes idiots hardware.If you have a warranty problem, argue for better consumer protection legislation. Ours is good in Europe.Incidentally I spent a long time moonlighting repairing Apple kit and it’s not worth it.Edit: also I’m only a proponent of board level repair for data recovery. Once a board is repaired on hardware of that class it will fail again if it even works reliably and is tainted. Get your data off (even better back it up to start with) and get new hardware in. I’ve seen repairs done like that which fail a couple of weeks down the line.And yes I have been that idiot. I have blown up a 2010 MBP. I poured a drink on the table and it sucked it up with capillary action and blew it up. This burned £1800 at the time instantly as I had no insurance coverage. Straight in the trash. I bought a 2011 MBP that cost me £3k right after that. You see where I’m going. The purchase price isn’t the end of it.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 06:31:20 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on October 21, 2018, 05:44:33 pmThere have been gifted people throughout history who have excelled in one discipline or another despite a lack of formal education, that doesn't mean anybody can be expected to perform on their level. On the flip side, I've met plenty of people who had loads of formal education yet still weren't very good at doing the things they should know a lot about. Some people just get it, others don't. Education rarely hurts but someone who is passionate can self teach and become quite good at what they do.

author: Terrius
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 07:07:23 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 21, 2018, 02:32:32 pmI offered my information based on my experience with RMA. The cost of repairing a Apple device, even in its entirety is NEVER more than buying a new device (though with their phones apple tries really hard to make it time ineffective). There is a reason that refurbishing Apple equipment is a ridiculously lucrative business.Apple maintains stock of all the replacement parts in the USA, they don't just suddenly manufacture each individual part when a service claim is made, those parts are already imported and can be shipped (usually arriving within 24 hours or less to the Apple store) for peanuts. In addition these parts are in OEM packaging, they do not Retail package any of their repair components as they are Not For Resale.Again and I can't stress this enough, repair houses be it Apple (yes, the Apple store is a First Party repair house), Dell, HP, Lenovo or any big company(not talking mom and pop shops) get First Party pricing on OEM service components as part of RMA service agreements with the contracting company.The only potential expensive part is the Apple Tech's time. Even this shouldn't be an issue because Apple devices are historically super easy to diagnose hardware and software issues with, if you have access to the servicing information.In regard to the off-topic stolen car argument, parting out is useful because that is a far better way to destroy the evidence of illicit activity. It also opens more avenues for the sale of the illegitimate parts.In Canada at least there has been an exponential increase in car thefts for exporting to Asia, and no, they are not always a "Target model". Unfortunately the car argument doesn't hold any water as car parts can also be obtained from third party sources, and can be repaired at any time by third party mechanics. (Tesla being the exception because they, like Apple, are anti-right to repair.) No you as a consumer will never receive first party pricing on "genuine parts", but the dealership can and does.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 08:06:14 pm
content: Quote from: TK on October 19, 2018, 09:21:16 pmI am curios to see what will happen to me.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 08:15:17 pm
content: Really, getting into trouble over a forum thread title which essentially quotes the video it links?Legal advice on the internet.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 04:28:00 pmStill original manufacturers of cars dont sue independent car service shops, not here anyway perhaps in Bentley ridden Switzerland, or RollsRoyce ridden Maryland? So not arguing about that, just your generalisation ; choose a current car model you like. Any brand, and i did, Nissan Micra, take another one, nobody steals a Fiat 500 for parts. So there you go!QuoteNo its not, Luis is third part service dude, he dont make Apple parts there is no correlation between Apple and car manufacturer part thefts.QuoteCalm down!Nope, just contemplated on yourbullshitgeneralisation quote,choose a current car model you like. Any brand.QuoteThats what i said while you said prior it was for the parts.QuoteThats what you say now but not before. Its not about popular its aboutexpensive, you just claimed that in your prior post, make up your mind!QuoteIm talking about Scandinavia , USA is different.QuoteUS have a bad taste i suppose..Have no idea why they stole such a half mid class car, perhaps easy to steal, parts bad manufacturing, etc just as every bank robber in UK used lame Ford Transits.QuoteNot arguing about that. But that has nothing to do with Louis, he dont steal cars for parts of what i have seen so far!

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:18:19 pm
content: Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 07:07:23 pmYes,for Apple, because they're not paying their own markup. (Though they are paying the extra overhead of spare parts.)What I've been saying is that YOU (i.e. a consumer) cannot do this. Your spare parts prices are too high and the total cost ends up astronomical.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 07:07:23 pmNobody claimed they were made on demand. (Like really, where did this come from?!?) And obviously they're not in retail packaging, since they're not retail products.They are, however, in individual packaging very different from the bulk packaging used for delivery to the factory. And above all, the warehousing and logistics adds costs.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 07:07:23 pmRight, but first-party pricing on service components still is far more than the cost of the same parts headed to manufacturing in bulk. Again, logistics and warehousing adds tons of cost.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 07:07:23 pmOf course. I, like probably everyone here, wishes Apple and everybody else would just start releasing service info. It's maddening that they don't.Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 07:07:23 pmCar theft was a tangential point, to illustrate that the cost to consumers (and indie garages) for OEM parts is so high that a) their total cost vastly exceeds the price of a new car, and b) even used parts are worth far more individually than as a finished car. Both are relevant to Apple repairs, since a) Apple parts are very expensive, and b)the parts Louis bought were probably used Apple parts.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2018, 10:28:52 pm
content: Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmThe most popular cars in Switzerland are VWs, and they're also the most stolen.Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmYou're anidiotif you think Maryland is full of Rolls-Royces. (MD doesn't even make the top-10 list of states by % of car sales that are luxury marques.)Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmExcept that that's almost guaranteed to be absolutely wrong.Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmYou haven't shown any evidence of the contrary.Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmYes, but those cars make up a tiny percentage of cars stolen. I said that cars are frequently stolen for parts, which is absolutely true.Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmThen you're illiterate, since I've claimed throughout that popular cars are the ones stolen most, and it's true.Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmThey steal them for parts. How do you not understand this??Quote from: MT on October 21, 2018, 09:35:34 pmI offer the identical reply as in my post above:Car theft was a tangential point, to illustrate that the cost to consumers (and indie garages) for OEM parts is so high that a) their total cost vastly exceeds the price of a new car, and b) even used parts are worth far more individually than as a finished car. Both are relevant to Apple repairs, since a) Apple parts are very expensive, and b)the parts Louis bought were probably used Apple parts.

author: Terrius
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 02:56:50 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 10:18:19 pmI contemplated replying with a well thought out breakdown to each of your points. I even typed out about five paragraphs, it occurs to me though that this has changed from logical discussion to bickering (in fact it had already done so long before I joined in) and has lost any potential value.Over the years Apple has developed and strengthened many anti-consumer practices, which is unfortunate. In the end like all public companies they only care about making more money and keeping the board and shareholders happy. They will do everything in their power to prevent people from cutting into their bottom line which is the sole reason they do not sell nor offer any way to legitimately obtain repair parts for their devices and instead force upgrades.I maintain my point, there is no situation with exception of complete device destruction, that would create a scenario where it costs more for Apple to fix a device than to replace it. However, this doesn't make them as much money as forcing/persuading someone to just outright buy a new device.I guess TL:DR version is, consumers need to stop white knighting for these big companies (all of them, Asus, AMD, Intel, Nvidia, Apple, Google, Microsoft, ect.). You are just dollar signs to them, they don't give a rats bottom about you.Right to Repair is a *possible* bastion of hope that could *potentially* shift some of the power back to us consumers and away from our corporate overlords. Only time will tell.I have nothing else constructive to add to the discussion so I will now end my contributions to it.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 07:12:48 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 20, 2018, 07:57:56 pmCertainly that is the case in the Free World, not so sure about the USA!I can go down to the"Reject Shop" in a nearby shopping centre & buy Coca-Cola from Indonesia, Colgate toothpaste from Malaysia, or whatever.Coke & Colgate in Oz don't like it, but it is pretty much "Suck it up, Princess".Actually, I don't like the "Grey import" drinks--they taste different to the Oz version.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 11:14:06 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 10:28:52 pmGeee, you just go on and on with your stupid generalizations!Volkswagen are currently most stolen car but not because its popular or expensive its because there are so many so its easy. You deliberately forgot to tell lots of Bentlys and Porches are stolen to not because they are many because they are expensive. It also is different between regions so totally different reasons for thefts and none has anything to do with your dumb ;choose a current car model you like. Any brand.generalisation.QuoteYour anidiotif you cant take subversive sarcasms based on your dumb generalisations!QuoteYes your generalization are.QuoteYes indeed i have, you just chose to ignore facts.QuoteThanks for confessing moving goalposts! Noone is arguing there is no such thing as steal for part of course its exists but not in they way you describe. Auto journalists are often paid by car manufacturers.QuoteIts you whos illiterate who cant even read what you said 5 seconds prior without moving goalposts! Its sad! Covfefe!QuoteSo nowused Apple partsequalsto stolen car parts! Some advanced thinking there! Yeah right!As i noted previously Louis most likely dont steal Apple parts nor car parts.So i offer my prior comment to your prior argument;There is no correlation between Apple and car thefts. Point out the balkan theif clans that steals Apple parts please! Well you cant so all your arguments fail.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 11:17:17 am
content: Not my problem that you don’t understand the connection, even after having it explained to you, and that you insist I’m wrong even though I provided sources, and you didn’t. Be obtuse if you want, it won’t make you correct on any of those points.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 11:18:36 am
content: Not my problem you cant grasp your arguments is wrong, as your sources is biased to fit your agenda. You even ignore facts like the study made by Swiss insurer AXA Winterthur who found the risk of getting your car nicked varied hugely across the country, with the canton of Glarus having the lowest risk, at ten times below the national average. You rather go on generalizing car thefts and make links between that and Apple and Louis.Again, no car manufacturer sues third party car workshop, so no correlation between cars repair/thefts and Louis repairing Apple crap.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 11:27:33 am
content: LOL you’re a piece of work. That doesn’t change national statistics, man!!And of course I’m generalizing! I never said EVERY car theft was to part it out.Please just stop, ok? You’re responding to what you imagined or misunderstood me saying, not what I’ve actually said. So you’re fighting an argument I didn’t make. (You haven’t understood the argument I did make.)

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 11:31:06 am
content: LOL our one heck of a piece of work , so there you go then! Your' hilarious, statistics is just that statistics! Everyone understands your argument are faulty. You try to build specific cases ......ontop a generalization..... of cars , how dumb is that!But again, yournow popularidea ofany car, any brand most stolen for parts, Fiat 500 not stolen at all but its very popular among chicks! Yourpopular ideaalso fails miserably just as your generalization of cheap/expensive ideas! The car thats most stolen is varying from year to year from brand to brand from region to region. Apple is not a car.Yet again i offer you my previouspopularreply for only 99.99USD inc tax!

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 01:12:03 pm
content: It is my laptop, I paid and now it's 100% mine. I just want to fix my stuff.If I found someone who can sell me replacement parts for my laptop, why I can't buy from him?If they are bad parts, bad for me not for Apple.If they are good parts, good for me not for Apple.If after Louis doing the job the laptop will have or has some problem I will knock Louis's doors not Apple one.We have enough problem in this life, why are we making our life even more complicated?

author: brabus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 01:32:22 pm
content: Because if you buy a bad battery and you change it yourself, and then your Laptop catches fire, the Apple name will fill the newspapers, not yours.If you have an accident because you bought bad brakes for your car, sure the thing will fill some newspaper, but it's far more accepted in comparison.Don't get me wrong, I regularly fix A LOT of Apple products, I like doing it because of the great engineering behind most Apple products: a lot of screws, a lot of unofficial spare parts, plenty of manuals online.I surely fixed at least 100 iPhones in the last two years, all of them work fine.I tried to fix my Galaxy S5 three times, still sucks as the glue doesn't stick and the thin Display glass broke again. I had to fix it because of the infamous AMOLED malfunction after 2 years of use. Now, THAT is bad engineering.IMvHO, Apple is not approaching the "repairability" for a very simple reason: it would be not economically viable for them. They make far more $$$ inviting people to scrap their old/broken phones for the newer model - and people are buying it. Good for them!

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 01:36:27 pm
content: Quote from: brabus on October 22, 2018, 01:32:22 pmI think newspaper or/and the entire news/social system are by far more evil than Apple.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 02:27:20 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 06:00:16 pmIt's a very low time to diagnose if you don't do component level repair, but just replace mobo or RAM. In case of apple repairs it actually takes much less time/effort as you repair a very limited number of models. Also you just set a time limit for one repair, if you cannot fix the fault in that time, say just swap the board instead of trying fixing it or declare BER (beyond economic repair). There is no requirement of fixing difficult problems at all costs.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 02:40:50 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 22, 2018, 02:27:20 pmUsually, yes. But occasionally (especially on new models you're working on for the first time) it can take much longer, especially if the fault is caused by something seemingly unrelated. (Like a repair someone told me about on some PC, where it was crashing or something, and the cause was a bad floppycable.)

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 09:08:52 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on October 19, 2018, 09:40:37 pmYup, I actually got something like this, once. it was an end mill holder for a milling machine, and I just KNOW that it once had the name Bridgeport stamped into it. Somebody had milled out the engraving, so it now has a curved groove there. So, they went to a LOT of trouble to place the trademark there, and then have to remove it.Jon

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 09:14:55 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 19, 2018, 09:41:19 pmUS law DOES give copyright and trademark holders the right to seize and destroy phony goods displaying their copyright or trademark. And, when they get notice that such materials are coming in, they certainly do so. A few years ago there were sweeps of fancy apparel stores where a rep from the trademark holder, such as Gucci, would walk through and mark all the counterfeits, and then federal agents would seize the items and put them in bins for destruction. Sometimes the stores were practically stripped of merchandise.I think Customs and Border Protection may now be working much more closely with major brands to actively report suspect items to the trademark holders.Jon

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2018, 10:44:38 pm
content: Quote from: MT on October 22, 2018, 11:14:06 amTooki's assertion that the cars most commonly stolen are stolen to be parted out is true, at least here in the US. "Chop shops" are a real thing; a stolen car will be brought to one and parted out in a couple of hours.And consider this: a stolen car, reported to the authorities as such, cannot be registered, which means it cannot be sold nor can it be driven on public roads. If there's no buyer for the car, there's not much in it for the thief.To clarify all of this: here in the US (I cannot speak for anywhere else in the world), the owner of the vehicle needs a title (indicating ownership) and to drive it legally, the car must be registered with the state and insured. Ownership of a car cannot be transferred without the title changing hands, and to do that, the seller signs over the title (and that's witnessed by a notary), and the buyer must immediately take the title to the state motor vehicle agency and register the vehicle. The person at the agency runs the title through the computers; if the car was reported stolen and not recovered, the agent will immediately flag that! If all is clear, the buyer will then be given a new title in his/her name at a current address.(If you move to another state, your car must be registered in the new state and you must present the title to the new state to do that. You'll get a new title with your new in-state address.)The thief won't have the title to the stolen car (the titles to my cars are in a safe-deposit box at my bank), so the title transfer can't be done legally and the car can't be registered, so no fence will take it and no private person will buy it. This leaves few options: obviously, the chop shop. Here in Arizona some cars vanish across the border into Mexico, but that's tricky because a car carrier truck will be checked at the border. A private driver might get lucky. Of course, the border is porous, so going out and driving through the desert might be a route.As for stolen luxury vehicles, that's often done by joyriders who end up wrecking the cars, though I'm sure there is a black market for BMW parts as lucrative as the one for Toyota parts.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 01:31:10 am
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on October 22, 2018, 10:44:38 pmI don't know where your numbers come from but in my neighborhood, stolen cars are usually recovered a few miles away. Strictly joy riding.The high dollar cars may be parted out but that's a minority. Sure, park your Ferrari in the driveway overnight and it will be in parts by sunrise. A Toyota Camry, not so much!Another thing about parting out, we have legitimate salvage yards so if you need some expensive part of a car, all you have to do is go take it off a scrapped car and pay the lady.One thing that gets stolen all the time is the catalytic converter. It's so bad that the police agencies have public fairs where they etch ID into the converters. This is a really big deal and happens fairly often. There is no VIN on the converter. It helps if they are welded to the exhaust pipes but they aren't.As to driving on public roads, steal plates from a similar car. Or don't worry about it, the cops have bigger issues. Yes, they will stop suspected stolen cars (that's one way they are recovered) but just holding down the gunfire keeps them pretty busy. The thing is, there's no real penalty from 10851's as they are called around here. It's usually a non-violent crime so even when convicted, there won't be any incarceration. We have to have space for the violent offenders and the Governor's kicking felons loose by the thousands.It's all joy rides.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 02:45:13 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on October 23, 2018, 01:31:10 amAnd air-bags. Apparently it isn't difficult to pass them off as "new". And especially with the unnaturally high demand because of the millions of units from Takata which have been recalled.https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2018/10/15/airbag-thefts-hondas-up-thieves-aim-resell/1523799002/

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 04:04:19 am
content: QuoteI thought it was the other way around: there is a /lot/ of demand for Toyota Camry parts, so stripping it down makes sense. On the other hand, there is a very small market for Ferrari parts (maybe none - you ain't going to have it serviced in a backyard workshop, after all) so they get shipped off to another country. In fact, I understand that many, if not most, high-value vehicles are stolen to order whereas run of the mill stuff is opportunistic.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 10:30:11 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 22, 2018, 02:40:50 pmWith apple you work on a new model maybe once or twice a year. And considering total amount of repairs it's insignificant.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 12:24:05 pm
content: Believe what you want, ok? I’ve spent my entire career in the computer industry in one way or another, so I know what happens in the field.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 06:41:16 pm
content: Quote from: Terrius on October 21, 2018, 01:08:00 pmOh, good god, another hobbyist who doesn't seem to understand anything about producing consumer products.

author: KE5FX
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 08:33:12 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on October 23, 2018, 06:41:16 pmI see a lot of insults being flung around, but not many numbers. Can you guys bring me up to speed on specifically what Terrius said that was wrong?Speaking as someone who has worked in that industry, the economics of game consoles work more or less as he's suggesting. The business model for consoles sold by Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft is based on charging royalties for licensing and distribution of titles for their hardware. Initial profit margins are not that high, and sometimes aren't positive at all. The manufacturers live and die by their attach rate, which is an industry term for the number of games that go out the door with every customer who buys a system.Apple does not depend on recurring or residual revenue at all, and this does in fact show up in their margins. That's how they bring in 80+% of the sector's profits on 20% of the sales volume. App sales are icing on the cake; the original model for the iPhone didn't even include apps. Make no mistake, Apple brings in plenty of profit even if you never purchase a single app. The console guys would kill to be in their position.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 08:44:38 pm
content: Quote from: KE5FX on October 23, 2018, 08:33:12 pmApple's business model is completely different. Luxury items (like an iPhone) are not affordable to the masses on purpose. An iPhone is similar to a 5000 dollar wrist watch or hand bag. There is a group of people who simply want to spend more to have something special and Apple is catering to that group. Ofcourse the manufacturers of luxury products are able to have much better profit margins on their products. LVMH (the company owning Louis Vuiton and many other luxury brands) for example is showing similar profit margins when compared to Apple.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 11:42:45 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 23, 2018, 08:44:38 pmApple iPhone is more like Samsung Galaxy than a LVMH handbag.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 11:50:46 pm
content: Quote from: KE5FX on October 23, 2018, 08:33:12 pmRe-read what I put in boldface in Terrius' post.Teardowns of the $1000 iPhone X showed a BOM of $360 or thereabouts. That margin is not unreasonable; in fact, it's probably too low and I'm sure they'd rather have the BOM below $300. The hobbyists seem to think that the net profit on this phone is $640 when out of that $640 Apple's gotta pay for the overhead, including salaries and benefits for workers, real estate, utilities, all of what's necessary to actually run the business.I don't see that misconception about Apple's business model to which Terrius refers. Nobody thinks that Apple sells anything at or near a loss.

author: KE5FX
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 12:21:27 am
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on October 23, 2018, 11:50:46 pmI did. Still don't see where he's wrong, at least not to the extent of warranting an insulting response.QuoteI'm always curious about those BOM estimates. How do the people doing the teardowns know what Apple's line item costs are? Do they just look parts up on DigiKey, or what?Safe to say the actual BOM costs are (a) lower than even the best-informed guesses, and (b) a closely-guarded secret. Apple has a massive amount of leverage over their vendors, not all of which shows up on a balance sheet.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 02:11:06 am
content: QuoteBut what must be the world's biggest cash pile of around$250bdoes. Whatever profit they make on a phone, it's a hell of a lot by any standard

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 04:48:53 am
content: Quote from: tooki on October 23, 2018, 12:24:05 pmDunno what you were doing in your computer industry career but based on my past experience working as a warranty repair technician, I can say you have no clue what you are talking about.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 07:25:35 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 24, 2018, 02:11:06 amI heard ice cream business is one of the worst...Quotehttps://www.carpigiani.co.uk/ice-cream-profit/

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 07:39:09 am
content: Ice-cream doesn't sell in the many millions, though, so the operating costs per item are much higher (even though they are no doubt very low, overall, compared to Apple's). That's not to mention that £3.95 - 12p is just little but lower anyway than $1000 - $300

author: nfmax
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 07:46:27 am
content: Compared to rent, wages, and taxes, the cost of the ice cream is insignificant

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 09:38:34 am
content: Quote from: wraper on October 24, 2018, 04:48:53 amWell, I do. We were probably working in different areas of repair.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2018, 05:06:24 pm
content: Its said CrapApple patented their own screws (pentalobe etc) and screwdrivers so anybody who makes or replaces them violates their intellectual property. And as previously pointed out would be like if an car repair shop changes the tyres on your car then get sued by the car manufacturer or the tyre manufacturer for doing so.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 02:33:02 pm
content: Quote from: MT on October 24, 2018, 05:06:24 pmThey’re not patented. Both no-name and top-tier tool companies sell the screwdrivers for them. Replacement screw kits for iPhones existed for a while, but then the screwdrivers became so ubiquitous that now you just get the drivers. (They’re better than Phillips screws anyway, as they behave much like Torx, in that they don’t cam out.)

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 03:47:57 pm
content: I wonder what would happen if I were to set up a repair shop named "Louis Rossman Apple Repairs"? He's spent a significant amount of effort building a specific image and brand to drive his business - I'm sure he wouldn't be happy to see someone hijack it. There would be no end to his lawsuits, writing and calling government agencies to report me, demanding seizures and prosecution, cease and desist letters, lawyering, raising a media stink about it, etc. Rightly so.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 03:50:10 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 25, 2018, 02:33:02 pmIndeed. Wera sell Pentalobes:https://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/screwdrivers/1230844/Cam out is a big problem. I've seen a lot of top tier stuff in defence sector with Philips and even slot screws turn up shredded when it was new believe it or not.Pozidriv FTW.Quote from: bson on October 25, 2018, 03:47:57 pmA very good point.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 04:59:35 pm
content: Quote from: bson on October 25, 2018, 03:47:57 pmIf he were to produce and sell items under his own name and someone else would resell those through their own company, I don't think Louis would object.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 05:08:20 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on October 25, 2018, 03:50:10 pmDisagree.Rossman is out there imparting his learnings and techniques to everyone for free on YouTube, and even offering 1:1 tutorials. And telling us what materials he uses and where to get them. And re-packaging and re-selling more obscure materials to make it more convenient. To be sure, he is likely making a modest profit, but probably not enough to pay for good healthy smoothie drinks.This is exactly the opposite of what Apple does. They don't even offer that kind of support to their own repair people. And they actively task their gang of lawyers to go after anyone who dares to try to repair their gold-plated turds. People who support Apple especially in this forum continue to amaze me. Apple not only has the largest nest-egg on the planet (perhaps only second to the Vatican) but they appear to also be #1 in brain-washing.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 05:15:57 pm
content: Quote from: zucca on October 24, 2018, 07:25:35 amFun fact! The current governor of Arizona is a guy called Doug Ducey, and prior to running for office, he ran a chain of ice cream parlors that went bankrupt.That's right -- he couldn't make money selling ice cream in Arizona.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 05:44:37 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on October 25, 2018, 03:50:10 pmIt boggles the mind that Phillips and slot screws are still used for anything other than perhaps the the tiniest of precision screws. Pozidriv is an improvement, but if it were up to me, everything would be Torx.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 06:01:03 pm
content: Agree with torx for sure.Just a point with Rossman: he’s a businessman who is marketing his business and his perception of things to support the business. If you think there’s some altruistic point in the YouTube channel existing I think you’re deluded.He is expert at networking and marketing which I respect him for.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 06:04:29 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on October 25, 2018, 05:15:57 pmFun Fact! Cold Stone is doing quite well, even with several shops here in chilly Oregon selling ice cream. You might want to find a more reputable source for your "Fun Facts".

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 06:29:13 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on October 25, 2018, 06:04:29 pmWell, any ice cream market has a baseline demand from weirdos like me who like ice cream year-round. But it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that you’ll sell more, on average, in a hot place.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 10:35:44 pm
content: I've been to them, actually that concept goes back quite a long time, there used to be a place in San Francisco in the 80s that did that cheesecake, icecream, fruit, toppings Benihana of Tokyo like mashup thing.Man was it super good!

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2018, 10:40:33 pm
content: Its not widely known but the very first Apple computer was in part invented by the two Steves to evade the law. As a frequency stable, precisely timed telephone "blue box".Nothing made their eyes light up more than discussing the fun they had doing this back in those early days.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 03:03:39 am
content: Kudos to Rossman for making these videos.... I enjoy them and wish him all the best. I hope he can get a lawyer to take up his case for free and see how far he can go with this. Even if they don't win, the publicity will help consumers make more informed choices on where they are spending their hard-earned money.Then again, "repairability" is probably not very high in the consciousness of a typical consumer of these gadgets. They figure they will be obsolete in a few years anyways, or they will be upgrading it before it needs to be repaired, or the cost will not even be worth it. So for the vast majority of consumers I think they couldn't give a hoot.I do agree though that the supply chain needs to be controlled more vigorously to prevent counterfeits. Rossman shouldn't have to forfeit his goods if they are authentic batteries, and the question is on who is the onus to prove the imported goods are fake or real, Apple or Rossman? I for one have not had a good experience buying a battery from China, as the following video shows for an old/vintage/obsolete iPhone 4S:

author: GeorgeOfTheJungle
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 12:59:29 pm
content: Quote from: edy on October 26, 2018, 03:03:39 amWell, that has happened with Apple's own 4x the price "certified top notch" batteries as well, not only in their iPhones and iPods but in their laptops too...So what?

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 08:12:41 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on October 25, 2018, 06:04:29 pmFun Fact! He's no longer involved in that business! It was taken over by people who actually know how to run a business, after he ran it into the dirt.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 08:30:29 pm
content: Part of what's happening is that Apple hates it when people get more than a few years life out of a laptop.People should be aware that if you bring a laptop thats no longer under Apple Care (or if god forbid you dont have it and its a year and a day after you bought it) you're going to be presented with a cost that has nothing to do with the actual cost of repair. And if you cant pay it they may well try to keep, and junk, your laptop. Oops.This is why people seek out non-Apple repair techs. Sometimes people can't afford to buy a new one.In the coming years, more and more people are going to find themselves struggling as jobs are lost by the millions to labor saving technologies. Unless the price of computing hardware falls (and it is in many market segments, even laptops, but not with Apple.)That means that fewer and fewer people will be able to afford to buy new.Are many mega corporations adjusting to the new economic reality of low growth or no growth or shrinking spending?NO, most are pretending it doesn't exist, while doing their best to trap people in as many ways they can.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 08:44:13 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 25, 2018, 02:33:02 pmWord patent was attention seeker (worked on you tooki), and point was car repair shop changes the tyres on your car then get sued by the car manufacturer for similar reason Apple tries to squeeze Louis !Quote from: bd139 on October 25, 2018, 03:50:10 pmLots of places sell pentalobe drivers, no mysticism about that..Cam out is not much of a problem on low torque screwslike crapApple!Apple engineer sues crapApple!https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/09/28/apple_engineer_sues/

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 09:11:53 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on October 26, 2018, 08:12:41 pmPerhaps you could call that a (politically-motivated) interperetation.It appears that he was one of several dozen franchisees who were abused by the franchise owner to the point where they brought a class-action suit against them.There is no evidence that his shops in Phonenix (or anywhere else) actually went out of business.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2018, 10:04:17 pm
content: Quote from: MT on October 26, 2018, 08:44:13 pmSo you’re actually admitting that you deliberately chose untrue wording — youlied— for attention? That’s pathetic.Quote from: MT on October 26, 2018, 08:44:13 pmFYI, I think you meant perhaps “mystery”. “Mysticism” is a word having to do with religion.Quote from: MT on October 26, 2018, 08:44:13 pmUhhh... Yeah, it is a problem. We wouldn’t have developed superior screw head styles if the existing ones had been good.Quote from: MT on October 26, 2018, 08:44:13 pmLots of people sue their former employers. Sounds like this guy and his management didn’t get along well. Happens anywhere.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2018, 02:46:15 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 26, 2018, 10:04:17 pmNo lies , just you who always tries to be "right" is pathetic!..... and you bought into it!Quote from: MT on October 26, 2018, 08:44:13 pmWhat its all about, religion in screw heads!QuoteNot at all , dont use excessive force dude! Just use a clicker torque wrench.Anyho, it just shows that there is nutting special about Apple before and after Steve Jobbs! Apple just tries make people into misery, thats all.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2018, 04:18:00 pm
content: MT, you need to learn to shut upbeforemaking a fool of yourself.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2018, 11:35:19 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 27, 2018, 04:18:00 pmYou're always a fool since you lack humor!Here the latest, Qualcomm v.s craApple!https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-qualcomm/qualcomm-says-apple-7-billion-behind-in-royalty-payments-idUSKCN1N102Dhttps://www.digitaltrends.com/business/apple-vs-qualcomm-news/

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2018, 10:32:12 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on October 26, 2018, 09:11:53 pmYou do realize that bankruptcy doesn't mean that the business closes up shop, right?

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2018, 11:59:15 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on October 29, 2018, 10:32:12 pmYou do realize that bankruptcy doesn't mean that you personally did something wrong, right?Remind me what this has to do with Rossman and Apple? Or perhaps not. This whole discussion has turned stupid.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 03:30:18 am
content: 1 week ago, posted on YT:Quoteto be continued.

author: TK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 12:21:20 pm
content: Quote from: zucca on November 12, 2018, 03:30:18 amSo it looks like the batteries were not original, but "original quality"

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 12:27:19 pm
content: Explained.They were originally described as original.Now they are described as original quality.The programmer in me knows how dangerous minute syntax changes can be.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 02:50:56 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 21, 2018, 04:28:00 pmI coudn't agree more. Some years ago I had a serious conflict with IBM because a storage server was experiencing transient data corruption on the SAS bus. We did not lose data thanks to the ZFS file system.They claimed that the diagnostics did not detect anything (it was a kinda random error that happened only with high I/O workloads). And of course that we were not using a supported OS (we use FreeBSD) despite the fact that an exact twin server was working as a charm.After many telephone exchanges they agreed to "replace the backplane for customer satisfaction reasons, ie, because the idiot customer wants something replaced" and it didn't help. Finally we decided to send them home and try to sort it out ourselves. Turned out to be a faulty SAS3 HBA. Of course IBM will not sell a dime here anymore.So, how do you diagnose that? What do you need to detect some minor distortion or timing problem in a 12 Gbps SAS3 bus?It's much cheaper to just replace the card.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 03:14:53 pm
content: Quote from: KE5FX on October 24, 2018, 12:21:27 amOf course the processor is just a Samsung part you can order from RS.The software they don't develop, but acquire by revelation. Tim Cook and someone else spend a month in the Tibet doing some spiritual exercises and whatnot, and they transcribe que source code revelated by an angel riding a unicorn

author: Wan Huang Luo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 04:19:53 pm
content: Hope this doesn't violate the rules. This is my opinion only. It would appear to me that Rossmann seems to specialize in sensationalism to get clicks. It works for him, I guess.Ifhe was attempting to import One Huang Lou "Apple"-branded parts, to resell as genuine, that werenotgenuine - then it would appear to me that he was clearly in the wrong. And Apple CLEARLY doesn't market genuine repair components in the Shenzhen Market.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 04:38:44 pm
content: Quote from: Wan Huang Luo on November 12, 2018, 04:19:53 pmYou are missing the point. Rossman isNOT"reselling as genuine".He is attempting to perform 3rd party repair to Apple products which the manufacturer uses every nefarious method to prevent. Apple has nothing but distain for its customers. It knows that they are sheep lining up for whatever piece of gold-plated fecal matter that Apple can foist upon them for even more $$$ than last year's model.

author: Wan Huang Luo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 06:59:06 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on November 12, 2018, 04:38:44 pmIf he is importing Apple-branded products of disputed authenticity to perform repair, he's bundling the sale of the product with his repair service. If the products contain the Apple logo and are not genuine parts, he should NOT be allowed to perform those repairs because people could mistake them for genuine parts.Respectfully, I think that you missed my point. And please turn the drama variac back down to a safe voltage.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 10:09:38 pm
content: It would appear (from watching Rossman's videos over several years) that he would rather NOT buy parts with that fruit logo on them. Since the part is internal to the customer's gadget, the customer wouldn't know (or care) whether it was a "genuine" part or not. Rossman is not in the business of making Apple look good by repairing their lousy products. Or by claiming that he is using "genuine" parts (whatever that means). Rossman is in the business of fixing his customers products so that they can get on with their lives without going to the Idiot Bar and losing all their data. Or being told that their gadget can't be fixed because there is a newer model available for purchase.The problem, of course, is when ordering from your average Asian source, you really never know what you are buying. They may claim that what you are buying has (or has not) any sort of logo, and is (or is not) a "direct replacement". But you are left at the mercy of the vendor whether their claims are accurate or not. And, then when the unknown goods arrive at the US port of entry, if Apple has their way, the goods will be seized as "counterfeit" whether they are or not. Because they have the $$ to buy the best lawyers on the planet to do whatever they want.

author: Nusa
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 10:50:22 pm
content: Quote from: bson on October 25, 2018, 03:47:57 pmConsidering that's not the name of his business, nor the way he spells his last name, I'm not sure how much he would care. So long as you weren't using his image or purporting to be the same person, you'd be fine. Especially if that's actually your name.My own surname is less common than his (even when correctly spelled), and I actually know two non-relatives with the same first and last name as myself. One of them is even in the same profession, although I'm much older than him.Now Apple, on the other hand, might object to you using their trademarked name as part of yours, especially if you claim to be authorized by them.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 11:15:51 pm
content: The real value in the Apple ecosystem is the polished nature of OS X, which is light years ahead of Windows in terms of user experience, not necessarily the hardware that much anymore. But it does have the advantage that because they have control over the HW ecosystem, by and large things 'just work' and go on working. However, their software advantage which used to be substantial is not that great anymore and there are significant downsides too, newer Apple HW is notably less durable than it used to be, or so it seems to me. For that reason I stopped buying it quite some time ago. I can't afford planned obsolescence.Quote from: Richard Crowley on November 12, 2018, 10:09:38 pmIf a part is a non-Apple part and is honestly represented as such, or a refurbished genuine part, and represented as such, either way, I don't think Apple should have any right to control any aspect of the transaction.To give them that right would upend the rights that come with ownership of products of every kind in a really horrible way. That would be a real problem for people because suddenly, companies of all kinds would start trying to do the same thing with everything people buy. They already are trying to pull tricks like that at every opportunity.Ironically, it would become a "situation" that could turn around and bite Apple's reputation hard, exactly what they likely would be claiming they were trying to protect.Also at the same time it would make people more everywhere aware of this important consumer rights issue, theright to repair.The only thing that I think they could possibly hold against vendors and win is if a vendor sold used Apple parts - representing them as new.Customers have the right to know if a part is refurbished to original factory specs, or used/as-is.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 11:32:29 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on November 12, 2018, 11:15:51 pmRossman has already shown us ample evidence that Apple is not playing by such a reasonable playbook. From their actions, Apple appears to be doing everything and anything remotely possible to completely shut-down 3rd party repair. Look at the completely ridiculous and preposterous claims their people make to legislative bodies (US and Canada, and probably elsewhere).QuoteAbsolutely. But I doubt very much that Rossman is making any claims remotely resembling deception. In fact, he is much more likely explaining to his customers that he has to get refurbished parts from Asia and chips harvested from "organ donor" cadavers in his morgue, etc. I would bet that most of his customers don't care where the parts came from as long as he can get their gadget working again with some sort of reasonably warranty (which is what he is doing).

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2018, 11:42:01 pm
content: I am looking at my AppleCare and proceeding to give zero fucks.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 12:08:21 am
content: Dave, please consider having a Right-to-repair sub-forum.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 12:35:42 am
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 12, 2018, 11:42:01 pmHope you are keeping your data backed up.'Cause you won't get it back at the Idiot Bar.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 12:45:43 am
content: I know that. I use them as an exchange service only. In fact they send me a new device out next day and I send the duff one back to them.Dumbass bar really. I buy AppleCare for the low premium. Once it’s up I will sell the hardware and investin new stuff. Doesn’t depreciate as much as other products. If I smash it they just replace it.Compare other vendors where you lose it for two months.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 11:36:57 am
content: And another hit for independent repair shops: Apple Confirms Its T2 Security Chip Blocks Some Third-Party Repairs of New Macs (https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/12/18077166/apple-macbook-air-mac-mini-t2-chip-security-repair-replacement-tool).

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 11:41:47 am
content: Quote from: madires on November 13, 2018, 11:36:57 amWhat about dodgy or even malicious parts?That's a certain risk. I understand their position from that point of view.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 11:42:37 am
content: Exactly.You can either have a secure device or a flexible device, not both.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 11:47:40 am
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 13, 2018, 11:42:37 amApple related doublethink at its best.People believe they were P0wned with extra components in the Supermicro motherboards.Same people dismiss the risk of "extra functionality" in unofficial service shops.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 02:24:53 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 12, 2018, 11:42:01 pmDoes that mean that you feel that Apple should have the sole right to repair Apple goods? Or that people should either have Apple Care or replace?The issue doesn't seem to be related to real issues with third party repair, they seem to be related to Apple attempting to corner the older device and second hand market. Just from an environmental point of view that doesn't seem to be very desirable.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 02:31:16 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 13, 2018, 02:24:53 pmhttps://www.theverge.com/2018/11/1/18052354/apple-repair-vintage-products-pilot-iphone-4s-5-macbook-2012

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 02:48:21 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 13, 2018, 02:31:16 pmDepending on how that pans out that sounds like a good move. How good will depend on pricing and parts availability, but it should definitely mitigate environmental concerns. It could mark a new course, as opposed to the outright refusal to service devices deemed too old we currently see.Of course, it still wouldn't mean that Apple gets to corner the repair market. Third party repair should be possible and not actively prevented or surpressed. I fear that the move to repair older devices may be a move to take some wind out of the right to repair movement's sails, but whether that's the case should be apparent from the choices made in new designs and the required tools.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 02:59:39 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 13, 2018, 02:24:53 pmNo but at no point does Apple have to make it easy for third party repairers for the sake of it.There are three failure outcomes we need to consider:1. In warranty failures. Apple are absolutely stellar compared to every other vendor I've dealt with there. Any defects they give me new hardware every time.2. Out of warranty failures. Where you have decent consumer rights (like here in the UK) that is covered. Else suck it up or cover it with insurance.3. In/out of warranty damage. Suck it up or cover it with insurance.There is no place for 3rd party repair in that other than the "suck it up" option and suck it up is universally people who (a) can't afford to replace the device outright or (b) didn't take the insurance out. Lots of suckers at the moment.Don't buy what you can't afford to replace or take insurance out to cover it.Repair is a dying little industry like strip malls and high street retail. Look at the TV shops. All gone. This is how the market works. You either embrace progress or fight it to the death. These are the death gasps.We are all biased here to this because we know how stuff works. That is all.Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 13, 2018, 02:24:53 pmThere is literally no environmental problem here. Apple are heavily investing in automated disassembly lines and recycling etc. Look for "apple daisy".What is going to happen and is happening now is you'll subscribe to your apple hardware monthly and I have no problem with that. Everything is transient, ephemeral and the thing I need is support and cover for my tangible items.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 03:04:53 pm
content: They definitely are trying to take even easily fixable older machines off the market in any way they can. Often they fail because of manufacturers defects.Thats been my personal experience, clear as a bell. Stupid gullible people let them do it, even when they don't have the money to buy another.Smart people know not to give them an opportunity to do that. People like Louis Rossmann fill a valuable niche.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 03:10:04 pm
content: If it doesn't work, smash it and claim it on your household insurance!

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 03:25:59 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 13, 2018, 02:59:39 pmI agree. And would add as a corollary:If you need to take out insurance on someconsumer gadget, because you would not be able to afford replacing it -- you probably should buy something less expensive in the first place.Insurance makes sense for high-value assets which you plan to use for many years (your house, your car maybe); and of course against health risks or liability claims which could financially break your neck. But insurance on consumer items which are essentially disposable (i.e. are typically replaced every 2..3 years) seems wrong to me.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 04:51:09 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 13, 2018, 02:59:39 pmApple is not obligated to facilitate third party repairs, but the problem is that it seems to be actively disrupting it. John Deere does the same, with the same undesirable outcome in both cases. They both use the same excuses in regards to safety and reliability. The consumer loses out, as the cost of repair becomes unrelated to the actual cost. The free market should not only apply to choosing the product, but also to the rest of the life cycle.The "insure or replace" line is about financial management, but has little to do with repairing goods. Repair is a sensible option. Repair will always be viable, though in what areas it is does shift indeed. Apple targeting the higher end market and selling relatively expensive devices is what makes these repairs viable in the first place. Apple actively trying to kill repairs off is something different from televisions becoming commodity goods entirely.Finally, you may be fine with leasing consumer goods. We shouldn't pretend it's the way forward though. Repair is desirable for many practical, political and ideological reasons.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 05:41:17 pm
content: I accept that some things can be repaired and some things can't.I repair a lot of things but I know what is a waste of time and money and I know how to avoid needing repairs to start with.We all need to work that out IMHO. That's the problem.You can repair anything you want but don't expect a helping hand. Even the best of Tektronix service manuals doesn't mean a repair is viable. I'll quite happily skip or part out a scope or something as an example.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 05:57:10 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 13, 2018, 02:59:39 pmApple Forces Recyclers to Shred All iPhones and MacBooks:https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/yp73jw/apple-recycling-iphones-macbooks

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 06:17:03 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on November 13, 2018, 05:41:17 pmAgain, it's expecting a helping hand versus deliberately tying a hand behind the back of repairers. Some people will argue for the first from the viewpoint of being a responsible manufacturer, but most are just arguing the second is undesirable.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2018, 11:40:48 pm
content: I'd be happy just having the information available. Want to sell in this market? Make schematics for your product available and some of the custom parts. Car manufactures have had to do exactly that for decades and they have managed, why should sellers of other products be off the hook? If a company doesn't want to play by the rules they can go out of business making room for another that can figure it out.As far as Apple, I quite like my employer issued MacBook, despite the touchpad being absurdly huge. I would never spend my own money on such a locked down system though, especially when it requires a pile of dongles to plug anything in. The fact that they call it a "Pro" system is laughable.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2018, 04:39:25 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 13, 2018, 11:40:48 pmWhat, exactly, is "locked down" on your MacBook Pro? (I am typing this comment on one.) What did Apple do to limit what you want to do with the machine?I quite like the trackpad -- it beats anything any of the Windows vendors use.QuoteI bought a USB-C to Ethernet/USB 3/HDMI dongle for mine. It's really the only extra bit you need. Right now, that dongle is connected to a display, a keyboard and trackball, and the network.I will admit that I also bought a USB-C to USB-A dongle and a USB-C to four-port USB hub. But the adapter I mentioned above gets used every day, as it lives in the office.The TouchBar? Not interesting, and I hate how the Escape key is no longer a real key and instead it's on the Touch Bar. I guess nobody at Apple uses Emacs. The keyboard is utter crap.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2018, 03:57:07 am
content: Louis just talked about lack of a mains fuse on the Weller soldering stations and gave a nice plug for Dave and EEVBlog!Two of my favourite YouTubers! Awesome! He features Dave reading the letter he received from Weller and also encourages his viewers to check out EEVBlog: