Antitrust watchdog changes Apple repair policy

Apr 21, 2016 11:26 GMT  ·  By

Apple has recently been investigated by Korea’s antitrust watchdog for what the local media calls a “too bossy” attitude regarding its repair policies and the relationship with local repair service providers.

Following complaints from Korean business operations, the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) decided to look into the matter and discover whether Apple was indeed undermining the rights of service centers or not.

According to Korea Times, the antitrust body discovered several violations and rectified no less than 20 contract provisions between Apple Korea and businesses in the country, which were considered to be unfair and violating competition rules.

For example, based on the previous terms, Apple was able to terminate any contract with Korean service centers without prior notifications, which the FTC claimed infringed the rights of businesses in the country. So under the revised rules, Apple needs to give advance notice before actually breaking a contract.

Apple couldn’t be sued for 1 year

Furthermore, contracts between Apple Korea and local companies stated that the latter couldn’t sue the Cupertino-based firm one year after what were being called “controversial incidents” were discovered, but under the new rules, legal action can be started immediately.

“An official from Apple headquarters visited the FTC and actively cooperated to revise such unfair terms of the contract,” FTC official Min Hye-young was quoted as saying. “Our latest decision will pave the way for protecting the rights of both customers and Apple's repair service operators, and build a fair trade ecosystem.”

Apple Korea is currently working with six different repair service companies in the country, and the revised contract terms will protect their rights for all products belonging to the Cupertino firm, including iPhone, Apple Watch, and MacBook.

Apple hasn’t offered a statement to express its position regarding this investigation, but the company most likely has little to say, given the fact that it has nothing left to do than to comply with the requirements of the anti-trust body, especially when unfair terms of contracts are discovered.