Samsung in Hot Water Over Splashy Australian Phone Ads (reuters.com) 57
Australia's consumer watchdog has sued Samsung's Australian unit for allegedly misleading consumers by promoting water-resistant Galaxy smartphones as suitable to use in swimming pools and the surf. From a report: The world's largest smartphone maker did not know or sufficiently test the effects of pool or saltwater exposure on its phones when ads showed them fully submerged, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) lawsuit says. The case is the first filed by a major regulator and could result in multi-million dollar fines. It centers on more than 300 advertisements in which Samsung showed its Galaxy phones being used at the bottom of swimming pools and in the ocean. "The ACCC alleges Samsung's advertisements falsely and misleadingly represented Galaxy phones would be suitable for use in, or for exposure to, all types of water ... when this was not the case," ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said in a statement on Thursday. Samsung said it stood by its advertising, complied with Australian law and would defend the case.
Bending (Score:4, Funny)
Try bending the display under water.
IP68 (Score:3)
If they say the phone is IP68 certified, then it means the warranty should cover water damage. As long as you don't go deeper than 1.5m or for more than 30 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
IP rated doesn't mean warranty covered by water. It only means that when the factory tests them there should be no water ingress. There's no telling what happens to the poor devices under normal use.
"You told me the phone was IP rated!"
"Sir the phone has a large shattered front screen and part of the corner has snapped off."
"IIII PPPPPPP rated! "
Re: (Score:3)
IP rated doesn't mean warranty covered by water.
I know. IP has nothing to do with warranty. I am just saying that this is deceptive marketing to claim a product is IP68 rated if you don't cover any water damage, including those that would result in using the product under the limits set by the IP rating.
It only means that when the factory tests them there should be no water ingress. There's no telling what happens to the poor devices under normal use.
No. It means the phone *must* sustain 1.5m water for 30 minutes, period. That means that the phone *should* survive 3 meters for 3h, or oven more but you can't be sure. However it *must* survive 1.5m. Otherwise they cheated the test, or your particular un
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know about other jurisdictions, but in Australia it most certainly does have something to do with warranty. If you say on the box you device works in conditions X and it is has a 3 year warranty, then it breaks nominally because you were using it in X within that 3 year period - then it's covered.
In Australia you are not allowed to lie or put unjustified claims on the box, period. In practice you can get away with a few complaints, but if that few turns i
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you're a major airline charging credit card surcharges.
Then you can do it for decades, before the ACCC politely asks you to stop breaking the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Things have to happen in a certain order. First you have to get the law changed [accc.gov.au] (it was passed in 2016), then you can ask people to stop breaking it.
But, yeah they are about as polite as a large government bureaucracy with big teeth can be. The ACCC's way of asking you to "stop breaking the law" is to issue an infringement notice saying you really must stop breaking your promises to customers, overcharging them or whatever is you are doing. And th
Re: (Score:2)
IP rated doesn't mean warranty covered by water. It only means that when the factory tests them there should be no water ingress.
Samsung tell us themselves what their IP68 rating means:
https://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/what-is/ip68/
That is quite specific about what it covers, and in Australia will most certainly be enforceable.
If Samsung are also show advertising usage in active salt water (surf) then their implied - and thus manufacturer approved usage under warranty - will be expanded to include this additional use.
Samsung would then be on the hook for any denied warranty claims that meet this expanded usage criteria.
Good luck
Re: (Score:3)
If they say the phone is IP68 certified, then it means the warranty should cover water damage. As long as you don't go deeper than 1.5m or for more than 30 minutes.
Well, you only will have to prove it. You also will have to prove that you didn't move it under water or dropped it into the water, because the 1.5m depth is actually a pressure limit and you can exceed this pressure not only by water depth but also by other means (like the phone splashing into the water or you moving it around under water quickly).
Apart from that you're right. But in reality IP68 doesn't mean much more than your phone can withstand getting wet.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you only will have to prove it.
just like you have to prove you didn't put your phone in the microwave if it stops working. Or didn't put it under 0C. Or didn't put it over 70 C. Or you know, all the stuff you don't have to do because otherwise the warranty wouldn't mean anything.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to prove any of that stuff, because if you send your phone back to be repaired it's very easy to tell if the damage was sustained due to capacitors exploding in the microwave, the LCD breaking apart due to freezing, or solder melting due to excessive heat.
Your warranty doesn't cover excluded events; and people who deal with electronics every day can generally tell what caused them to fail.
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not very easy. A defective component could do the exact same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
But in reality IP68 doesn't mean much more than your phone can withstand getting wet.
Right, you need to have water ratings considerably in excess of the exposure you expect to subject it to due to dynamic pressure effects, and to make sure the seals stay good after a few years of normal use. I buy wrist watches with 50 meter or 100 meter depth ratings, although all I do is wear it in the bath, at the beach, or in the pool. Don't have any water intrusion problems.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not an expert on Australian consumer law, but it seems to be similar to UK law, maybe even modded on it.
The fact that Samsung showed the phone being used in a swimming pool in their adverts, and that consumers would not be expected to know the precise meaning of the IP68 rating, means that a court would almost certainly side with the consumer.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That could be a point. Long exposure to salt may damage the phone. Although it's probably fine if not done frequently and if you rinse it afterwards.
But swimming in a lake should be 100% covered by the warranty. No salt, no chlorine.
Re: (Score:2)
And heavily chlorinated water. They show it being used in a pool in more than one ad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First, swimming in a lake is not covered, because it's moving water. The only thing that is covered is still water. It's IP 68 rated, which is dropping it into a freshwater pool 1.5 meters deep, and leaving it there for anywhere up to 30 minutes.
Samsung may (and probably will) still cover you, but if you read the warranty, swimming with your phone is not covered.
Salt water wasn't tested. (but it's probably covered by warranty)
Chlorine wasn't tested. (but it's probably covered by warranty)
Dropping your phone
Re: (Score:2)
BS. A lake is still water, just like a freshwater pool.
But IP68 also cover moving water: shower, hose, etc.
I bet they couldn't design a phone that can be certified IP68 but breaks if you move it gently in a lake, even if they wanted to.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about warranty, it's about it not breaking.
IP68 says that the device can be immersed in 1.5 meters of still water for 30 minutes and not sustain any damage. That is what the Galaxy does, and that is what the Galaxy has been tested to do.
Salt water causes problems, as does moving the phone around in the water. There's a big difference between dropping a phone into 1.5 meters of distilled water, and running into the surf (into salt water with waves) with your phone. This was what Samsung depicted in
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung don't have to test it in salt water. They can design the phone to survive in salt water if they want to.
They also didn't test if the phone can survive in pink pants and I'm sure they can.
In the end, what matters is if the warranty covers it or not. Manufacturing defect can happen. They don't put every single phone in the water to certify for IP68. It's possible a seal was badly applied. As long as they replace the phone for free under the warranty then it's fine to me.
Re: (Score:2)
If they say the phone is IP68 certified, then it means the warranty should cover water damage. As long as you don't go deeper than 1.5m or for more than 30 minutes.
The thing is, in Australia you're not simply permitted to lie in advertisements. If an advertisement shows a phone being taken into the surf, it is then assumed the phone is capable of remaining functional in the same conditions in real life. If it is not, that is considered deceptive advertising and we don't tolerate that in Australia.
This is why charlatans like vitamin pill companies are not allowed to call their products "health products" because that implied they are able to demonstrate a health bene
Re: (Score:2)
Not only Samsung lied in the advertisement, but they won't cover water damages even if the phone got damaged while in a fresh water bowl for less than 30 minutes.
In the surf? (Score:1)
Suitable to use in the surf? Is that english?
Yes, it is English. Thinking of thr verb? (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you thinking of the verb sense of "surf"?
Surf
noun
the swell of the sea that breaks upon a shore or upon shoals.
Btw if one is going to comment on someone's use of the English language, one may wish to properly capitalize the word "English".
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. What part don't you understand?
The water is fine! (Score:2)
Not the first case (Score:4, Informative)
This is not the first case the ACCC has filed against manufacturers claiming water resistant or waterproof devices and certainly won't be the last. I think the first was ACCC vs. Uniden back around 2006/2007, when Uniden claimed that their Atlantis 250 handheld VHF Marine radios were waterproof - something that led to life endangerment.
Wrong product! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Nah, I've looked at all of this, and I think they would useless, they will always explode at the wrong depth, see Murphy's Law.
The ACCC don't mess around. (Score:2)
While the ACCC don't hand out the sort of silly-money fines the European or American courts do, they don't mess around when it comes to consumer guarantees. You either comply with australian law or you stop trading.
If a product is advertised as water proof, then it damn well better be waterproof. The courts here tend not to recognize fineprint shenanigans as a valid proof that the purchaser actually agreed to it. (Remember, a contract is not the piece of paper, a contract is an agreement, the piece of paper