Friday, June 15, 2012

Apple sued after Time Capsule backup loses photos


A Surrey, B.C., man is suing the Apple computer company for $25,000 after his Time Capsule backup drive crashed, taking with it a year of photographs including those showing the birth of his first child.

In his suit filed in B.C.'s small claims court, Perminder Tung says he bought the Apple Time Capsule in June 2009 and used it to back up two MacBooks and an iPhone.

It failed last month, he alleges, and when he took it back to the Apple Store, he was told the data was lost and irretrievable.

Tung alleges he was also told at the store that the product had numerous issues related to defects in the design and the power supply.

He says he was told Apple had issued a recall notice for the Time Capsule, but his particular model was outside of the recall's time frame.

Tung, who is a lawyer, says he's since learned of many other Time Capsule failures, which have spawned online forums, a memorial register and dubious fix-it yourself videos.

In his claim, Tung is suing Apple Canada for just over $25,000 to replace the hardware and to compensate him for the loss of recorded memories like the birth of his first child.

"The defect with the Time Capsules, which invariably destroyed the stored data, amounts to a fundamental and total breach of contract. The alleged 'Time Capsule' did not encapsulate and protect the information it was intended to secure. The breach destroyed the workable character of the thing sold," says Tung in his claim.

Back up your backups
Apple Canada did not return calls from the CBC, but technology guru Tod Maffin says the suit is just proof computer users need to back up data multiple times.

"Really, it's incumbent on the user to protect their data, especially if that data is important from a business or a really personal point of view," says Maffin.

He notes that precious mementoes in life are no longer as durable as they once were.

"It used to be that the products we would make were industrial era, they were physical things, and increasingly in this information economy what we produce as a society doesn't exist in physical form."

"It exists in bits and bytes, so it is even more important that we use many of these services, some of which are even free these days, to back up your computer."


  1. How long after the warrantee expires should Apple be held accountable? Did he really think that any piece of hardware would last forever?

    And I don't see how the failure of the time capsule destroyed a year's worth of photos unless he was stupid enough to deliberately delete them from his main computer, thus relying solely on the ability to "go back in time" to retrieve them from the time capsule. Rule number one is never to have your data stored in a single place.

    What will happen if he wins this suit? How can any company guarantee a memory product and it's data indefinitely? Should an individual be absolved from personal responsibility?

  2. I can't believe there are actual pages like this. Sir, I don't think your site is going to change that fact that Apple is a dominant superpower in the computer/music industry. Additionally, I have tried many of their products (before I gave them judgement) and have to say that they have an impressive and sleek OS. Although it is not for me, I do not complain about how terrible their company is. If someone were to expose the many loopholes Windows has in its policies, Windows would lose so much business that it would go bankrupt. Don't act like Apple is a big, mean, bad company. This is America and this is capitalism. At the end of the day, all companies (Windows, Apple, Android) don't have a shit about you; they only give a shit about your money.

  3. This site is not designed to change anything about Apple's (so-called) power in the industry. There are many people out there that buy into the illusion that Apple is better because it's infallible. The simple fact is that it is not. Apple's software and hardware both have problems just like anything else. I've had people tell me, after looking at this site, that they had no idea Apple computers crashed and had viruses. Apple themselves recently changed their website because of the recent wake-up calls in the form of viruses. People should know that if they are going to spend that much more money, it doesn't always mean they are getting a better product. And if Android only cares about my money, why is the OS free?

  4. Apple products are not perfect, I'll agree. But a growing number of people are discovering that they are better than the competition, and worth every penny (at least for their own purposes).

    While there may be some people that have an unrealistically positive view of Apple, there are plenty of others who have still not shaken off the decades-old negative propaganda about Apple products being useless toys, incompatible with the mainstream and not long for this world. Some of the later folks are probably fans of this site.

    As for Android being free… Google is not a charity. They certainly make money off Android by licensing core apps to device makers, and by selling ads that appear on search results pages when people use the supplied web browser. Android is an investment Google hopes will keep it relevant as more computer use shifts from PCs to mobile devices.

  5. Apple has made a few pretty products in their time but the numbers I see don't show any significant increase in customer base. If anything I think that prices on the new Macbook BASE PRICE at $2200 will drive more people away. I know a few Mac owners that probably have the money to get one and have scoffed at the price. And as for Android being "relevant", since it's the dominant mobile OS what does that make Apple? Not relevant at all.

  6. The Macbook Pro Retina is expensive for sure. I personally couldn't justify one. But there are still plenty of other people with the money to buy these and I'm sure they will.

    I never said Google wasn't relevant, only that Android was created for that purpose. (It seems to be working). And please don't use the argument that superior number of units sold is the sole measure of relevance. Apple's profits and influence on the industry are disproportionally high because it is anything but irrelevant.