Samsung fined $14 million for misleading smartphone water resistance claims

Promoted phones as ready for a dunking – forgot to mention known problems with subsequent recharges


Australia’s Competition and Consumer Commission has fined Samsung Electronics AU$14 million ($9.6 million) for making for misleading water resistance claims about 3.1 million smartphones.

The Commission (ACCC) says that between 2016 and 2018 Samsung advertised its Galaxy S7, S7 Edge, A5, A7, S8, S8 Plus and Note 8 smartphones as capable of surviving short submersions in the sea or fresh water.

As it happens The Register attended the Australian launch of the Note 8 and watched on in wonder as it survived a brief dunking and bubbles appeared to emerge from within the device. Your correspondent recalls Samsung claiming that the waterproofing reflected the aim of designing a phone that could handle Australia's outdoors lifestyle.

But the ACCC has labelled ads extolling water resistance as a feature of the phones misleading.

"We reviewed hundreds of complaints from consumers who reported they experienced issues with their Galaxy phones after they were exposed to water and, in many cases, they reported their Galaxy phone stopped working entirely," said ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb.

The problem was not that the phones leaked. Rather, Samsung did not advise that if the phones were charged after a dunking, there was a "material prospect" the charging port would become corroded and stop working.

"Prior to the launch of the Galaxy phones, Samsung Australia's parent company, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., was already seeking to mitigate the effects of this charging port corrosion caused by charging following exposure to water" according to an ACCC statement. "Despite this, Samsung Australia's marketing campaign promoted Galaxy phones being used in pools and sea water while there remained a material prospect the Galaxy phones would be damaged due to corrosion."

The ACCC's statement points out that the fines it is permitted to levy have increased considerably since the time of Samsung's misconduct, so the company could have faced a much higher bill for its misleading ads. ®

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • Spain, Austria not convinced location data is personal information
    Privacy group NOYB sues to get telcos to respect GDPR data access rights

    Some authorities in Europe insist that location data is not personal data as defined by the EU's General Data Protection Regulation.

    EU privacy group NOYB (None of your business), set up by privacy warrior Max "Angry Austrian" Schrems, said on Tuesday it appealed a decision of the Spanish Data Protection Authority (AEPD) to support Virgin Telco's refusal to provide the location data it has stored about a customer.

    In Spain, according to NOYB, the government still requires telcos to record the metadata of phone calls, text messages, and cell tower connections, despite Court of Justice (CJEU) decisions that prohibit data retention.

    Continue reading
  • Taiwan creates new challenge for tech industry: stern content regulation laws
    Big tech asked to be more transparent by logging what it took down and why

    Taiwan's concentration of tech manufacturing capability worries almost all stakeholders in the technology industry – if China reclaims the island, it would kick a colossal hole in global supply chains. Now the country has given Big Tech another reason to worry: transparency regulations of a kind social networks and surveillance capitalists detest.

    The regulations – named the Digital Intermediary Service Act and released as a draft yesterday by Taiwan's National Communications Commission – require platform operators to create a complaints mechanism anyone can use to request content takedowns, remove illegal content at speed, undergo audits to demonstrate they can do so, and respond promptly to orders to remove content.

    When platforms decide to take down content, they'll need to list each instance in a public database to promote accountability and transparency of their actions.

    Continue reading
  • India extends deadline for compliance with infosec logging rules by 90 days
    Helpfully announced extension on deadline day

    Updated India's Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the local Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) have extended the deadline for compliance with the Cyber Security Directions introduced on April 28, which were due to take effect yesterday.

    The Directions require verbose logging of users' activities on VPNs and clouds, reporting of infosec incidents within six hours of detection - even for trivial things like unusual port scanning - exclusive use of Indian network time protocol servers, and many other burdensome requirements. The Directions were purported to improve the security of local organisations, and to give CERT-In information it could use to assess threats to India. Yet the Directions allowed incident reports to be sent by fax – good ol' fax – to CERT-In, which offered no evidence it operates or would build infrastructure capable of ingesting or analyzing the millions of incident reports it would be sent by compliant organizations.

    The Directions were roundly criticized by tech lobby groups that pointed out requirements such as compelling clouds to store logs of customers' activities was futile, since clouds don't log what goes on inside resources rented by their customers. VPN providers quit India and moved their servers offshore, citing the impossibility of storing user logs when their entire business model rests on not logging user activities. VPN operators going offshore means India's government is therefore less able to influence such outfits.

    Continue reading
  • IBM settles age discrimination case that sought top execs' emails
    Just days after being ordered to provide messages, Big Blue opts out of public trial

    Less than a week after IBM was ordered in an age discrimination lawsuit to produce internal emails in which its former CEO and former SVP of human resources discuss reducing the number of older workers, the IT giant chose to settle the case for an undisclosed sum rather than proceed to trial next month.

    The order, issued on June 9, in Schenfeld v. IBM, describes Exhibit 10, which "contains emails that discuss the effort taken by IBM to increase the number of 'millennial' employees."

    Plaintiff Eugene Schenfeld, who worked as an IBM research scientist when current CEO Arvind Krishna ran IBM's research group, sued IBM for age discrimination in November, 2018. His claim is one of many that followed a March 2018 report by ProPublica and Mother Jones about a concerted effort to de-age IBM and a 2020 finding by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that IBM executives had directed managers to get rid of older workers to make room for younger ones.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022