Apple to Pay $100 Million For Unauthorized App Purchases

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Apple to Pay $100 Million For Unauthorized App Purchases

image

Kids are off the hook as Apple reimburses parents.

Apple has agreed to pay out as much as $100 million to customers involved in a class action lawsuit regarding in-app purchases made by minors. The suit alleges that the company's in-app purchasing restrictions were lax enough that youngsters were able to purchase game credits and other virtual items without their parents authorization.

Currently, in-app purchases from the App Store require users to re-enter their account password before paying, but that wasn't always the case. Older versions of Apple's iOS mobile operating system allowed users to authorize a download from the app store and then make authorization-free purchases for the following 15 minutes as a means of convenience. This led to children racking up dozens and dozens of purchases without their elders' knowledge.

According to the settlement, Apple will notify as many as 23 million customers who are eligible for the settlement, and credits will be applied to their accounts. For those claiming over $30 worth of reimbursement, cash refunds will be made available.

Source: Reuters

Permalink

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.

Legion:
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?

Well, you kinda have to also realize that quite of few of these Apple Store games are easy to use, colorful, cheery, bubbly and totally designed to drain every last cent you have. Let me put it this way if a kid could use an atm, using their parent's card that they see them use alot, without entering a password. They would use all that money on junk food. 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. :P

Devoneaux:

Legion:
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?

Not the people who give their kids access to the apps store after they authorized purchases.

Aren't some games specifically designed around 'pay-to-win' in app purchases?

And that these games are specifically targeted at children?

I'm just saying that there's no corporate responsibility because Apple says it's up to the developers/publishers who then say it's Apple's job to verify their design decisions.

DVS BSTrD:

Devoneaux:

Legion:
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?

Not the people who give their kids access to the apps store after they authorized purchases.

Have you used an iphone? It used to be as easy as a kid asking if the parent to put in their password and then the kid can purchase things ingame without actually going to the app store for the next 15 minutes. Parents aren't perfect, they're often quite stressed out and make mistakes. Apple shouldn't profit from that.

Dogstile:

DVS BSTrD:

Devoneaux:

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?

Not the people who give their kids access to the apps store after they authorized purchases.

Have you used an iphone? It used to be as easy as a kid asking if the parent to put in their password and then the kid can purchase things ingame without actually going to the app store for the next 15 minutes. Parents aren't perfect, they're often quite stressed out and make mistakes. Apple shouldn't profit from that.

True, but it's still the parent's own damn fault for not realizing they've allowed their kids to spend real money. It's no less irresponsible than not checking ESRB ratings on actual videogames. I don't think they should be let off the hook completely. Reimbursement is alright but there should be some kind of penalty.

DVS BSTrD:

Dogstile:

DVS BSTrD:
Not the people who give their kids access to the apps store after they authorized purchases.

Have you used an iphone? It used to be as easy as a kid asking if the parent to put in their password and then the kid can purchase things ingame without actually going to the app store for the next 15 minutes. Parents aren't perfect, they're often quite stressed out and make mistakes. Apple shouldn't profit from that.

True, but it's still the parent's own damn fault for not realizing they've allowed their kids to spend real money. It's no less irresponsible than not checking ESRB ratings on actual videogames. I don't think they should be let off the hook completely. Reimbursement is alright but there should be some kind of penalty.

Why? Its not as if Apple made it clear. They don't bring up a notice and its not a feature that is often talked about. This is one of the first (if not the first) time its been easy enough to do on this scale with phones and apple had told nobody, except the users who experimented with it.

Dogstile:

DVS BSTrD:

Dogstile:

Have you used an iphone? It used to be as easy as a kid asking if the parent to put in their password and then the kid can purchase things ingame without actually going to the app store for the next 15 minutes. Parents aren't perfect, they're often quite stressed out and make mistakes. Apple shouldn't profit from that.

True, but it's still the parent's own damn fault for not realizing they've allowed their kids to spend real money. It's no less irresponsible than not checking ESRB ratings on actual videogames. I don't think they should be let off the hook completely. Reimbursement is alright but there should be some kind of penalty.

Why? Its not as if Apple made it clear. They don't bring up a notice and its not a feature that is often talked about. This is one of the first (if not the first) time its been easy enough to do on this scale with phones and apple had told nobody, except the users who experimented with it.

That's why I'm saying they should pay attention to what their kids are doing, especially with a function that allows them to spend real money. Take some time to find out what the hell goes on in that game before you let it raise your child.

DVS BSTrD:

Dogstile:

DVS BSTrD:
Not the people who give their kids access to the apps store after they authorized purchases.

Have you used an iphone? It used to be as easy as a kid asking if the parent to put in their password and then the kid can purchase things ingame without actually going to the app store for the next 15 minutes. Parents aren't perfect, they're often quite stressed out and make mistakes. Apple shouldn't profit from that.

True, but it's still the parent's own damn fault for not realizing they've allowed their kids to spend real money. It's no less irresponsible than not checking ESRB ratings on actual videogames. I don't think they should be let off the hook completely. Reimbursement is alright but there should be some kind of penalty.

No it's not.

Traditional HCI procedure is that if you want something to remember you password, you have to check a "Remember my password" box.

Apple didn't put up such a box. They just assumed that the user wanted to remember the password (for 15 minutes), didn't warn about the fact that you can purchase absolutely anything you want for 15 minutes after inputting the password - not just in the App Store, but also inside the apps themselves - and the result is what we see today. Given that 'Remember my password' is pretty much everywhere else, even IT-experts could have been fooled by this because it's not something you would normally expect (i bet that there is in fact a lot of IT-savy parents amongst those who fell for this). And if IT-savy people can fall for it, how the hell do you expect the normal user to stand a chance? :o)

I believe that most parents, since there wasn't a 'Remember my password' (or 'Keep me logged in', take your pick) box when entering their password, expected the device to not allow purchases after they quote-and-quote 'shut down' the App Store-app (although technically it's only minimized). At the very least, it's certainly NOT an unreasonable expectation that the password shouldn't be remembered across apps without explicit permission (so that once you exit the App Store, and enter an app with In-App Purchases, it should request the password again because it's a different App).

I'm sorry, but I'm with the parents on this one. I've been thinkering with IT for 19 years of my life (I'm 25), and i believe that if I had a kid, even i could have been fooled by this. And i believe the same thing about you :-)

Edit:

That's why I'm saying they should pay attention to what their kids are doing, especially with a function that allows them to spend real money. Take some time to find out what the hell goes on in that game before you let it raise your child.

This argument bothers me also.

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.

iPads are no different. Kids who grow up now is going to be using that stuff both as they grow up and when thwey're grown up, and it doesn't make sense that they shouldn't learn it at home just because their parents aren't good at this.

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. Parents need to be able to hand their kids stuff like this - even if they don't understand it - because they kids are going to use these devices in their lives (at school, at work, future home, and their childhood home is no exception), and it should be safe for them to do so. Yes if they hand the kid the password to purchase they're morons (and some parents probably do that), but parents who doesn't hand the kids their passwords shouldn't be fearing this.

And I'm glad that Apple changed their policy.

Athinira:

DVS BSTrD:

Dogstile:

Have you used an iphone? It used to be as easy as a kid asking if the parent to put in their password and then the kid can purchase things ingame without actually going to the app store for the next 15 minutes. Parents aren't perfect, they're often quite stressed out and make mistakes. Apple shouldn't profit from that.

True, but it's still the parent's own damn fault for not realizing they've allowed their kids to spend real money. It's no less irresponsible than not checking ESRB ratings on actual videogames. I don't think they should be let off the hook completely. Reimbursement is alright but there should be some kind of penalty.

No it's not.

Traditional HCI procedure is that if you want something to remember you password, you have to check a "Remember my password" box.

Apple didn't put up such a box. They just assumed that the user wanted to remember the password (for 15 minutes), didn't warn about the fact that you can purchase absolutely anything you want for 15 minutes after inputting the password - not just in the App Store, but also inside the apps themselves - and the result is what we see today. Given that 'Remember my password' is pretty much everywhere else, even IT-experts could have been fooled by this because it's not something you would normally expect (i bet that there is in fact a lot of IT-savy parents amongst those who fell for this). And if IT-savy people can fall for it, how the hell do you expect the normal user to stand a chance? :o)

I believe that most parents, since there wasn't a 'Remember my password' (or 'Keep me logged in', take your pick) box when entering their password, expected the device to not allow purchases after they quote-and-quote 'shut down' the App Store-app (although technically it's only minimized). At the very least, it's certainly NOT an unreasonable expectation that the password shouldn't be remembered across apps without explicit permission (so that once you exit the App Store, and enter an app with In-App Purchases, it should request the password again because it's a different App).

I'm sorry, but I'm with the parents on this one. I've been thinkering with IT for 19 years of my life (I'm 25), and i believe that if I had a kid, even i could have been fooled by this. And i believe the same thing about you :-)

See my previous post. I'm not saying it wasn't a bad idea to begin with, but weither or not I could have been fooled by this (yes I could have) doesn't mean it wasn't still careless on my part.

DVS BSTrD:

Dogstile:

DVS BSTrD:
True, but it's still the parent's own damn fault for not realizing they've allowed their kids to spend real money. It's no less irresponsible than not checking ESRB ratings on actual videogames. I don't think they should be let off the hook completely. Reimbursement is alright but there should be some kind of penalty.

Why? Its not as if Apple made it clear. They don't bring up a notice and its not a feature that is often talked about. This is one of the first (if not the first) time its been easy enough to do on this scale with phones and apple had told nobody, except the users who experimented with it.

That's why I'm saying they should pay attention to what their kids are doing, especially with a function that allows them to spend real money. Take some time to find out what the hell goes on in that game before you let it raise your child.

But they're not letting it raise their child, these are normal kids given a game to play and pressing on the shiny buttons. Hell, my 9 year old brother is allowed on my iphone to play games and if I hadn't decided to buy two apps in a row, I wouldn't have realised that the system allowed you to do that.

This is a less "oh, the parents are idiots and didn't test it out" and more "unless you test it out in a select way, its actually quite hard to realise it does that".

DVS BSTrD:
See my previous post. I'm not saying it wasn't a bad idea to begin with, but weither or not I could have been fooled by this (yes I could have) doesn't mean it wasn't still careless on my part.

See my previous post too, i edited in a big section (you just replied too fast).

Basically my point is that not all parents are IT-savy. Some of them simply don't know jack sh*t about IT, but they shouldn't be afraid to give IT-stuff to their kids because of that, for the simple reason that this is the future and their kids will live in that world.

Society is specialized. We all have our areas of expertise, and for many people of the old world, IT simply isn't one of them. Manufacturers have a responsibility to make this stuff relatively safe to use, even if the buyer is an idiot.

Captcha: "badger, mushroom" <-- Well played!

Legion:
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.

DVS BSTrD:

That's why I'm saying they should pay attention to what their kids are doing, especially with a function that allows them to spend real money. Take some time to find out what the hell goes on in that game before you let it raise your child.

Well guess who hasn't got kids everyone.

But seriously, parents letting iPhone games raise their children? Lets think about how this might occur. Parent leaves house to do adult things that need to be done (for example open a new bank account because their current bank sucks donkey balls). Oh dear the child doesn't think the bank is such a fun place to be for 30 minutes while their parent isn't giving them their full attention. Child starts to annoy parent while they are trying to concentrate on filling out forms or talking to a member of staff. Quick solution to the problem download an app and let the child play whilst you get the chore out the way.

I'm guessing you've never been in a car with a screaming child in the back either. Theirs been times when i would of happily gave my daughter full access to my googleplay account if it meant she would be quiet whilst i was driving. Think about what you say before you criticise a certain demographic in which you obviously have no experience in.

image

bottom line

technology: humans can't handle it

flarty:

Well guess who hasn't got kids everyone.

But seriously, parents letting iPhone games raise their children? Lets think about how this might occur. Parent leaves house to do adult things that need to be done (for example open a new bank account because their current bank sucks donkey balls). Oh dear the child doesn't think the bank is such a fun place to be for 30 minutes while their parent isn't giving them their full attention. Child starts to annoy parent while they are trying to concentrate on filling out forms or talking to a member of staff. Quick solution to the problem download an app and let the child play whilst you get the chore out the way.

I'm guessing you've never been in a car with a screaming child in the back either. Theirs been times when i would of happily gave my daughter full access to my googleplay account if it meant she would be quiet whilst i was driving. Think about what you say before you criticise a certain demographic in which you obviously have no experience in.

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.

Thereby proving yet again that, in todays world, your mistakes are only your fault when you can't find someone other than you to blame them on.

Legion:

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.

This'll put a dent in the "we're gonna buy samsung" fund... lol no it wont

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

Devoneaux:

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.

Negatempest:
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. :P

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.

Athinira:

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.

flarty:

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.

flarty:

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.

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.

Traun:
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.

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).

Strazdas:
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? :o)

-

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.

Strazdas:
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.

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?

Strazdas:

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.

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.

Athinira:
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[1]-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.

flarty:

Legion:
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.

image

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."

[1] 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.

Devoneaux:

Legion:
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.

thesilentman:
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.

thesilentman:
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.

thesilentman:
...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.

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. -_-

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.

flarty:

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?

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.

Vegosiux:

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.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here