in ,

Apple fighting back in the lawsuit against Siri’s performance

Siri is a great invention, one of the best voice based virtual assistant there is, and Apple has done a good work on it. So, it has all the rights to brag about the work. And it indeed did brag about Siri in almost of its advertisements for the recently released iPhone 4S. The best thing about Apple advertisements are that they do not really talk about the hardware involved in their smart phones, instead, they talk about the cool new features they have included in the phone. For instant, the Siri on the iPhone 4S.

So the advertisements were very intense on Siri. The ads showed what all Siri could do, even though it could not do all those in real life. Whatever the technology it might have used and however advanced the algorithm might be, it is still artificial intelligence. So a lot of people bought this and they did not find it so convincing, the results of using Siri I mean. So a few people sued Apple over the performance of Siri.

Wall Street Journal writes:

Remember that ‘Rock God’ commercial? One of the plaintiffs claims he couldn’t replicate it. Another says that when he asked for directions to a certain place, or to locate a store, Siri either didn’t understand or, after a long time, responded with the wrong answer.

The Cupertino tech giant has hired the services of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP to fight the claims. Apple claims that the service might not be as advertised, but it is still in the beta stage. Apple says that it had given its customers an option to return the phone back in 30 days if they did not like the services, and they would get their money back. And nobody did. So when they were given the option to test the phone and confirm the validity of the ads, they did not think of it then and now they can not sue the company.

From Apple’s motion to dismiss:

They offer only general descriptions of Apple’s advertisements, incomplete summaries of Apple’s website materials, and vague descriptions of their alleged—and highly individualized—disappointment with Siri. Tellingly, although Plaintiffs claim they became dissatisfied with Siri’s performance “soon after” purchasing their iPhones, they made no attempt to avail themselves of Apple’s 30-day return policy or one-year warranty—which remains in effect. Instead, they seek to take an alleged personal grievance about the purported performance of a popular product and turn it into a nationwide class action under California’s consumer protection statutes. The Complaint does not come close to meeting the heavy burden necessary to sustain such claims.

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *

Google Music can now de-authorize only four devices

Samsung Galaxy SIII to get 2GB RAM in Japan