Apple sued over hairline cracks in iPhone 3G

Apple, meet lawsuit. Lawsuit, Apple.The company is facing another lawsuit, this time over the performance of its iPhone 3G on AT&T's network.
Written by Andrew Nusca, Contributor
Apple iPhone 3G
Apple, meet lawsuit. Lawsuit, Apple.

The company is facing another lawsuit, this time over the performance of its iPhone 3G on AT&T's network. But that's not the real news: what's notable are added allegations that Apple is ignoring the occurrence of hairline cracks in the handset's enclosure.

AppleInsider reports:

The 23-page suit, filed in a New York district court by Nassau County resident Avi Koschitzki, joins a chorus of complaints (1, 2, 3, 4) filed earlier this year, each of which charge the iPhone maker and its exclusive US wireless carrier AT&T with misrepresenting the performance of the new touchscreen handset by advertising it as "twice as fast" as its predecessor.

"Based upon information and belief the 3G iPhones demand too much power from the 3G bandwidths and the AT&T infrastructure is insufficient to handle this overwhelming 3G signal based on the high volume of 3G iPhones it and Apple have sold," Koschitzki's attorneys wrote.

Apparently, because the 3G network is so overloaded, it's common for iPhone users to get knocked down to the slower EDGE network after only a few minutes of 3G bliss - regardless one is in a geographical area saturated with 3G network coverage.

But the interesting part is the allegation that several hairline cracks form in the iPhone 3G's casing at or around the camera module. Some customers have even noticed cracks immediately upon opening their new iPhones' boxes for the first time, according to the suit.

"Although Apple was and is aware that the iPhones were and are defective, and that consumers have experienced repeated instances of cracked housing, Apple has nevertheless allowed the defectively designed iPhones to be sold to the public," the document says.

Koschitzki is seeking class-action status on his suit, which names AT&T as a defendant.

Editorial standards