Apple to Pay $100 Million For Unauthorized App Purchases

[Traun]

Why would you give a kid access to an iPhone? At all? I'm serious here, someone explain this to me?

 

[Strazdas]

An iphone shouldn't be a dangerous tool to let your kids play on without constantly watching their every move. it's easy to blame parents for being irresponsible, but who created an atmosphere of games and apps that specifically prey on children?

an iphone shouldnt be a dangeous tool to let your kids play on without constantly watching their every movie if you have educated them about how money works. if you are incapable of doing such education, you shoulnt have kids, or iphone for that matter. it is parents responsibility when they allow their children to take money of their purse. All advertisement intentionally prey on stupid people. we should ban all advertisement.

On the other hand i am happy because i hate apple.

And in that case, it's the parents fault? Heck, I have a pretty fat wallet and may not be able to tell I have my card in my wallet until it's too late.

Yes, it is, for not telling the kids how money work, for not telling them not to fucking steal from thier parents and generally not doing a thing we call "parenting". heck, giving acess to that ATM would be a bad start anyway.

Listen, not all parents are IT-savy. They didn't grow up with it, and they simply don't understand it.

People keep arguing about 'bad parenting', but it's a simply fact that kids shouldn't grow up being IT-idiots because their parents don't understand it. My father hardly knows how to turn on a computer, and my mother has only gotten reasonably experienced in the last few years. Should me and my two sisters never have gotten a computer because my parents don't understand it? Of course not. I'm happy that I'm a computer-wiz today despite my parents not being that.

What this mean is that these devices need to be SAFE, even for the idiot parents. Yes, we can't protect against all idiots (or acts of idiots), but we can protect against most. And Apple failed that.

Well, if parents actually wanted to do parenting they would become at least miniamally IT-savy for their childrens sake. IT is not a nanny that you can jsut shove children to you know. Kids shouldnt grow up IT-idiots. parents are the ones that should change in this case. your parents should have learned the basics of how computers work if they wanted to control your actions on it. maybe they didnt, thats fine, but then they shouldnt complain that "omg he found this porn site all computers are teh devil".
Safety is never a bad thing, but idiot-proof often leads to oversiplicity. Parents need to learn what a device is before giving it to thier children. and this burden falls on parents. you do raise a point with the password being remmebered in unrelated aplications, and if that is true (i dont use iphone) then it should be fixed.

Dont be silly. Course they didnt, but technology such as iphones present an easy way of pacifying kids. So with your first point we should all throw our computer games away because the cup & ball was invented way before them. Why take advantage of the numerous benefits technology present us with?

No, you should be having your current computer games with a degree of responsibility. by taking advantage of benefits, you accept responsibility that come with it. these parents shifted that responsibility on apple.

Also yes my experience of being a parent, having to live with children 24/7 for the last few years makes my point a whole lot more valid than yours on raising children. The key in that sentance being experience. You also prove my point when admiting i was right that you have no kids.

No, it does not. your opinion is no more valid than anyone else who were ever a kid (aka everyone in the world). I do not have to experience something to have a reasonable opinion about it. For example i have never raped a woman, however i do have a very valid opinion about that. In fact the victim would likely have less valid opinion due to emotions influencing it more than logic. Your examples of "i woudl have given him a whole google play library to shut him up" is a perfect example. you are fueled by emotions and admit on agreeing to do irrational things just to cover that emotional state. such statements in fact make your opinion less valid.

 

[Starik20X6]

Fuck that noise. If you're moronic enough to try and use an iPhone as a babysitter, you deserve to pay for any consequences of your remarkable lack of foresight. I'm getting very sick of every failure of parenting being someone else's fault.

 

[Whitbane]

Why would you give a kid access to an iPhone? At all? I'm serious here, someone explain this to me?

I wish I could, but I can't. It seems ridiculous to me as well. Parents really need to stop sucking and teach their kids instead of relying on electronic devices to do it for them. It's money, and if they don't understand it, why give them a device that makes it easy to spend their parent's money on? It's like people run on stupid.

 

[Ambitiousmould]

To be honest, I think this is Apple's fault. It's already been said about parents not been IT-savy and stuff, so I'll not go into that, but doesn't the fact that you there is no permission box to have them remember your password go against some sort of law. The Data Protection Act maybe? Where a Data Handler (in this case Apple) has to have express permission from the Data Subject (the parent who's password it is)to keep any data about them (i.e. their password).

 

[Athinira]

an iphone shouldnt be a dangeous tool to let your kids play on without constantly watching their every movie if you have educated them about how money works. if you are incapable of doing such education, you shoulnt have kids, or iphone for that matter. it is parents responsibility when they allow their children to take money of their purse. All advertisement intentionally prey on stupid people. we should ban all advertisement.

Wrong. An iPhone shouldn't be a dangerous tool to let your kids play on without watching their every move, EVEN if you haven't educated them about how money worksw.

Children down to the age of even 2-3 are sometimes playing with Apple products. I would very much like to see you teach a kid that age about money.

In fact, given that i myself are a substitute teacher, i would like to see you educate 6 year olds about it. Educating kids isn't an easy task. I can educate SOME 5-6 year olds myself depending on their personality, but for the most time, their attention span is rather short. For the most part, kids that age cannot be truly educated. They can, at best, be guided to experiment with something (including math or language). Certainly, digital currency is beyond their understanding at that age. They can understand how physical money and coins work, but how would you explain to a kid that when he presses something particular on an iPad, then daddys credit card can be debited? Do you expect him to understand that? How would he know which dialogue would do the debit? Would he even understand what 'debit' means? )

-

Mostly however, this is an issue of security for us all. I also happen to study security for a hobby, and as a general rule, the entity that is best capable of mitigating a risk is the one who should bear the responsibility of the risk. In this case, this is Apple, since they are in the position to make accidental purchases hard (by changing software).

More importantly, this case has given them a FINANCIAL incentive to do so. By making Apple reimburse the parents, you are giving Apple an incentive to fix this problem. If Apple didn't have to reimburse them, they could just say 'tough luck' and then continue to profit from these unaware parents and kids (since they take 60-70% of the profit of an in-app purchase). We saw the same thing with credit cards back when they were a relatively new technology.

Originally credit card security was terrible, and it only got better once Congress passed laws that made the credit card companies financially responsible for credit card fraud (it used to be peoples own problem). Suddenly companies like VISA and MasterCard couldn't hurry enough to fix the security issues, although that was only in the US. In the UK back then, they decided not to do so, hence credit card fraud continued to be a big problem there fore a while longer.

Well, if parents actually wanted to do parenting they would become at least miniamally IT-savy for their childrens sake. IT is not a nanny that you can jsut shove children to you know. Kids shouldnt grow up IT-idiots. parents are the ones that should change in this case. your parents should have learned the basics of how computers work if they wanted to control your actions on it. maybe they didnt, thats fine, but then they shouldnt complain that "omg he found this porn site all computers are teh devil".
Safety is never a bad thing, but idiot-proof often leads to oversiplicity. Parents need to learn what a device is before giving it to thier children. and this burden falls on parents. you do raise a point with the password being remmebered in unrelated aplications, and if that is true (i dont use iphone) then it should be fixed.

I'm sorry, but once again, no. Parents shouldn't need to do that. While they should certainly be AWARE of what they are purchasing for their children, they shouldn't need to learn to use it intimately and understand all the hoops and stuff. My father was with me when i got my first computer at the age of 6. He understood what a computer is, he watched as i started to explore the possibilities the first time i turned it on, but he can still hardly find the "On" button on a laptop.
I personally think my father is a good example of what you can reasonably expect as a minimum: that a parent understands what the thing IS, but not how to use it. He understands what an iPhone is, but has absolutely no knowledge of how to use a touch-screen based device. This is the basic assumption companies should make when designing these devices.

And as i previously said, even IT-savy people could have been fooled by this oversight from Apple because it's non-apparent (and I'm sure quite a few IT-savy parents are amongst the ones who got fooled).

In addition, while you mention that parents should familiarize themselves with the stuff enough so they understand the basic protection measures (parental controls), i would actually argue that Apple has done a terrible job at conveying these things to the parents, or even that the possibilities exist. If Apple wanted to do this properly, conveying the option for parental controls should be one of the very first things you are asked about when you turn on a brand new Apple-product and go through the initial setup.

And it shouldn't just be a question like "Would you like to turn on parental controls?", because even a term like 'Parental Controls' can fool an IT-retarded parent who hasn't heard of the expression before.

A question like "Is this device intended for one of your kids?" is much better, and if you then click yes, you get to another screen that explains Parental Controls, gives some examples - like saying you can prevent kids from purchasing stuff - and only THEN asks if you want to turn it on or not.

 

[flarty]

No, you should be having your current computer games with a degree of responsibility. by taking advantage of benefits, you accept responsibility that come with it. these parents shifted that responsibility on apple.

Did they really? name me any other online transaction service that works like this? Every other I've used from Amazon to steam, from just eat to zavvi require me to enter the security code on my credit card to avoid balls up just like this. Why should apple be any different? Is it too much to think that a person who has made a lot of web based transactions, would then be under the impression when making a purchase on the app store, that first request a password for a purchase, that it would do so for every transaction after and not leave the account open for further purchases for a further 15 minutes without warning?

No, it does not. your opinion is no more valid than anyone else who were ever a kid (aka everyone in the world). I do not have to experience something to have a reasonable opinion about it. For example i have never raped a woman, however i do have a very valid opinion about that. In fact the victim would likely have less valid opinion due to emotions influencing it more than logic. Your examples of "i woudl have given him a whole google play library to shut him up" is a perfect example. you are fueled by emotions and admit on agreeing to do irrational things just to cover that emotional state. such statements in fact make your opinion less valid.

Yes it does. Just because you were once a child does not mean you know what its like to be a parent. Lets go to your rape analogy (which i find is a disturbing analogy to use since we are talking about parenting skills). By this definition a rape victim would say it was terrible i was raped but i understand why he did, at least he enjoyed. Also i mentioned parenting skills, which like all other skills must be learned. Parenting is one massive learning experience that only ends when you die. Until you begin to experience it your opinion on the matter is worth very little, as most parents would agree.

Also i have daughter not a son, an assumption no parent would make.

 

[thesilentman]

Apple and security have never gone together. I don't know what constitutes as safe for you guys, but for me, it's the ability for the person using a product and knowing what he's doing and getting out of it. While I like that Apple is choosing to reimburse these guys rather than go "suck it up", the blame falls partly on the parents as well.

I'm sorry, but once again, no. Parents shouldn't need to do that. While they should certainly be AWARE of what they are purchasing for their children, they shouldn't need to learn to use it intimately and understand all the hoops and stuff. My father was with me when i got my first computer at the age of 6. He understood what a computer is, he watched as i started to explore the possibilities the first time i turned it on, but he can still hardly find the "On" button on a laptop.
I personally think my father is a good example of what you can reasonably expect as a minimum: that a parent understands what the thing IS, but not how to use it. He understands what an iPhone is, but has absolutely no knowledge of how to use a touch-screen based device. This is the basic assumption companies should make when designing these devices.

I'd like to point out that any tool is still a tool. It reminds me of a saying that goes like this: "Anyone can buy a chainsaw, but idiots will cut their legs off." It's very easy to mess up computer systems. I know because I've done it, and have looked at a good number of ways that can be done on a computer.

And as i previously said, even IT[footnote]This term is faulty. It is very faulty, and I hate it for reasons that would take up an entire forum post, so I won't explain it today.[/footnote]-savy people could have been fooled by this oversight from Apple because it's non-apparent (and I'm sure quite a few IT-savy parents are amongst the ones who got fooled).

Um, no. Being IT-savy has nothing to do with the fact that people allowed their kids, accident or not, to use their phone to pay for some pay-to-win games. This is more money matters, which is something only parents can teach.

In addition, while you mention that parents should familiarize themselves with the stuff enough so they understand the basic protection measures (parental controls), i would actually argue that Apple has done a terrible job at conveying these things to the parents, or even that the possibilities exist. If Apple wanted to do this properly, conveying the option for parental controls should be one of the very first things you are asked about when you turn on a brand new Apple-product and go through the initial setup.

...You do realize that Apple isn't the only one not doing this, right? Ask anyone who uses Windows that knows what the difference between an Administrator and a Standard user is. Most people don't. I guarantee you that MS does not throw up a quick tutorial when you go make another account on a Windows machine. Linux OSes do get it right setting up security, but they don't throw up a tutorial as the target is someone who at least somewhat technologically savvy, which is a good thing here. Not so for Windows or the Mac.

So before Ipads existed parents did nothing? Children just ran wild?

Also pointing out that somebody isn't in that situation is not an argument against points they make. You don't have to personally experience something to have an opinion on it. If you want to criticise my points, by all means, but don't act like you being a parent and me not automatically makes your points more valid.

Dont be silly. Course they didnt, but technology such as iphones present an easy way of pacifying kids. So with your first point we should all throw our computer games away because the cup & ball was invented way before them. Why take advantage of the numerous benefits technology present us with?

Also yes my experience of being a parent, having to live with children 24/7 for the last few years makes my point a whole lot more valid than yours on raising children. The key in that sentance being experience. You also prove my point when admiting i was right that you have no kids.

Using an iPhone/iPad/iPod/etc sure is a good way to pacify kids, but that doesn't mean that it's the only way. Using them as personal babysitters is what gets us riled. It's common knowledge that an iPhone can vacuum money out of your pocket if you aren't careful.

The iPhone, (and by extension, every "new" iteration of the smartphone) is an awesome tool. But like I said earlier: "Anyone can buy a chainsaw, but idiots will cut their legs off."

 

[Deryl Owens]

Way to teach people that it's not their responsibility to make sure their ten year old doesn't have unsupervised access to a gadget capable of making purchases. Personally I don't care how easy it is for kids to do it. If they are at the age where they don't understand money, they shouldn't be on one or have one without close supervision. If they are old enough, then the parents should make the kids cover some/all of the cash spent, or cover it themselves.

There is a reason for why most things say you should be a certain age before you can have an account.

An iphone shouldn't be a dangerous tool to let your kids play on without constantly watching their every move. it's easy to blame parents for being irresponsible, but who created an atmosphere of games and apps that specifically prey on children?

The parent should be responsible and the tool is not dangerous, the ignorance is dangerous. If the company wants to let people buy products on their phones and you dont like it then deny it to your kid. Its not the companys responsibility to parent for you, thats your job and if you dont like it well, dont have any more.

 

[Athinira]

I'd like to point out that any tool is still a tool. It reminds me of a saying that goes like this: "Anyone can buy a chainsaw, but idiots will cut their legs off." It's very easy to mess up computer systems. I know because I've done it, and have looked at a good number of ways that can be done on a computer.

And while that is certainly true, manufacturers still have a responsibility to make the tool as safe as possible to use.

This isn't really anything new. If you get into a car accident because of a fault in your car, you can sue the manufacturer and if you can prove that the responsibility lies at them, you can get compensation. This case really isn't any different: Apple created a system where children are a part of the target customer group, and they didn't put up enough barriers to prevent children from accidentally purchasing stuff.

Um, no. Being IT-savy has nothing to do with the fact that people allowed their kids, accident or not, to use their phone to pay for some pay-to-win games. This is more money matters, which is something only parents can teach.

Um, no. Said children were completely unaware that they were purchasing stuff. Yes parents can teach children to be careful with money, but if the child doesn't know that it's spending money. Children know physical money at a pretty early age, but it takes longer before they understand digital money and digital payment systems. And even if they understand those systems, they also have to understand spending. They don't know that by pressing a certain button in a game, they are actually taking money from their parents credit card.

Oh and just put this out of the way: the parents didn't "allow their kids". Apple did (by not implementing enough security). The parents were led to believe that conducting purchases would require a password entry when it didn't.

...You do realize that Apple isn't the only one not doing this, right? Ask anyone who uses Windows that knows what the difference between an Administrator and a Standard user is. Most people don't. I guarantee you that MS does not throw up a quick tutorial when you go make another account on a Windows machine.

Microsoft can get away with that because noone has been hurt (physically, emotionally or financially). Booting up a computer and not understanding how to configure it poses no risk to you out of the box. Even if you got a virus from simply connecting to the internet (which was common in early versions of Windows XP before Service Pack 2), that still wasn't something that was gonna do anything beyond wasting your time.

This case is difference because here we have a situation were people did get hurt (financially), and the blame falls on Apple for not implementing the system in a kid-friendly way, even though the system is aimed towards kids.

 

[Negatempest]

So, no one is pointing out that apple made millions from accidental purchases, and when parents went back to apple after seeing the bill asking for a refund over the mistake, they said, "No". And some of you are actually okay with that...really? We aren't talking about pennies here. People/parents have lost thousands to hundreds of thousands over a simple mistake and you guys believe that these people should wallow in debt. I am currently in debt myself, no where near as much as some of these guys are, and HELL if I want any of them to suffer such a thing. We aren't talking about accidental deaths here, we are talking about a simple freakin refund from Apple over obvious false over-purchasing, ones that even banks question about, and Apple response at the time was "Too bad". **** that. -_-

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

Wait a sec...now I'm not one to support Apple or their shonky business practices at all, but isn't this more the fault of those who make the apps? Why does Apple have to shoulder the responsibility, for how easy the apps make it? Monitor the whole freaking iTunes store more than it already is? Unless the app is an all-out scam, I don't quite see why Apple should have to fork out. If anything, it should be the individual publishers responsibility.

 

[Strazdas]

No, you should be having your current computer games with a degree of responsibility. by taking advantage of benefits, you accept responsibility that come with it. these parents shifted that responsibility on apple.

Did they really? name me any other online transaction service that works like this? Every other I've used from Amazon to steam, from just eat to zavvi require me to enter the security code on my credit card to avoid balls up just like this. Why should apple be any different? Is it too much to think that a person who has made a lot of web based transactions, would then be under the impression when making a purchase on the app store, that first request a password for a purchase, that it would do so for every transaction after and not leave the account open for further purchases for a further 15 minutes without warning?

Ah, conformity, service i used before does this so therefore ill assume this new service must do it as well.

Yes it does. Just because you were once a child does not mean you know what its like to be a parent. Lets go to your rape analogy (which i find is a disturbing analogy to use since we are talking about parenting skills). By this definition a rape victim would say it was terrible i was raped but i understand why he did, at least he enjoyed. Also i mentioned parenting skills, which like all other skills must be learned. Parenting is one massive learning experience that only ends when you die. Until you begin to experience it your opinion on the matter is worth very little, as most parents would agree.

You dont need to experience parenting to know what it is like. thats a false assumtion. Yes, a rape victim should first of all udnerstand the reason behind the crime. im not saying she should be happy about it, but going on a rage of "devil raped me burn him at the stake" is not a logical way to go about it.
The problem with parenting skills is that most parents have exactly 0 of them. you have one of two choices: one, let them have children and accept that the world is full of terrible parents that lead to terrible humans. two, don't let them have children and break pretty much every human rights convention ever. you should, however, not go and blame whatever industry is popualr at that time for the lack of parenting skills that parents dont have.
i dont know what most parents would agree on, i dont prognoze personal opinions, but to claim i dont know anything if i am not a parent is simply stupid and shows your lack of understanding. I have a 5 year old sister, i know how parenting works, possibly better than most parents, yet i am not a parent.
your way of thinking is what makes the parents complain about thier games being teh devil because you know, one can just buy it, dont like it and then demand a compensation for emotional damage.

This isn't really anything new. If you get into a car accident because of a fault in your car, you can sue the manufacturer and if you can prove that the responsibility lies at them, you can get compensation. This case really isn't any different: Apple created a system where children are a part of the target customer group, and they didn't put up enough barriers to prevent children from accidentally purchasing stuff.

and if the fault occured due to your misuse of the car they will flip you off. Iphone follows the government set up security regulations and more. they have no responsibility to make it safer. they CAN, if they want to win the market share agaisnt those that dont, but there is no obligation.

Oh and just put this out of the way: the parents didn't "allow their kids". Apple did (by not implementing enough security). The parents were led to believe that conducting purchases would require a password entry when it didn't.

parents gave their kids the Iphone with thier password in it, therefore parents allowed thier kids acess to the account. it is SOLELY their fault for doing that. A thing with mobile phones is that they always remember everything. this can be useful for stuff like autolog into youtube, but not so for others (this case). thing is, they been doing that forever and only people that have been living under a rock dont know this yet. look, i use phone only for calls and SMS and even i know how its passwords work. if you think iphone is the only one to do this you are sadly mistaken.

Microsoft can get away with that because noone has been hurt (physically, emotionally or financially). Booting up a computer and not understanding how to configure it poses no risk to you out of the box. Even if you got a virus from simply connecting to the internet (which was common in early versions of Windows XP before Service Pack 2), that still wasn't something that was gonna do anything beyond wasting your time.

except destroy this computer you just bought and paid your 3 month salary for (thats how low salary is here). and yet everyone understood that if you decided to crash your computer, it was your own fault for not taking precautions. yet somehow now we shift the fault onto the corporations, because idiots will be idiots so we msut make everything idiot-proof.
there is a saying, fool and his money is soon parted, and it fits this situation perfectly.

This case is difference because here we have a situation were people did get hurt (financially), and the blame falls on Apple for not implementing the system in a kid-friendly way, even though the system is aimed towards kids.

apple has no responsibility to implement kids-friendly security for devices that are not meant for kids. the game creator that created specifically for kids could be blamed for not making a kids friendly way system, but them, didnt he really? what defines kids-friendly?

So, no one is pointing out that apple made millions from accidental purchases, and when parents went back to apple after seeing the bill asking for a refund over the mistake, they said, "No". And some of you are actually okay with that...really?

so if i go to market and purchase shoes, but turns out i didnt want them (yet i still used them), should i get a refund? no. actually, shoes can even be returned, this game item cant.
i think the whole american "Refund" culture has gone WAY out of hand. people watch a movie and demand refund if they didnt like it, how crazy can you get?

 

[Vegosiux]

apple has no responsibility to implement kids-friendly security for devices that are not meant for kids.

How about "devices that can be expected to come in contact with kids"? I mean, while it's true that a kid shouldn't operate a blender, there's still the need for some kid-friendly security on blenders.

Yes, I get it, smug superiority feels good; and paernting these days is terrible. But that doesn't mean Apple are some kind of saints.

 

[Strazdas]

apple has no responsibility to implement kids-friendly security for devices that are not meant for kids.

How about "devices that can be expected to come in contact with kids"? I mean, while it's true that a kid shouldn't operate a blender, there's still the need for some kid-friendly security on blenders.

Yes, I get it, smug superiority feels good; and paernting these days is terrible. But that doesn't mean Apple are some kind of saints.

Drugs can also come in contact with kids, its parents responsibility to not let them. same for any other device. Apple is no sait, far from it, i hate Apple for many reasons and i will never buy their products. Still, this does not mean i think these parents should be suing apple for thier own lack of parenting.

Capcha: moot point
it agrees with me, now that i got capcha on my side, next step is to rule the world.

 

[flarty]

Using an iPhone/iPad/iPod/etc sure is a good way to pacify kids, but that doesn't mean that it's the only way. Using them as personal babysitters is what gets us riled. It's common knowledge that an iPhone can vacuum money out of your pocket if you aren't careful.

The iPhone, (and by extension, every "new" iteration of the smartphone) is an awesome tool. But like I said earlier: "Anyone can buy a chainsaw, but idiots will cut their legs off."

Your right it isn't the only way to pacify children. But when out and about a mobile device is the most convenient and something everyone is bound to have on them.What if it was a complete stranger that managed to make the purchases due to apples flawed purchasing system? what would your stance be then? Unfortunately for these individuals it was there children which means people like you can reign down upon the internet with your self righteous views about parenting even though you do not even know how or when these purchase took place.

I work in a timber ward where we use chainsaws, i wasn't allowed to touch them until trained. Same for when i hired one, the hie company had to train me even though i already knew how to use one.

Funny pic though. =/

Ah, conformity, service i used before does this so therefore ill assume this new service must do it as well.

I take it that you cant name one other company that carries out transactions like apple? If that's the case i think people are more than justified to think that unless it is brought to their attention. What if it was a complete stranger that managed to make the purchases due to apples flawed purchasing system? what would your stance be then? Unfortunately for these individuals it was there children which means people like you can reign down upon the internet with your self righteous views about parenting even though you do not even know how or when these purchase took place.

You dont need to experience parenting to know what it is like. thats a false assumtion. Yes, a rape victim should first of all udnerstand the reason behind the crime. im not saying she should be happy about it, but going on a rage of "devil raped me burn him at the stake" is not a logical way to go about it.
The problem with parenting skills is that most parents have exactly 0 of them. you have one of two choices: one, let them have children and accept that the world is full of terrible parents that lead to terrible humans. two, don't let them have children and break pretty much every human rights convention ever. you should, however, not go and blame whatever industry is popualr at that time for the lack of parenting skills that parents dont have.
i dont know what most parents would agree on, i dont prognoze personal opinions, but to claim i dont know anything if i am not a parent is simply stupid and shows your lack of understanding. I have a 5 year old sister, i know how parenting works, possibly better than most parents, yet i am not a parent.
your way of thinking is what makes the parents complain about thier games being teh devil because you know, one can just buy it, dont like it and then demand a compensation for emotional damage.

I couldn't even be bothered to read all of this. Your still using the horrible rape analogy then even going as far to insinuate you understand why people rape.
Then say most parents have 0 parenting skills, really please present me with the evidence for this, have you carried out a survey across several demographics? may we all see this please?
You seem to just be spouting rubbish as if you know everything about anything. I'm guessing your in your teens.
You'll understand when your older and if you ever have children of your own.
Until then i bid you good day and farewell and leave you to jump on the next topic you believe you have some wonderful insight too.

 

[Strazdas]

What if it was a complete stranger that managed to make the purchases due to apples flawed purchasing system? what would your stance be then? Unfortunately for these individuals it was there children which means people like you can reign down upon the internet with your self righteous views about parenting even though you do not even know how or when these purchase took place.

Why would you give your iphone to complete stranger? Yes it is bloody well your fault if you gave your phone to stranger to buy sutff on. If it was stolen, then it is the fault of the person who stole it, but iphone remembers the passwrod for 15 minutes (or so been siad in this thread) so the chacnes of thief using such features within 15 minutes of theft is not that high to begin with.

I couldn't even be bothered to read all of this. Your still using the horrible rape analogy then even going as far to insinuate you understand why people rape.
Then say most parents have 0 parenting skills, really please present me with the evidence for this, have you carried out a survey across several demographics? may we all see this please?
You seem to just be spouting rubbish as if you know everything about anything. I'm guessing your in your teens.
You'll understand when your older and if you ever have children of your own.
Until then i bid you good day and farewell and leave you to jump on the next topic you believe you have some wonderful insight too.

The rape analogy may nto be the best one, i admit. i do probably know better why people rape than most due to reasons i cant name on public forums. not that thats the topic anyway.
the things raging from beating the children to this [http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-02/baby-left-on-roof-of-car/55349990/1] prives this already. there were studies conducting family relations and the results were horrifying amount of people needing family counceling. sorry, i dont remember every link i read, im sure we both can use google at same competence.
I dont know everything about anything. far from it, i dont know a lot and are cosntantly trying to learn. you wont see me raging in, say, a car thread, im not itnerested in cars (most of my car knowledge comes from Top Gear, so thats pretty much void). but i liek discussing things im interested in, and parents responsibility happens to be one of them. not that it matters in my opinion, but for the record, i am 23.

 

[Athinira]

and if the fault occured due to your misuse of the car they will flip you off. Iphone follows the government set up security regulations and more. they have no responsibility to make it safer. they CAN, if they want to win the market share agaisnt those that dont, but there is no obligation.

If there is no obligation, then why did Apple lose the case? )

parents gave their kids the Iphone with thier password in it, therefore parents allowed thier kids acess to the account.

The parents didn't give their kids the password. They entered the password to purchase the app, and assumed that the password entry wouldn't carry over to the app they just purchased once they left the App Store-app.

'Reasonably' assumed i might add.

A thing with mobile phones is that they always remember everything. this can be useful for stuff like autolog into youtube, but not so for others (this case).

Uh, no.

You are confusing 'logging in' with a 'password confirmation'. Those two are not the same, and in close to all cases (yes on mobile phones too), password confirmation is NOT remembered unless you check a 'remember me' checkbox, and it certainly doesn't carry over from one app to another. Why the hell do you think it's called confirmation to begin with, genius? )

It's standard for mobile phones to remember that you've logged in, but not that you've confirmed your password beyond the application that you're using.

In fact, Apple themself confuse users this way by including a 'Don't ask for my password next time' button in iTunes when you purchase stuff. So in iTunes, you can check so it remembers your password. On iOS it automatically remembers (or rather, remembered) your password without asking nor warning you about it, and even allowed the password to carry over to a different app. Not very smart.

thing is, they been doing that forever and only people that have been living under a rock dont know this yetw.

Once again, wrong.

First of all, referring to my iTunes example in my last paragraph, they haven't been doing this forever. Purchasing through iTunes or through iOS is essentially two windows to the same function, yet they work differently.

Second - and more importantly - in-app purchases HAVE NOT existed forever either. All of these accidental purchases that Apple is now reimbursing happened shortly after in-app purchases were implemented. It was an entirely new system, so your claim that this has existed forever is false.

except destroy this computer you just bought and paid your 3 month salary for (thats how low salary is here).

Except that crashing your computer doesn't destroy it. One quick Windows reinstall and you're back in business.

Also, there is the added factor of an evil entity (aka. an attacker). If you ccould get financially damaged as a result of pure carelessness on Microsofts part, then you would actually be able to sue Microsoft, but if you get sabotaged by a third party (and yes, a virus IS sabotage), then Microsoft can't take the blame because it might be impossible to defend against sabotage from an attacker. You can't sue a car manufacturer either if your car was deliberately sabotaged by someone else.

In Apples case, there is no attacker or third party to be blamed. Just plain and simple carelessness in implementation.

apple has no responsibility to implement kids-friendly security for devices that are not meant for kids. the game creator that created specifically for kids could be blamed for not making a kids friendly way system, but them, didnt he really? what defines kids-friendly?

Apple does by allowing those apps on the App Store in the first place. If Apple wanted, they could bar kids games from the App Store (similarly to how they bar anything involving porn) and then argue that these things were never intended for kids. But they don't.

Also, saying these devices are not for kids is also false. This is 2013, and kids ARE going to be using these devices, both in the future and now. Pretty soon they will be in almost every place, including kindergardens. As i have mentioned earlier in this thread, even cats can use iPads [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaif2uq_0Vc]. There is nothing that says or indicates that these devices aren't for kids and cannot be used by kids (to play, to learn, to be entertained, take your pick).

So in short, most of your arguments are as full of holes as this cheese [http://media.onsugar.com/files/upl0/1/15259/03_2008/cheesegrater.jpg].

 

[Strazdas]

and if the fault occured due to your misuse of the car they will flip you off. Iphone follows the government set up security regulations and more. they have no responsibility to make it safer. they CAN, if they want to win the market share agaisnt those that dont, but there is no obligation.

If there is no obligation, then why did Apple lose the case? )

there can be many reasons, inadequate local law, inadequate judge, apple wanting to pretende nice and many many other reasons, including the majority thinking this is the way it should be (which does not make it the optimal one though).

The parents didn't give their kids the password. They entered the password to purchase the app, and assumed that the password entry wouldn't carry over to the app they just purchased once they left the App Store-app.

'Reasonably' assumed i might add.

assumed.

You are confusing 'logging in' with a 'password confirmation'.

and you stopped needing password to log in when?

Except that crashing your computer doesn't destroy it. One quick Windows reinstall and you're back in business.

there are worse things than crashing. i remember back when CDs were new one woman called and said ther her "disk drive" doesnt work. turns otu she has put a floppy disc in there. im not evne talking about the obviuos virus overheating and burning MB things. remember the Chernobyl virus that managed to burn over 100.000 PCs in one day?

Apple does by allowing those apps on the App Store in the first place. If Apple wanted, they could bar kids games from the App Store (similarly to how they bar anything involving porn) and then argue that these things were never intended for kids. But they don't.

allowing your third party application suppliers to create games suited for kids does not turns the device to be meant for kids.

[quoet]Also, saying these devices are not for kids is also false. This is 2013, and kids ARE going to be using these devices, both in the future and now. [/quote]
personally i hope noone woudl use an apple device but thats biased. kids should not be allowed to use these devices until they know how to properly use them, and that responsibility falls on parents.
so, since cats can use them, should i sue apple because my cat scratched the glass?

Capcha: case closed
i seriuosly dobut your accuracy capcha.

 

[Athinira]

there can be many reasons, inadequate local law, inadequate judge, apple wanting to pretende nice and many many other reasons, including the majority thinking this is the way it should be (which does not make it the optimal one though).

The optimal way is that the party in the best position to mitigate a risk is financially responsible for the lapses that happens.

In this case, Apple is in the best position to protect since they design the system and can implement safety-measures.

assumed.

Reasonably assumed.

and you stopped needing password to log in when?

* <--- The point

O <--- Your head.

Standard measure is that login information can be remembered and carry over, but password confirmation doesn't.

there are worse things than crashing. i remember back when CDs were new one woman called and said ther her "disk drive" doesnt work. turns otu she has put a floppy disc in there. im not evne talking about the obviuos virus overheating and burning MB things. remember the Chernobyl virus that managed to burn over 100.000 PCs in one day?

Yes, but that's the exception rather than the rule. And the part of my post you left out with viruses being deliberate sabotage still holds true. The amount of protection you can provide against an attacker is limited, no matter how good your security is. But in this case there are no attacker. Only bad security implementation.

allowing your third party application suppliers to create games suited for kids does not turns the device to be meant for kids.

When you control 100% who gets to supply apps to the app-store or not, then yes it does.

iOS is not like Windows. On Windows, you can install ANY application that ANYONE has written. In iOS, Apple clears every application before it hits the App Store. Hell, they even clear updates to applications. Apple is 100% in control, and by selectively allowing kid applications there, they are marketing their devices for kids.

personally i hope noone woudl use an apple device but thats biased. kids should not be allowed to use these devices until they know how to properly use them, and that responsibility falls on parents.

Yes they should. Again, welcome to 2013. This IS how the world is going to be.

Using a tablet or smartphone is a learning experience if you're new to it, no matter if you're 3, 13 or 30 years old.

The companies that sell us these devices is selling us the future. And as mentioned, it only makes sense for the party in the best position to mitigate the risk to be financially responsible for it. That's how you achieve good security in this world. You want an example, check the history of credit card fraud. Originally credit card companies weren't liable for fraud (customers were), and security was sh*t because they didn't care. Then congress passed laws that made the companies liable, and suddenly they couldn't trip over each other fast enough to actually secure their damned systems against the simplest of frauds. As a result, credit card security is really good today (automatic blocks if large sums are used in a short timespan, 24/7 revocation service for stolen/lost cards, secure network audits), and fraud only happens if users grossly misjudge card safety.

You are basically taking an "educating the user" stand, something i will remind you isn't even working with adults when it relates to IT-security, so how on earth you expect children to learn this is beyond me when even grownups fail at doing it. I can't even teach my mother, who is a 10+ years computer user, how to secure her PC. How do i teach a 4 year old again? )

There is a limit to what parents can teach kids. Just like everyone else, kids need to learn by doing. There ISN'T, however, a limit to how many security measures Apple can implement. They are actively profiting on selling these devices, and therefore it's their responsibility to secure them against the simplest of mistakes. I don't expect them to provide 100% security, but what they did here was simply dumb, and the staggering amount of cases there has been more or less proves it. If there had only been 2-3 cases, then you might argue that these were incredibly stupid parents. But we have cases in the thousands here.