Apple is suing a recycling firm for $23 million, claiming it allegedly re-sold iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watches instead of breaking them down
- Apple is suing a Canadian recycling company called GEEP which it claims resold upwards of 100,000 iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watches instead of breaking them down.
- GEEP claims the theft of the devices was carried out by three “rogue” employees, and it wasn’t aware of it.
- Apple is unconvinced by the defence, claiming in its suit “GEEP’s officers and directors knew or ought to have known about the scheme.”
- Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.
Apple is suing a Canadian recycling company, claiming it re-sold upwards of 100,000 iPhones, iPads, and Apple watches.
The suit, reported by The Logic on Wednesday, was filed in January against Ontario-based recycling firm GEEP (Global Electric Electronic Processing). Apple contracted GEEP in 2014 to break down its products.
Apple noticed the missing devices after an audit of the warehouse, which revealed devices were being taken to parts of the building not covered by CCTV. It then ran a check on the serial numbers of all the devices it sent to GEEP and found roughly 18% were still active on carrier networks.
Apple claimed in the suit it sent that more than 530,000 iPhones, 25,000 iPads, and 19,200 Apple Watches to GEEP to be broken down between 2015 and 2017. Apple notes that some, not all of its devices connect to carrier networks, so the real figure of re-sold devices is likely to be higher.
The tech giant is suing GEEP for $31 million Canadian ($23 million USD) plus any money it made from allegedly re-selling devices.
“Products sent for recycling are no longer adequate to sell to consumers and if they are rebuilt with counterfeit parts they could cause serious safety issues, including electrical or
Apple is suing former recycling partner GEEP Canada — now a part of Quantum Lifecycle Partners — for allegedly stealing and reselling at least 103,845 iPhones, iPads and Watches that it was hired to disassemble. “At least 11,766 pounds of Apple devices left GEEP’s premises without being destroyed – a fact that GEEP itself confirmed,” reads a portion of Apple’s complaint, as reported by The Logic (via AppleInsider).
Apple sent the recycling firm over 500,000 iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watches between January 2015 and December 2017, according to The Logic’s report. When Apple did an audit, it discovered 18 percent of those devices were still accessing the internet through cellular networks. That 18 percent doesn’t count Apple devices without a cellular radio, so it’s possible an even higher percentage of the gadgets were resold.
Apple seeks to obtain at least $31 million Canadian dollars (roughly $22.7 million USD) from its former partner. The recycling firm denies all wrongdoing, but it doesn’t deny there was a theft — it has reportedly filed a third-party suit claiming three employees stole the devices on their own behalf. Apple disagrees, arguing that these employees were in fact senior management at the recycling firm, according to The Logic.
Last year, humans left behind a record amount of e-waste adding up to 53.6 million metric tons of discarded phones, computers, appliances, and other gadgets. Like other tech companies, Apple has been trying to improve its environmental practices, including an effort to move recycling in-house with its own disassembly robots Daisy and Dave, which are designed to recover iPhone components that traditional recyclers can’t.
However, the company still relies on other partners to recover valuable material from
Back in January, medical device company Masimo levied a lawsuit against Apple, accusing the company of stealing trade secrets and improperly using Masimo inventions related to health monitoring in the Apple Watch.
Masimo is known for its pulse oximetry devices, and Apple just recently debuted the Apple Watch Series 6 with blood oxygen monitoring capabilities. Following the launch of the Series 6, Masimo has accused Apple of attempting to delay the legal proceedings in order to sell more watches and gain a more dominant share of the smart watch market.
As highlighted by Bloomberg, Apple has not officially responded to the original January lawsuit, instead filing requests to dismiss the trade secret part of the case and to have Masimo patents invalidated. Apple has asked the trial court to put the case on hold until the patent issue is resolved, which could take a significant amount of time.
Apple told the court that delaying the case until a patent review will narrow the issues and “reduce wasted resources.” With no hold, the first hearing on the case will take place in April 2021.
According to Masimo, the potential postponement would allow Apple to “seize on a critical window of opportunity to capture an emerging field,” using its “considerable resources and ecosystem” to capture market share with no regard for Masimo patent technology.
Masimo CEO Joe Kiani said in the filing that Masimo believes Apple’s customers see the Series 6 as a “medical product,” which can “harm consumers” and “reduce [Masimo’s] opportunities to sell truly clinical-grade products to consumers.”
Masimo accused Apple of stealing secret information by pretending to have a working relationship with Masimo and then poaching Masimo employees. Masimo also believes that Apple is infringing on 10 Masimo patents, and says that Apple relied on Masimo technology when
An unusual school year has started in earnest, and with it has come the return of digital proctoring programs. This is software that can lock down students’ computers, record their faces and scan their rooms, all with the intention to thwart cheating.
These programs, with names like ProctorU and Proctorio, first raised alarms about privacy as they were adopted by schools. Now many students are finding that the programs they’re required to use may not have been well-designed to consider race, class or disability — and in some cases, simply don’t work. Many are organizing on and across campuses for alternatives or for their eradication.
The rigidity of online proctoring has exacerbated an already difficult year, students say, further marginalizing them at the very moments they’re trying to prove themselves. Here are some things that can go wrong with testing and digital surveillance.
‘It Feels Like an Invasion of Privacy’
Before the pandemic, Sabrina Navarro, 20, a junior at California State University, Fullerton, hadn’t thought to register her chronic tic disorder with her university’s disability services office. The disorder, which she’d lived with since she was 6, hadn’t ever affected her education.
“I’m good at covering it up,” she said of her disorder. “A lot of my friends don’t even know that I have it.”
This semester, though, scared that her involuntary mouth movements would get her flagged for cheating, she went to get medical records to prove her diagnosis and request accommodations.
If the majority of her classes didn’t require Proctorio, this wouldn’t be a concern, she said.
But Ms. Navarro feared Proctorio would record her tics and send her professors footage for review. Ticcing happens more frequently for her during stressful situations, like an exam.
“Just the fact that professors might have access to seeing me ticcing, over