Dad sues Apple for pushing cash-draining 'free' games at kids
An iPhone-owner whose daughter downloaded $200 (£125) worth of "Zombie Toxin" and "Gems" through in-app purchases on his iPhone has been allowed to pursue a class action suit against Apple for compensation of up to $5m (£3.1m). Garen Meguerian of Pennsylvania launched the class-action case against Apple in October 2011 after he …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Re: Dangerous
>no shit
I was being rhetorical / ironic, Sherlock.
is it still a game if you pay for more ammo?
I think video games started going downhill when "insert 10p to continue" arrived in the arcades!
After that home video games arrived and its taken from then till now for them to start draining cash on a per game basis, or a during-game basis
'cept for these newfangled online dungeons and dragons malarky of course
This isn't a parenting issue
Ugh, this isn't a case of parental negligence, which irritates me as much as anyone - this is about apps that are clearly masquerading as games for children but with mechanics more akin to scratchcards or fruit machines. Their sole purpose is to pry as much cash from the user as possible while providing the minimum entertainment necessary to keep them interested. When looked at in the context of how we moderate other forms of children's entertainment, these should really be regulated or age restricted, with penalties for marketing that appeals to children.
Yes, if parents had been more vigilant they could have prevented their kids running up exorbitant bills, but on the other hand the games are misleading by design (advertised as "free" when they clearly aren't). Really, this is like letting your kids watch CBeebies then discovering they've been running a premium phone service akin to Babestation between cartoons.
Two observations.
These applications are created this way by design, the developers (and Apple) want you to pay them over and over again and don't care that they are targeted at children that cannot enter in to a contact to purchase in app or out of app.
To those saying parents should work out whether the app is going to request in app purchases, the shite is aimed at kids, do you really want to wade through the childish shite to find out if you're going to be ripped off in each and every app downloaded? If it's aimed at kids it shouldn't need them to make purchases they are not legally entitled to do.
Have do done yet.... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... have you done yet... OK son I think it's OK to play it.
"To those saying parents should work out whether the app is going to request in app purchases, the shite is aimed at kids, do you really want to wade through the childish shite to find out if you're going to be ripped off in each and every app downloaded?"
No.
Nor is it necessary. You simply switch off in-app purchases and the problem is solved.
but the kid will just turn it back on if they know the password
"but the kid will just turn it back on if they know the password"
The iTunes password and the password to change in-app purchases (and other system settings) are two separate things. Frankly, I don't think it's a terribly bright idea to give either one of them to one's darling child.
and if your autistic kid is happy to sit brute forcing the 4 digit code then simply unlink your CC
Bitten
While I sympathise with Apple slightly in that a credit card enabled phone given to a 9 year old is asking for trouble (would you give your kid your wallet and pin numbers? No, neither would I) Apple do operate a walled garden, and as such have some measure of resposibility for what goes on within that garden.
Apps?
Bloody hell I'm feeling old so soon.
It doesn't seem that long ago when this was all about Facebook or similar.
The credit card companies (or someone) need to release an app where you can prevent this from happening - it shouldn't be too hard.
I sympathize, but ...
... because our credit cards are at risk, and other parental type reasons, we set our kids' iphones and ipods to require a password that WE have for ANY purchase. We also told them about in-app purchases: if they accidentally do make a purchase to come to us. If they hide it, they're in trouble. If they didn't realize it, we invoke the "if you can't handle it you can't have it" Clause of the Geneva Parenting Convention of 1973. (Works a treat with things like knives, axes, and my tools that do not get put back in the toolbox.)
Personal responsibility: it's not the government's job. In fact, they really hate it.
No kid of mine would ever have a device with itunes on it. Much less a device with iTunes that had credit card access.
Bill you and Melinda really are mean to your kids with your anti-Apple stance and you are giving all your ill-gotten gains away leaving none for them.
Won't someone please think of their children!
- Monkey Boy
I dont see anyone mentionng
that Apple did not design the game. Some 3rd party iOS developer designed the game, built the game, setup the in app purchase process etc etc etc.
All Apple - probably - did was make sure that the application did NOT do things like get out of its sandbox, collect/send personal data where it shouldn't, and of course make sure that Apple got it's piece of any in game sales.
Nowhere in the article or in these comments do I see anyone pointing at the developer and saying - shame on you - here is *your* class action suit. In the comments there are some vague references to the developer but not specifically, just generically.
Par-runt is just trying to get $ for free (aka lottery winnings)
Flames because Im sure I get a few....
Re: I dont see anyone mentionng
Lets remember a few things here:
1) Apple took on the responsibility of vetting apps. Since they are making a profit off of both having the app, and its purchases, they have a responsibility to protect their customers.
2) I'm give the benefit of the doubt that most of regs commentator's are techies, geeks, or some various combination of the two. You average apple customer is no long the hipster color crayon market. My 80 year grandma has an iPhone.
I think the suit is stupid or at least the asking price is overblown then I remember this is Apple we are talking about they don't mind being in the middle of stupid suits. I am rooting for the guy more for the idea that some concept of regulation will be imposed on preditory habbits like this.
Re: I dont see anyone mentionng
"off of"
Stop it right now.
Re: I dont see anyone mentionng
Well, being an ESL speaker, always interested in this:
======================
It fell off of the lorry
It fell off the lorry
could be used to explain where the stolen goods came from.
The second could however be interpreted as a part of the lorry fell off, where the first is more correct if it is something the lorry was carrying.
=======================
But, also this:
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/nonerrors.html
Search for 'off of'.
Anyways, on-topic: App settings post rules them all. Problem solved. Nothing to see. Walk along now.
Re: I dont see anyone mentionng
I don't mind "out of", or possibly "off from", but I'd rather you didn't say "off of". But maybe that's just me being a native speaker. I've heard linguists say that ESL has a distinct grammar, even to the extent that native speakers find themselves at a disadvantage in a largely ESL group.
And anyhoo, like most English speakers, I've no objection to people who speak English as a second language making what *I* regard as grammatical errors, coz frankly their "bad" English is a whole lot easier for me to understand than their own language.
falling apple
If I remember right (summer 2010) on an ipad you need the same password to update an app and to download a free app as to use or abuse your credit card. Was there not an os with the same mindset, where you need to be administrator to make an application run?
Sue Google too
These "free" games are a bane on the service. Not only are they not free but they're filled by idiot commenters boosting the game with 5 star ratings to boost their affiliate codes.
Any game with in-game content should instantly attract a 12-rating and anything with affiliate codes should permit ratings but disable comments.
Another Loser Dad
A loser dad with loser kids.
There's a sucker born every minute and he and his kids are both suckers and losers. Crawl back under the rock you crawled out from.
Is it still a game...
@mark63
That would be about 1978, IIRC, with "Atari Football". First game I ever saw with "pay to continue" as opposed to "pay for another game". Worked a treat, as the player currently losing would often pay up in the hopes of reversing the situation. But if the world has been going downhill since then, why aren't at bottom yet?
I blame the Lydians. No money -> nobody stealing your money. And it's darn hard to pass a sheep over an SSL connection.
No sympathy
I've got four kids, they don't get the password for the credit card, just recently one of them wanted to download Temple Run, which is free, she argued, she begged, she pleaded, she tantrumed, she had to wait until she brought the phone home so I could add the game. This is for the very simple reason that it would be ridiculously irresponsible of me, on a number of levels, to give a child free reign on a credit card.
Remember when your phone asked if you wanted it to remember your purchase password for you?
That was a test, if you answered in the affirmative you failed, do try and learn from it because fools and their money testing is ongoing.
Re: No sympathy
I agree. If it's that important then some banks allow children as young as 11 to have debit cards. Set one up, pay their pocket money into the bank and then it's their own money they're wasting. After a couple of months of quickly running out of money and being broke for the rest of the month they'll quickly change their ways.
Yeah, maybe this guy shouldn't have given his kid the password...
...but that doesn't let game makers -- or Apple -- off the hook for exploiting children with "free" games. Just because the guy made a mistake doesn't mean it's OK for smartphone game hucksters to fleece him. I hope he kicks Apple's ass until it bleeds.
Re: Yeah, maybe this guy shouldn't have given his kid the password...
"Exploiting children"? Did you seriously just make a "somebody think of the chiiiiildren" argument?
I'm with Apple on this one
If you don't want your kids spending your cash, don't give them your iTunes password.
Or, if you're that stupid, don't have kids.
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
The flip side is that Apple is deceptively marketing apps aimed at kids for "free" when in fact they are deliberately designed to incentivize kids to make real world purchases. Given that Apple has such tight control of how apps are approved and presented they really cannot pretend that there is nothing they could do to warn parents or protect kids from excessive spending.
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
Apple and AT&T specifically push the use of the iphone by your children. Just refer to the "who wants to limit the Iphone" advertisement. That specifically shows a small child quietly playing on and Iphone while the parent works in the background on 'something more important than their child'. This ad subliminally communicates to any parent...give your iphone to your child...and you'll have a few minutes of peace and quiet.
Apple is feeding this kind of use...yet claims ignorance when called out on it. Yes, I think this lawsuit is a bit much, but I think APPLE HAS IT COMING. They are the biggest abuser of lawsuits currently, so Karma Baby.
TIME TO TAKE THE COCKY BASTARDS DOWN A KNOTCH IMO
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
"deceptively marketing apps towards children" ????
Try actively. Refer to Iphone/Sprint advert..."who would want to limit the Iphone"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lQiVCfpJX3A
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
Sorry. It's Sprint that has the child.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lQiVCfpJX3A
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
Paedophiles also deliberately target kids.
So if a parent lets their child 'go for a walk' with a paedo, it's only the paedo to blame, right?
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
"Or, if you're that stupid, don't have kids."
Unfortunately, stupidity and likelihood of having children are directly proportional.
Re: I'm with Apple on this one
Unfortunately, <insert deity of your choice> is also in on the act.
There's this thing you can do with another player which seems like an awful lot of fun and you feel compelled to do it. However, 9 months later the bill arrives and by then its too late.
If you find it hard not to hand out access to your credit card, you have almost no hope of resisting this urge.
Experience is the best teacher
It's simply careless to hand over adult responsibilities to children, at least before they fully understand the consequences of their choices. Children are obviously immature, and need to be guided to a clearer understanding of themselves and the wider world. Sometimes the best way to teach is to hand over limited responsibility to allow actions and consequences to be tested. We gave our children limited amounts of money on their devices to spend in any way they liked. If they quickly blew it all on poor selections (and then had nothing to spend for some time) they quickly learned to think far harder the next time they received another allowance.
The beauty of this process is that we help them to become responsible for their own decisions without passing judgements or being harsh. All it took was limited first-hand experience of the way the world works. But simply hand over unlimited financial resources and then blaming someone else for the ensuing disaster sends all the wrong messages.
iBabysitter
Is this not akin to taking your child to the supermarket, telling them they can go and pick one toy; but because you can't be bothered to go to the toy department with them (and don't know how much the toys are worth) you hand over your wallet and send them off whilst you do the shopping?
Then when you find little Johnny/Janice has spent $500 on toys, you sue the supermarket.
Here's a parenting tip, try spending some time with your child at play, supervise their use of the phone/tablet. If you don't have time and need to leave them alone then give them some paper and crayons, a lego project, or some physical game or activity to do - until you do have the time - to play together on the shiny.
Guess what, children have great imagination! They'll make a spaceship or a robot out of a cardboard box (my nephew's latest creation). It could be argued that babysitting them with an iPhone causes them to lose that imagination, instead training them to be nothing more than good little wallets.
For all those infuriated iParents commenting on this thread, I have no idea how you were raised but I was raised in a time when mobile phones were only a sparkle in Martin Cooper's eye. I survived on my imagination and so will your little fart.
But what do I know, I don't have kids so I don't have the parenting certificate that pops out with the placenta.
Re: iBabysitter
> Is this not akin to taking your child to the supermarket.
No. It's akin to given them a Nintendo DS.
If it is any more dangerous than that then perhaps the "curator" isn't doing their job properly.
Apple has displaced Microsoft as innovator of harmless things being made dangerous in new and interesting ways.
Re: iBabysitter
NO. This is more akin to them picking a toy out of a box marked FREE TOYS FOR CHILDREN then you discover when your wife gets home that she was charged a tenner at the checkout for enabling the toy to be used. Would you berate her for being an awful parent, because this was explained somewhere upside down at the back of the shop in 1point white cursive script on pale yellow, and accept that the shop behaved perfectly responsibly? Or would you demand a full refund and apology or you will never shop there again? With copies to local papers and your solicitor.
PS: If your children are to live in the 21st Century and not the 19th then I think playing with a smartphone is likely to be more use to them than playing with a cornflake packet.
Re: iBabysitter
>> Is this not akin to taking your child to the supermarket.
>No. It's akin to given them a Nintendo DS.
no it isnt.
if you choose to give your kids your credit card details (or the password to an account that has them saved) then you deserve all you get.
will he be launching a class action law suit against amazon because his kid can log into it and order lots of shit to be delivered because he left auto-login turned on?
if parents cba looking after their kids then a) dont have them. or b) accept that there will be other costs involved instead of the time-cost.
i appreciate that people dont like freemium stuff*, and enjoy their apple-bashing, but come on - at least try and find legitimate things to whine about...
* that said, theres a lot of good 'freemium' stuff out there too, i wouldnt want to get rid of it as a concept just because some people are silly enough to hand account details to a kid who doesnt understand what they're doing.
how do you think
Apple makes its billions? yup with scam ware aimed at kid. it is child abuse PERIOD. anything other then a fews billions in fines
Re: how do you think
Man the kids in the playground must have teased you something rotten.
What with you having an ass for a hat and all
and such a big hat too.
Fuckwit
Question
For anybody who's got one of these iGadgets, how obvious is it when you're about to make an in app purchase? Asking for the password is good, but to a less experienced user (e.g. a child) that alone doesn't make it obvious.
Re: Question
It's very clear that you're buying something. There are three basic steps:
1) Select the in-app purchase. From every option for this I've seen (whether the app is free or not), the purchase is very clearly labelled as a purchase and how much it costs - and I'm sure this is mandatory.
2) Once selected, there's a pop-up message saying what the item is, that it costs money and what the price is and asked you to confirm that you want to buy. In order to proceed, you have to click 'yes'
3) Enter the password.
As an aside, there's a Jaws game and you get acquire 'free coins' through a variety of ways, including some like getting an Experian credit report or free Vistaprint business, were the developer is getting a referral fee and I've found that more objectionable than the in-app purchases.
Re: Question
I see. That's the real crux of it IMHO. It sounds like Apple has done all that can reasonably be required of them. There are still some things that would make it better for parents, like an option to add separate password just for payments, so they can they can easily permit kids to everything but that. But I don't see any negligence on their part.
Yes the whole thing is slimy, but not I think in any way illegal. Concerned parents could likely better spend their time publicly shaming Apple about this, in the hopes of getting those apps taken out of the market instead of trying to sue.
Suck it Apple
Do I think this is a frivolous law suit? Yes, I do.
An IPhone, or any other smart phone is NOT supposed to be a toy. But Apple and AT&T push that it is....in their ads. For example, the advert showing an innocent/quite child, playing on an IPhone, while the parent sits in the background...working on whatever....and the words 'why would you want to limit the iPhone'.
Apple LOVES it when this kind of purchasing practice occurs, because they are getting money from every direction. Don't be so naive.
Since Apple has adopted the position of suing over every little thing....Karma BABY!
I HOPE HE GETS IT ALL.
Re: Suck it Apple
Apple has no advert like that. Here's the iPhone ads: http://www.apple.com/iphone/videos/
Maybe you've confused the Samsung ad with Apple's? It's OK if you got confused, Samsung copied the same style and even hired the same girl.
If only IOS had parental controls to prevent this sort of thing from happening. Oh wait, it does.
Re: parental controls
Actually, I think this is a red herring. If the parent doesn't know about the parental controls but does know that they've given their CC details to the device, the parent should not give the device to a child without constant supervision.
It's like your wallet, except that it doesn't run out so quickly. Why in the name of fsck would you give such a thing to a child and then look the other way? I just don't understand.
Oh, and in case anyone is curious, it turns out I do have children and about ten minutes ago I just explained to my 11-year-old why I won't sign him up for websites whose T&Cs require you to be over 12. This task really isn't as difficult as some of the child-free population seem to think. It results in about two minutes of disappointment, after which time the attention span runs out and he finds himself wasting his life away in some other non-improving fashion. I think that's what being 11 is for.
Disgusting
The games are obviously targeted at adults with the mental capacity of a 9 year old, and fortunately are heirs to large fortunes so that their guardians say "Oh, why not ?"
Can Apple produce this person ? Why not ?
Hamelin doesn't need a Pied Piper if it has no rats ...
Sterilisation
The moron should be prevented from breeding further in the interest of society.
This topic is closed for new posts.
