Class action lawsuits against Apple over iPhone throttling now number 30

“The total number of class action lawsuits against Apple for deliberately slowing older iPhones has now doubled to 30, from the 15 we reported just a couple of weeks ago,” Ben Lovejoy reports for 9to5Mac. “”

“There’s something about the most lucrative product on earth being slowed down without telling users that seems to have gotten the ear of the legal community,” Lovejoy reports. “Will they get a big settlement out of Apple? The sharks are certainly circling.”

Patently Apple continues to track them,” Lovejoy reports, “and it’s clear that things are now getting very silly, with 13 separate suits in Northern California alone – eight of them in San Jose – as more law firms try to climb aboard the bandwagon.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Hopefully, the end result of this whole event will result in much improved clarity of communication between Apple and their customers.

Republican U.S. Senator wants Apple to answer questions about slowing iPhones – January 10, 2018
French prosecutor launches probe into Apple planned obsolescence – January 8, 2018
Apple’s design decisions and iPhone batteries – January 8, 2018
Apple now faces over two dozen lawsuits for ‘purposefully’ or ‘secretly’ slowing down older iPhones – January 5, 2018
Why aging batteries don’t slow down Android phones like Apple iPhones – January 5, 2018
Apple’s $29 replacement batteries expected to hurt new iPhone sales – January 4, 2018
How to see if Apple’s throttling your iPhone – January 4, 2018
Brazilian agency requires Apple to inform consumers on batteries – January 3, 2018
Analyst: Apple’s ‘batterygate’ solution may mean 16 million fewer iPhones sold this year – January 3, 2018
An Apple conspiracy theory blooms – January 2, 2018
Apple clarifies policy on $29 battery replacements: All iPhone 6 and later devices are eligible – January 2, 2018
Why Apple’s response to iPhone ‘batterygate’ is brilliant – December 30, 2017
Australian lawyers to launch largest-ever class action against Apple over iPhone ‘batterygate’ – December 29, 2017
The most annoying things about Apple’s iPhone ‘batterygate’ apology – December 29, 2017
iFixit discounts iPhone battery replacement kits as Apple cuts prices, apologizes for the confusion – December 29, 2017
15 class action lawsuits filed against Apple for throttling iPhones with aging batteries – December 29, 2017
Apple apologizes for poor communication about iPhone batteries and performance; slashes battery replacement cost from $79 to $29 – December 28, 2017
No, Apple’s throttling of iPhones with aging batteries is not planned obsolescence – December 28, 2017
Apple execs face jail in France after lawsuit over slowing down iPhones – December 28, 2017
Korea seeks explanation from Apple for slowing down devices without warning – December 28, 2017
Apple now facing 8 lawsuits over throttling processors in iPhones with aging batteries – December 27, 2017
Apple tarnished their brand with clandestine iPhone battery management and processor throttling – December 27, 2017
Should Apple replace aging iPhone batteries for free instead of throttling processor speed? – December 21, 2017
Apple confirms iPhones with older batteries will take hits in performance – December 20, 2017
iPhone performance and battery age – December 18, 2017
Apple met with Chinese regulators to discuss iPhone 6s unexpected shutdowns – February 10, 2017
Rumor: Apple may extend iPhone 6s battery replacement program to iPhone 6 – January 17, 2017
A message from Apple about 
iPhone and unexpected shutdowns – December 2, 2016
Apple offers free battery replacement for ‘very small number’ of iPhone 6s units with unexpected shutdown issue – November 21, 2016


  1. And all of this public embarrassment was utterly preventable, but that’s exactly what happens when corporations fail to understand their relationship with consumers. Tim Cook et al are tone deaf, but they’re hearing it now. Question is whether this will result in a real and improved change in corporate culture or if Apple simply plans to weather the storm and continue with business as usual.

  2. anyone else get the feeling that this is actually backlash over the fact that you never know if an iOS update will dramatically slow down your device?

    All I want from Apple is for them to be honest about the impact an update will have on my device, ie, “Note: after installing this update, your phone will be much slower responding to touches and the keyboard may not respond to touches for several seconds.”

    By NOT being honest about what updates will dramatically slow performance, it seems to me that Apple has really brought this “Apple slows down old iphone” panic on themselves.

    1. Silence isn’t exactly dishonesty. They didn’t come out and say they didn’t slow down our phones, or the researchers are pushing FUD.

      They made a change and kept it mum. And why? Corporate culture.

      Why are people upset? Because for years, not recently, but years, people have believed that Apple, Microsoft, et al., have been slowing down old systems and software for the sole purpose of getting them to buy new. This intent is dishonest.

      Intent is difficult to prove. But none the less, that’s what these law suites are about.

      When you use the term dishonest, you are showing what side you land on. Better get your name on a class action then.

  3. Some things do need to happen, and 1 shouldn’t.
    1 – If Apple will not allow for user replaceable batteries then the cost should remain at $29 not end at the end of this year.
    2 – Apple needs to communicate to customer in iPhone – Settings – General – About – Battery Health, as Good, Replace soon or Replace now.
    3 – I believe that Apple does not do this for 1 reason, if you have Apple Care you would get that battery replaced for free, and Apple simply does not want to do that, so instead they slow down the iPhone.

    1. I hope so. Many of these lawsuits are just ambulance chasers looking for a payday and nothing more. They are clearly hoping that Apple settles; the lawyers get millions; and the end users get $1.95 each.

      The most *in theory* any end user can get is the rebate of the original $79.00 plus tax if they paid for a battery upgrade prior to Apple’s announced battery replacement plan.

      If they replaced their iPhone there is no way they can provide proof they replaced their iPhone because it was suddenly running more slowly. (If they tried to do this they would have to show what applications they routinely ran and how much the update they installed slowed those specific applications in the manners in which they were using them. Then they would have to show that the iOS directed slowdown actually caused those specific slowdowns because of their specific batter condition. All of which is a near impossibility even in theory.)

      Note: I am NOT saying what Apple did (or even is doing now) was right. It was absolutely wrong. At the very least Apple should have done two things: 1) been open about the battery life and speed issue and 2) allowed the user to chose speed versus battery life in the iOS settings. Since Apple did neither of these Apple is rightly being raked over the coals on this.

      1. Yes it was an unnecessary and incompetent oversight on Apple’s part. It seems Apple likes to inflict punishment and bad PR on itself for no good reason. All it takes to prevent it is a CEO doing his job watching our for minefields.

      1. It hasn’t lost it – yet. It has some headroom left but less than before. Check out the ratings of who people think is the Most Innovative Consumer Tech Company.

        BUT it needs to spend the rest of 2018 repairing fences and put someone in charge (is Counselor Troi available?) of overview. Perhaps a reputation or consumer repercussions department. Someone who will watch out for potential faux pas before they are committed.

        Assuming of course they have the funds to do this. /S

        1. Unless you already know something solid to the contrary I think I made logical points and suggestions. I guess the words I was really looking for was “preemptive damage control.” Apple needs to up their game in terms of how the things they do might have unintended consequences. Frankly I think Apple’s Legal team should have advised them on this. And I guess the question is besides Tim Cook who else is minding the store? Where is Cook’s team to put forth advisory’s on their actions?

  4. Apple has routinely been abysmal in communicating anything about there updates. Sometimes, though rare it seems, you get a list of new features, but rarely do you get release notes that say what they fixed or changed, and they point some where else for security fixes.. Which is fine, as long as the security fixes are detailed as well, which sometimes they are not.

    Now they are paying the piper for their lack of effective communication. Eventually some judge is going to try and combine the suits into one ridiculous suit, the most the end user is going to get is a certificate for a new battery and the lawyers will take the rest..

    This situation is a clear call for tort reform, and the end user should be put first and the lawyers last.. Limit what they can make and make them and their firm pay up the nose if they file a dumb lawsuit and lose.

  5. The lawsuits all claim the motive of planned obsolescence as the reason for the throttling. The lawsuits will fail on that basis.

    I think we can all agree that Apple did not handle the communication of this properly. However, the intentions behind the change were good and it’s also an effective solution to problem of aging batteries. I’d like to see actual statistics on what percentage of devices have actually been throttled. I suspect it’s far lower than most people seem to think.

    1. I think you are correct on that.
      What I think they should be looking at is if Apple is not telling you because they don’t want to replace the batteries under Apple Care a far more likely scenario.

      1. Possibly. However, I would expect the majority of cases for where the battery NEEDS to be replaced to exceed the Apple Care warranty period. To your point, if the argument shifts to not honoring Apple Care, then Apple should be found guilty. I don’t know… I still don’t believe Apple’s motives were nefarious here. Again, I think we can all agree that Apple should have communicated better.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.