Apple Sued Over Moisture Sensor in iPhone

[Jeff Campbell]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.cultofmac.com/californian-woman-sues-apple-over-faulty-iphone-moisture-sensors/39132?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+cultofmac/bFow+(Cult+of+Mac)' target='_blank'>http://www.cultofmac.com/california...w+(Cult+of+Mac)</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Inside every iPhone is a moisture sensor: a small dot of liquid-sensitive material that turns bright pink if the iPhone's insides have been exposed to being submerged. It's the method Apple uses to protect itself from having to replace iPhones that clumsy customers have dropped in a puddle, their beer or a toilet."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1271771085.usr105634.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>The Californian woman claims in the lawsuit that&nbsp; <em>"As a result of Apple's improper application of the Liquid-Damage Exclusion, Apple sells [devices] with the intent to exclude them from the warranty coverage Apple promises consumers it will provide-even when consumers pay extra for Extended Warranty coverage-simply because their Liquid Submersion Indicator has been triggered, without any attempt by Apple to verify whether the Class Devices actually have been damaged as a result of submersion or immersion in liquid." </em>The reason for the moisture indicators is to determine if they have been exposed to moisture so isn't that verification? Not enough according to the lawsuit, it appears she also wants another verification done to make sure the indicator isn't faulty. It doesn't sound unreasonable to me, especially since there have been <a href="http://www.cultofmac.com/the-tropics-may-be-too-humid-for-apples-iphone/13571" target="_blank">other complaints</a> that these are too sensitive and could be faulty. What are your thoughts?</p>

[ptyork]

High humidity or even a single rain drop can get into the headphone jack (the location of the sensor--not even a place where moisture can enter the actual phone) and will trigger the moisture indicator. Undoubtedly it was placed there to make it easy for black glasses and goatee wearing "geniuses" to yell "NO SOUP FOR YOU" without actually having to do any work. But the reality is that it is most certainly worthy of a law suit. It should have been enclosed in the case so as to provide an actual indication of water infiltration rather than just moisture exposure. And regardless of true intention, it sure is easy to claim that it was placed there to reduce the number of warranty claims that it would have to service. Don't know whether the courts will agree, but if I were the judge...

[Jeff Campbell]

When even reports of high humidity will activate that sensor, I'd have to agree with you that a lawsuit seems the right way to go :)