Consolidating files in itunes 10
In December 2010, two separate groups of i Phone and i Pad users sued Apple, alleging that certain software applications were passing personal user information to third-party advertisers without the users' consent. Press reports stated that in April 2011, Apple agreed to amend its developer agreement to stop this from happening "except for information directly necessary for the functionality of the apps"; however, the suit alleged that Apple took no steps to do this or enforce it "in any meaningful way due to criticism from advertising networks".The Associated Press reported a pending congressional inquiry into the matter, with United States Congress members stating that commercial storage and usage of location information without a consumer's express consent is illegal under current law, but Apple defended its use of customer tracking in a letter released May 9, 2011, by the House of Representatives.Eligible members of the class were entitled to extended warranties, store credit, cash compensation, or battery replacement, and some incentive payments, with all unfiled claims expiring after September 2005.Apple agreed to pay all costs of the litigation, including incentive payments to the class members and the plaintiffs' attorney fees, but admitted no fault. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose division, under the title In Re i Phone Application Litigaton, and further defendants were added to the action.Apple denied wrongdoing but, in settlement of the claims, Apple ultimately reinstated the telephone support for the duration of original ownership of the otherwise obsolete products and customers affected by the change were given a limited reimbursement if they had been refused telephone support, had been charged per incident, or had incurred third party support charges.
In 2008, Apple agreed to cut the price UK consumers pay to download music for their i Pods after a formal complaint to the European Commission from the UK consumer group Which? Regarding Apple in particular, the federal complaint alleged that "Apple facilitated the Publisher Defendants' collective effort to end retail price competition by coordinating their transition to an agency model across all retailers.
In December 2011, the district court granted Apple and AT&T's motions to compel arbitration, following the Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility v.
Concepcion, and decertified the class; in April 2012 the Ninth Circuit denied plaintiffs permission to appeal.
In December 2011, immediately after class decertification of the previous case, a new group of plaintiffs led by Robert Pepper won the race to the courthouse by filing a complaint in the Northern District, which was combined with some slightly later filers and titled "In re Apple i Phone Antitrust Litigation", case 11-cv-06714-YGR.
The new case is essentially the same but is filed only against Apple, not AT&T Mobility.
From the 1980s to the present, Apple has been plaintiff or defendant in civil actions in the United States and other countries.