The famous "Error 53" that so many of our articles have filled out. For those who do not remember the cause, one of the many that the Cupertino company has open, during one of the last updates of the company, when a user changed the front panel of an iPhone that could slightly affect the TouchID, and also, it went beyond the official Apple technical service, decided to block said device with what is known as "Error 53", which left it completely unusable. These peculiar methods brought a lot of tail, since there are not a few users of the company who have practically no access to official technical service, at least in a comfortable way.
For Australian judicial bodies return to the burden with "Error 53", suing Apple for its restrictive redress policies, and of course for this famous problem.
This time it was the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission the one that has seen fit to bring the Cupertino company back to court. And it is that being honest, any lawyer like me would dream of working for Apple, no longer because of the possible access and ease of acquiring their products, but because something that you will never miss is work. This federal procedure is based on the fact that Apple has left thousands of the company's devices totally useless after the update in February last year. As we have already said, "Error 53" focuses only on devices that have TouchID, when installing display modules not authorized by the Cupertino company, and for which the corresponding fee is not taken.
According to Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Apple has violated what would be known as the Australian country's consumer guarantees. This refers specifically to the quality, the repairability and the means that companies use to efficiently continue the useful life of the product. In fact, Apple has done the opposite in this regard.
How has the Australian authority justified the claim?
These are the words they have left in the statement so that we get an idea of the scope of the demand and the reason for it:
Denying consumers warranty rights because third-party parts have been chosen not only impacts consumer rights in general, but also discourages other users from manufacturing and offering repair alternatives that clearly cost less than offered by the original manufacturer itself, which produces an inequality.
It is quite clear that Apple intends that no unauthorized reseller or repairer reaches into its devices, we have no doubt about it. While it is true that the company is just now making its warranty policies more flexible, allowing, for example, to enter the warranty program some devices that have previously been opened for a screen replacement. This is the response given by the Cupertino company spokesperson in Australia:
We take the safety of our users very seriously. The "Error 53" is the result of a series of safety tests designed for our products. iOS checks that the TouchID has not been tampered with and that it works correctly on our iPhone and iPad, which is why it gives errors when tampered with.
If the system detects any type of alteration, the TouchID stops working, as well as other related systems such as Apple Pay.
In short, it seems that the long controversy over "Error 53" is still present, despite the fact that Apple has put methods to prevent it from continuing to affect many more users. The reality is that we could understand that Apple hates unauthorized technicians repairing its products., especially if we take into account that a screen replacement in the Apple Store in Spain is quite cheap compared to the rest of the offers, but the user's freedom will always be ahead.