• On MovieTome: CAPTAIN AMERICA was in THE HULK?!?
August 20, 2008 10:00 PM PDT

Apple sued over iPhone 3G reception issues

Posted by Steven Musil
  • Font size
  • Print

A newly filed lawsuit claims the iPhone 3G's network is slower than promised.

(Credit: Apple)

An Alabama woman has filed a lawsuit against Apple, claiming the iPhone 3G's network is slower than advertised.

In a 10-page complaint filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for Northern Alabama, Birmingham resident Jessica Alena Smith charged Apple with breach of express and implied warranty and with unjust enrichment. Smith, who refers to the phone she purchased throughout the complaint as "Defective iPhone 3G," is seeking class action status.

The lawsuit claims that Apple's iPhone 3G advertising campaign is misleading.

"Defendant intended for customers to believe its statements and representations about the Defective iPhone 3Gs, and to trust that the device was 'twice as fast at half the price'," the lawsuit states.

The charges in the lawsuit mirror widespread complaints about the iPhone 3G's reception that have crisscrossed the Internet since Apple and AT&T released the successor to the original iPhone on July 11. Affected owners have said the iPhone 3G will switch between 3G networks and EDGE networks even when the device is sitting still and that they will lose reception in the middle of a call while in a 3G-rich environment.

"Immediately after purchase, plaintiff soon noticed that her Internet connection, receipt and sending of e-mail, text messages and other data transfers were slower than expected and advertised," the lawsuit states.

After weeks of silence regarding the complaints, Apple finally acknowledged earlier this week that reception issues existed. An Apple representative told the Associated Press that the iPhone OS 2.0.2 software update, released Monday, is designed to provide "improved communication with 3G networks."

But Monday's update was labeled with the briefest of descriptions--"bug fixes"--making it difficult to know exactly what was addressed with the update.

The suit asks that Apple be ordered to repair or replace all defective devices and pay unspecified damages, interest, and attorney fees.

Apple representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Steven Musil is the night news editor at CNET News. Before joining CNET News in 2000, Steven spent 10 years at various Bay Area newspapers. E-mail Steven.
Recent posts from Apple
Yes, Apple should sell a $99 iPhone
Google Earth browser plug-in arrives for Mac
Analyst: iPod shortage spreading
Apple looking for Psystar's backers
iPhone app promo codes trickle out
Apple deletes Mac antivirus suggestion
Analyst says iPhone kept smartphone growth alive
Entertainment dominates top iPhone applications
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 132 comments
by medfools August 20, 2008 10:50 PM PDT
Some people are so retarded. Why doesn't she get a life. Get a different phone, or return it. If she bought a tv that had a crappy picture, would she sue Sony?
Reply to this comment
by oneoclock August 21, 2008 12:49 AM PDT
"If she bought a tv that had a crappy picture, would she sue Sony?"

Yes, quite probably she would. :-)
by Riquez-001 August 21, 2008 4:33 AM PDT
"Why doesn't she get a life."

I refer you to case number AL-26459, Smith vs God.
Smith feels that she didnt "get a life" as advertised by God, so she is sueing him for damages.
She claims that she has been forced to instigate expensive & frivolous law suits in order to "get a life" & is seeking compensation from God for the undisclosed costs.
by Vegaman_Dan August 21, 2008 7:53 AM PDT
If the product doesn't work as advertised, then the customer has a legitimate reason to complain. If the company repeatedly refuses to do anything about it, then legal action may be required.


"Would she sue Sony?"


Of course she would. So would any person with half a brain.

by No Man August 21, 2008 9:47 AM PDT
"If she bought a tv that had a crappy picture, would she sue Sony?"

If I bought a Sony HDTV and paid extra for HD cable service, then found that the TV was incapable of displaying an HD picture and that Sony refused to even discuss the problem... yes, I would most definitely sue Sony.
by bobsmith8dot11 August 21, 2008 1:54 PM PDT
medfools i guess she would have sued you too if you were to manufacture tv that had a crappy picuture.
by tech_junky48 August 21, 2008 8:35 PM PDT
It's better than the woman who sued McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee in her lap, or the guy who claimed insurance money for some cigars he insured after he smoked them. Not both of these cases are real and both were won by the plaintiffs.

@riquez: That lawsuit's been over for a long time. God got tired of dealing with the American legal justice system, so he made it so that none of them ever existed. Wait what am I talking about. There were never any people with those names! I must be imagining things.

I might sue Sony if I bought a TV that was advertised as being HD and with a great picture, and the picture was crap.

We have a screwed up legal justice system here in America. I think anyone who sues for a ridiculous lawsuit (Like Coffee Woman or Cigar Man) should be deported to either Cuba or Nigeria (their choice) for the rest of their lives.
by dude7895 August 22, 2008 12:07 PM PDT
Apple lies about there own products and the products of there competitors, people are starting to realize this. I hope she wins the case.
by jag0 August 20, 2008 10:56 PM PDT
She does have a point about the 3G coverage although anyone who says that "half the price" is a lie is an idiot. The 8GB model is indeed half the price of the original.
Reply to this comment
by ev61 August 20, 2008 11:27 PM PDT
is that gallon of milk also half the price if the price difference is multiplied by 120% and divided over 24 months?!?!?
by jag0 August 20, 2008 11:47 PM PDT
Except the price only went up an extra $10 for the data plan which is nothing. I see that you bought into the iPhone over-reaction but whatever.
by jag0 August 20, 2008 11:49 PM PDT
forgot to mention that the "half the price" claim is for the phone...not the bill but I guess you haven't figured that part out yet.
by ser3232 August 20, 2008 11:58 PM PDT
I hope your joking. How do you figure that the iPhone 3G is half the price when the data for it is $10 more a month and not everybody is eligible for that $199 base price?

Plus tell me how she has a case? Shes basing her whole lawsuit on a headline in a commercial. Its only half the price if you qualify and only look at what your upfront cost is, not the subsidizing. And it says twice as fast, then it has an asterisk that says it depends on 3G coverage, meaning it is dependent on the provider. Can you say loop hole?

So what if they admitted the update was to fix reception issues. Is she going to sue Apple because of the keyboard lag too? Gimme a break. They are a 2 year old phone company.
by jag0 August 21, 2008 12:18 AM PDT
Yea because Apple is the only company to advertise their phone at a lower price. :-/

It's standard practice for lower prices to be advertised for non-customers. If you really are denying that then you're an idiot.
by msanto August 21, 2008 3:09 PM PDT
No it's not. Factor in the fact that the 3G data plan is $10 / month more, and you have to pay for SMS ($5) separately (it used to be part of the package), and you actually pay more. I didn't do the math for an 8GB device, but for a 16GB iPhone you pay $160 more over the 2 year contract.
by jag0 August 21, 2008 10:24 PM PDT
If I remember correctly, before the iPhone 3g came out there were some sites that showed the bill break down and the iPhone was NIT the most expensive.
by DrtyDogg August 22, 2008 3:38 AM PDT
@jag0
Heres some links for you
http://www.macworld.com/article/133872/2008/06/fasternotcheaper.html

http://theappleblog.com/2008/06/12/the-cheaper-iphone-3g-will-cost-users-more-att-raises-monthly-fee/

http://blogs.zdnet.com/mobile-gadgeteer/?p=1176

http://www.betanews.com/article/Doing_the_math_3G_iPhone_not_really_cheaper_in_the_long_run/1213286816

http://gizmodo.com/5015540/iphone-3gs-true-price-compared
by Carramrod06 August 22, 2008 2:15 PM PDT
Let us just establish that jag0 lacks the necessary IQ to compute the simple math.
by tcardone05 August 20, 2008 10:56 PM PDT
No, but if one bought a TV that advertised as being an HDTV and the HD only worked on that TV on a few stations (but all stations worked fine on other HDTVs), it would be an easy target for a lawsuit by some rich lawyer.
Reply to this comment
by Lerianis August 21, 2008 10:24 PM PDT
Finally, someone who GETS IT! I was wondering honestly if I would ever see someone who would use the CORRECT analogy, and tcardone05 finally did.

The fact is that these phones do not work anywhere NEAR as they were advertised to work, and 3 months now is more than enough time to iron out an 'issues'..... unless the issue is that the wireless antennas or chipsets in the phones are defective. To me, it seems like they are, considering some people have switched off 3G and BAM! All their problems with the iPhone 3G vanishes because they are now using the older Edge network.
by rolandk10 August 20, 2008 11:25 PM PDT
I'm no fanatic for apple by any strech but I have been keeping up on these issues as some of my customers rely on me for support. This seems like a stunt to me. This thing just came out. There are bumps but I say give them a chance to fix it. Look how long microsoft had before they were sued over vista. Which I thought was frivilous too.
Reply to this comment
by msanto August 21, 2008 3:13 PM PDT
Excuse, but I work with cell phones for a living. I can stick 6 of them on my desk next to the iPhone and all of them will have full bars (both at work and home) while the iPhone has 1 bar. We also have several iPhones at work and they all have this issue.

Additionally, it's not an ATT issue since this is happening worldwide.
by AmrcnHstryX August 23, 2008 1:23 AM PDT
work it out? im sorry but isnt that supposed to happen before the phone comes out? 3G is not new and lots
of phones do it well. i do not want to buy a product and then have to wait for the company to fix it after i have purchased it. if it didn't work then they should not have launched it so soon and fixed everything.
the bottom line is that apple has done many tests on th phone before it came out and i am very positive that they were aware of it before but chose to ignore the problem because its not like it went wrong all of a sudden right after they started selling the phone. they were not built properly from the beginning.
by rolandk10 August 24, 2008 10:32 PM PDT
The reason I said it;s a stunt isn't because I don't think there is a problem. In fact I do. I think it's a stunt because of how soon this law suit comes on such a publicized product.

And yes, work it out. Products constantly come out and need further revisions. If they were all perfect, every hardware and software ever made would stop at version 1.0. The reason I think many people don't like that this product is flawed is becaouse Apple products are supposed to 'just work'. Well, this one doesn't. I know alot of people would like to crucify Apple and that day may or may not come but this issue seems too small too soon for a law suit.

Perhaps this is one of the first products you've been an early adopter on. I don't personally own one of these phones nor do I ever intend to but the few products I've early adopted had issues and I accepted them and the problems eventually got fixed. It's just the way it works. Unless your willing to wait a year for every new product to be tested, bugs will be released to the public.
by deusexxmachina August 20, 2008 11:34 PM PDT
I download the new update today 2.0.2 and now get no EDGE or 3G service what so ever. While before it was fine. This is really troubling considering that fumble of a launch. I love Apple but this lawsuit needs to happen. I've got an appointment tomorrow at the MACstore and I am gonna milk em for the 16G or maybe some accessories. Oh well.
Reply to this comment
by oneoclock August 21, 2008 12:57 AM PDT
"I am gonna milk em for the 16G or maybe some accessories."

Eh? how is this going to fix your reception issues? Are you saying you are taking advantage of a situation that you know will soon be fixed anyway?
by Get_Bent August 21, 2008 11:59 AM PDT
Excuse me? He installs the latest update, his service goes from mediocre to non-existent, and you call this a fix? That's like "fixing" a broken window pane by removing the entire window.
by Get_Bent August 21, 2008 12:01 PM PDT
If your iPhone is malfunctioning to the point where its main feature is dead, why would you want more accessories for it? How about going the the Mac Store and asking them to fix or replace your iPhone instead?
by lacfnc06 August 21, 2008 12:07 AM PDT
apple deserves it after the cheated all iphone 3g buyers
Reply to this comment
by Mark.P.Bartlett August 21, 2008 12:09 AM PDT
She should just go home. Honestly she is so retarded. If it was a company that no one even heard of before she wouldn't care. Anyone can sue over anything these days. What a shame.
Reply to this comment
by bobsmith8dot11 August 21, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
Mark are you on Crack? she has a valid point, and she is suing the Big corporate who gave her a false promise...Well if you are an apple fan boy...please go and crib at Macworld forum...
by lacfnc06 August 21, 2008 2:30 PM PDT
why?? she's right to do this for everybody that apple cheated. they screwed up and need to fix it without acting like nothing has ever gone wrong with anything of theirs!! what is their problem!!
by AmrcnHstryX August 23, 2008 1:28 AM PDT
so you would be ok to spend your money on something that didnt work as it has been advertised?
and becuse they are a bigger company they are pressured to perform better then smaller companies on account of having lots of money and resources at their disposal.
by M C August 21, 2008 12:27 AM PDT
Step 1: Open law firm specializing in class-action.

Step 2: Find willing dupe (or unwilling one - see Jason Tomczak).

Step 3: Profit.*

* Note that actual class participants DO NOT profit.
Reply to this comment
by msanto August 21, 2008 3:14 PM PDT
And that's my point! People say she's after money. She won't get diddly!
by terminalblue August 21, 2008 1:01 AM PDT
how is this not justified? The only problem that i have with this is its seems a little soon. HOWEVER, apple did make some rather lofty statements about the 3gip, and for most people it has yet to pan out. If I had something that didn't do what i asked i would return it...at the least.

Apple is a fine company that makes fine products, but that doesn't mean they are above making mistakes. Personally i would be SUPER PISSED if i payed 200 for the phone and went to at&t for a phone that worked better as an mp3 player then a phone.

Perhaps instead of offering a lower price, they should have charged the same price as the first gen iphone and used better hardware?
Reply to this comment
by masajo928 August 21, 2008 1:07 AM PDT
Yeah, Apple deserves to be sued... My Japanese iPhone 3G stinks... When I type Japanese it still slows down... But that's not the only problem.... There are too many to list...
Reply to this comment
by hatmon August 21, 2008 2:02 AM PDT
She is doing the right thing. Apple have a great reputation because they used to make very high quality products. The majority of people think this is still the case. Anything that publicises that Apple is now producing mediocre quality products but still charging the same high prices is going to save many people from being disappointed by the many flaws which they could probably have avoided at a lower price.
Reply to this comment
by burntherich August 21, 2008 2:34 AM PDT
You have to wonder what law firm would take this case. I am sorry but this woman has no basis for a lawsuit. If you could sue companies for issues like this, there would be no market place. People expect new technologies to work out of the box with no hiccups. It doesn't happen in today's world. She should just deal with it and not be a complete fool
Reply to this comment
by Chameleon81 August 21, 2008 4:06 AM PDT
3G is not such a new technology. And if you have problems you dont advertise it as perfect. Would you be happy if a car manufacturer advertises its car as 80mpg thanks to a new technology and that car stops every 100 miles and needs a push to start again? Would you again ask for understanding ,patience or would you complain? I guess the second option.

If you advertise you have to have the competences to back it up if not people have the right to get annoyed.
by JoeBSJ2LC August 21, 2008 5:53 AM PDT
First, I'm pretty sure false advertising is a pretty good basis for this lawsuit. Second, Why do people keep saying this is a new tech. This is the second generation iPhone, Apple should have gotten it right.
Third, This is more a reply to the second or third comment (the one who said "shutup and return it, blah blah blh). That is kind of hard to do when you have to SIGN A CONTRACT. In order to return it she would be hit up with early termination fees out the a.... I'm pretty sure they don't charge those when you a buy a TV and try to return it
by AmrcnHstryX August 23, 2008 1:05 AM PDT
I work hard to make money and when I buy thing I expect them to
work like they are advertised, how is that too much to ask for? Hey lets just let Apple
make gobs of money and not deliver on the what they are advertising because
I dont have anything better to do with my cash then to let them have it.
by awaybbl August 21, 2008 4:24 AM PDT
I'm surprised that the "twice the speed at half the price" hasn't been challenged in court already. Anyone with basic math skills can see that the total cost of ownership over the length of the contract has actually gone up in comparrison to the original iPhone. Original data plan for the iPhone was $20/month, now it's $30/month. So if you figure it out, after 2 years you'll be paying $240 more for your data plan. Add that to the "lower" price of the device, and it's actually $40 MORE than the original device.
Reply to this comment
by jag0 August 21, 2008 9:22 AM PDT
Are you dense? The answer "yes" in case you aren't sure.

The "half the price" claim is about the base price of the phone which IS half the price and where are you getting this $40 more from? I paid $36 extra (basically $40) when I got my phone but that was for the activation fee...which is normal cell phone provider operating procedure. ALL cell phone companies in the US (as fat as I know) charge a activation fee when you sign a new contract.
by DrtyDogg August 21, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
@jag0
Your are the one who doesn't get it. Take the higher data plan price, multiply that by the required contract and you come up with, drum roll please, a higher TCO than the previous version.
by jag0 August 21, 2008 10:30 PM PDT
God you are stupid...the "half the price" lines refers to the phone ITSELF which isn't a lie.
by DrtyDogg August 22, 2008 9:15 AM PDT
Are you a moron? You cannot purchase the phone ITSELF. You have to sign up for a contract, making the TCO more than the previous iPhone. Yes, IF you could purchase the phone by itself without a contract at 299 it would be half price, but you cannot which is why contract terms are part of owning the phone.
by Riquez-001 August 21, 2008 4:47 AM PDT
Frankly, every mobile phone I have ever owned has been a pile of sh*t.
Crappy reception, slow internet, frustrating interface, waste of time camera & I don't go for the low end models. Nokia are the worst offender - never, ever again.

Most networks are a bunch of cowboys too. Just look at how they try to trick you with upgrade plans & message packages, 2 year contacts, ringtones etc etc. Then once they have you signed up you can go screw yourself if you have a problem. The whole industry needs steam rolling & start again.

I don't have an iPhone, but my wife has an iPod touch & it is nice to use.

The reception issues are not unique.
My current phone has great reception, but unfortunately the battery lasts 24 hours if im lucky & the camera may as well not be there.
Buying a mobile phone is like picking rotten fruit out of a basket, the Apples arent the only bad ones.
Reply to this comment
by msanto August 21, 2008 3:20 PM PDT
See my earlier comment. I work w/ mobile phones, and the iPhone will have 1 bar while the other six on my desk have full bars. And we have several iPhones exhibiting the same issue.

And let me tell you, in my biz, I've seen a lot of crappy phones. Among 3G phones, this is the worst I've seen in comparison to other 3G phones sitting in the same area.
by Goodbye Helicopter August 21, 2008 4:55 AM PDT
only ones to be pissed at are yourselves

when did any US carrier have decent reception?
when did 3G networks really ever mean much (particularly in the US)?
3G is not about voice telephony reception. It is a about data network bandwidth.
Reply to this comment
by thelemurking August 21, 2008 5:58 AM PDT
You cannot have data or voirce if your are constantly losing your connection to the network. That's the big issue right now.
by tech_junky48 August 21, 2008 8:48 PM PDT
I have never dropped a call in 2.5 years on the AT&T (fmr. Cingular) network in FL (and occasionally outside FL). I almost always have had 3G on my last phone (Samsung SYNC) and my current phone (Samsung Blackjack 2). My phone before that got VERY good reception (LG CG300). 3G has always worked stunningly well for me. And yes, 3G is for data, but dropped calls and no bars (standard GSM) and BAD data coverage (WCDMA 3G) means theres something wrong with the iPhone 3G.
by Benf August 21, 2008 9:55 PM PDT
I have an old Nokia 6102i and have nearly perfect reception on AT&T, I live in the eastern part ofRiverside County in Southern California, very sparsly populated, my Daughters 3G Nokia has excelent telephone and excelent 3g reception, if you have the problem you describe get a Nokia and move to AT&T.
by Constable Odo August 21, 2008 5:12 AM PDT
If you buy a car and it's advertised as getting so many miles to the gallon and in actual practice it doesn't get that high mileage because of driving conditions or whatever. Do people sue car companies for false advertising because of exaggerated claims? There are so many companies that sell products claiming to enhance memory, lose weight, grow hair, etc. It's a wonder that the courts can handle all these suits because products don't live up to their claims. Usually the people just ask for their money back and go buy another product (that probably won't live up their advertising claims, either). I hope the court throws out the case. As long as Apple is willing to give her money back, that should be good enough.
Reply to this comment
by Vegaman_Dan August 21, 2008 8:27 AM PDT
Actually in all the examples you listed, companies are commonly sued for making misleading statements or false claims in their advertising. This is very common in the business. Most customers who are wronged simply go away since the price of the product (hair cream/etc) isn't worth the price of the lawyer to go after them. But now you're talking about the iPhone, a device that will set you back nearly $3,000 over two years. That's enough to get their attention.
by doublethought84 August 21, 2008 5:42 AM PDT
I've had not one problem ever since I bought the 3G, and I live in Columbia, SC.. hardly a market AT&T or Apple is even concerend with. My iPhone loads as fast as Time Warner Cable on my MBP. If you're having those kinds of issues, its where you live, its the service. Get over it or move somewhere that has better 3G coverage.
Reply to this comment
by msanto August 21, 2008 3:22 PM PDT
See my earlier comment. I work w/ mobile phones, and the iPhone will have 1 bar while the other six on my desk have full bars. And we have several iPhones exhibiting the same issue.

And let me tell you, in my biz, I've seen a lot of crappy phones. Among 3G phones, this is the worst I've seen in comparison to other 3G phones sitting in the same area.

It has nothing to do with ATT or network coverage, as I can demonstrate with real data. And note: users around the WORLD are complaining.

I can't understand these comments by people who really know nothing about the technology.
by murbo August 21, 2008 5:46 AM PDT
what is the big deal? someone is suing someone else.. like that never happens.
plus, early adopters always have problems, thats why you never buy a new operating system the day its released, or buy a car without checking its crash test ratings, etc. etc.
deal with it...
Reply to this comment
by AmrcnHstryX August 23, 2008 1:14 AM PDT
the OS was in the first I-Phone and that worked well and 3G has been out for quite a while but it has only caught on as of recently so i cannot agree with your statement
by asg749d August 21, 2008 6:02 AM PDT
She does have a point - as do the millions of people who were expecting a better device with a better service. Would you not have done the same if you have bought a radio that only receives AM signals when it is advertised as AM/FM?
Reply to this comment
by hal1999 August 22, 2008 5:59 AM PDT
I don't agree with the analogy but if I bought a radio that did not receive FM I would return it to the store. I would not sue the company!!!!!
by AmrcnHstryX August 23, 2008 1:11 AM PDT
hal1999 you cant jst return the i-phone like you would anything else because of the early termination fee. when buying stereos there are no contracts to sign.

and to add to the comment, someone has to do something about it sooner or later and better sonner then later, people are being fooled into buying the i-phone and apple dosent seem to care
by MaggieRed August 21, 2008 6:15 AM PDT
This is exactly why the U.S. needs a "loser pays" law. You take someone to court in a law suit, you lose, you pay all cost of both attorney's and the court. That will stop these frivolous law suits.

People joke about this, but think about it when stuff like this happens to any company someone is going to eventually pay for the cost of all this. Any idea of how price structures of the products you buy are concocted? It is just exactly the same as congress saying its going punish corporations with winfall taxes. You don't really believe they will pay that out of their own coffers do you, I hope people are not that totally stupid. The price of the products increases to cover these costs. Therefore, you and I pay for all this.

So use your brains people. This woman is a major loser in life. And her and her attorney group are both in the same boat. Sad, pathetically sad.
Reply to this comment
by Wheezerdr August 21, 2008 6:31 AM PDT
This is not a frivolous case. The device is called the iPhone 3g. Something it does not do well. I have this device and the iPod touch. This lawsuit is NOT surprising and in all honesty NEEDS to be done. Sure the lawyers usually make out like bandits but forcing apple to fix this phone should be good for the consumer since this is a defective device. The 2% of devices having issues is based on what? Apple is making up more lies to keep wall street happy. Hopefully this will send a message to apple to stop selling half baked products.

Now for the person who said to return the phone if she is not happy with it. Basically she will get charged $30 restocking fee because the doesn't work as advertised. How is that fair.

Buying a 3g phone and being forced to pay more for 3g (you can't opt for the 2g plan - I asked 4 times) and then being told to turn off the 3g function is quite frustrating. This is a defective product that should no longer be sold until it is fixed.
by Lerianis August 21, 2008 10:28 PM PDT
Anyone else beginning to think that the people who are posting that this woman is a 'loser' are the same person, under many different screen names? I hate to say that is the case, but that is really the impression that I am getting here.
by heartattackman August 22, 2008 8:42 AM PDT
You lie about what your product does, you get sued. Easy as that.

I agree, this seems to be the same poster using different usernames. There can't be this many dumb people out there who think it should be ok for Apple and AT&T to sell millions of defective products and then face no consequences and not even acknoweldge there's a serious problem.

I don't see Apple or AT&T saying anyone who bought an iPhone more than 30 days ago and is unhappy can return it today for some small fee and no early termination fee. Don't get made at this woman and her lawyer b/c their doing something about this situation while Apple and AT&T pretend nothing is wrong.

Good for this woman and her lawyers. They're the real reason Apple and AT&T are going to fix this problem.
 See all 132 Comments >>