Feeds

back to article Apple snuffs iPhone privacy complaint with Korean peanuts

Apple has paid a South Korean user one million won to settle a complaint arising from unauthorized iPhone collection of that user's location information. This is the first time the Cupertino outfit has made such a payout. Although the amount involved is miniscule – ₩1m converts to just under $950 – what's important is the fact …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge
Meh

Meh

That's all

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Stupid story of the month

Seriously? A Korean lawyer won a privacy case for less than $1000 payout in a Korean court? Was it even worth his time? or the reporter's?

The South Koreans didn't even raid Apple's offices, unlike Google Korea who has had that privilege twice already. Sounds like there's a really strong case here.

3
1
Anonymous Coward

Precedent?

The $1000 payout may help set a precedent for a class action suit.

3
0
Joke

Dr S J Evil

Should have asked for one... hundred... billion... won!

1
0
Silver badge
Joke

Man

The Korean version of "Who wants to be a Millionaire" must be boring if a million won isn't even a Grand in GBP...

1
0
Joke

Won / One

How about won billion?

1
0
Silver badge

Quite brazen, even for Apple.

"Apple Korea did not respond to the ruling. Following the decision, Apple Korea had refused to pay compensation. The court seized 1 million won from Apple Korea's bank account for payment of compensation to the complainant after deducting 2,000 won in remittance fees."

Having read this, I immediately had an image of Steve Jobs being told that Apple Korea had lost a lawsuit, and thereupon falling on the floor in a frothing-at-the-mouth tantrum, screaming "I won't pay I won't pay I won't pay!".

That a corporation in any country would simply *refuse* to pay court-ordered compensation defies belief. Or it *would*, if it weren't Apple.

It will be interesting to see how the Korean courts react to belittled in this manner.

7
4
Anonymous Coward

No, it doesn't perfectly possible and it happens all the time

It's very common for big companies to not appear in such small court cases. At the billable rate of their lawyers it's simple not worth their time to travel 200 miles to some city and defend the case properly.

You'll find plenty of examples, the most popular ones - that show up on the news - are people who foreclose on banks after similar judgments by default.

1
0

not turn up, but do pay up

Whilst it is common for large companies not to bother turning up for court, I would've thought they do pay up when they lose.

Obviously in Korea they do things different, and just took the cash, but, over here I would've thought a summons to the directors for contempt of court would be a more likely outcome?

0
1
Anonymous Coward

@thesykes

Well I'm afraid you thought wrong, as I said look up "forecloses on the bank" to see popular evidence of cases where companies ignored the request to pay up and people had to seek further legal help, around the world.

Also happens in shops etc, sometimes bailiffs go in because whatever court judgement got "lost in the post".

1
0

ahhh.. I see

must just be individuals who get hauled up then, if you're big enough, the law doesn't apply?

1
2
Anonymous Coward

No, the law always applies.

Let's say you're a (small) individual and I sue in small claims court. You don't show up and the judge awards me victory by default. You also don't pay. It's fine, you don't go to jail over that.

I then ask the court to contact you to force you make payment. You still don't pay. OK, I ask the court to send in the bailiffs. You don't let them in, etc, again it's well within your rights.

But I know you have a loaded bank account, so I tell that to the court. Court agrees with the asset seize and orders your bank to pay me directly from your account. Just like this case.

It works for individuals and big companies.

0
0
Silver badge

However...

I see nothing in the original article to indicate that this was a "small claims" court of some sort. Even if it was, then it is *still* quite brazen, and pointless, of Apple to refuse to pay a court-ordered award - or maybe simply pointless, if it is as easy to collect an award from a large company with many assets as it is here (in the US).

If it was not a small claims court, then it *is* brazen. Courts tend to look at such behaviour as if it were a species of lese majesty. A bit surprising that they were not found in contempt of court, but then again, I suppose that the court might well be satisfied with the award having been successfully collected.

1
0
Mushroom

Watch out Apple share price

Apple is famous for not paying shareholder dividends, leaving the money in the bank. ($50bn+ at last reports).

Now the strategy is clear - they were saving it for paying lawsuits.

2
2
Coat

Imbroglio

"...to join in a lawsuit over the iPhone data-collection imbroglio"

I have only one question: Was it an epiphenomal imbroglio?

(Sorry, coat, taxi, last week's meme etc).

0
1
Go

This opens flood gate

Finally, it is time for Apple to face the music and pay up.

1
2
Thumb Up

An attempt at puns

All I can hear in my head when I read the south Korean currency is Charlie Sheen performing his piece de la resistance 'winning', except this time it was Samsung. Charlie and Sam need to get together, and win.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.