Apple to pay $3.2m in Israel iPhone slowdown case

Apple has proposed a settlement in Israel to pay about US$3.2 million to eligible customers affected by alleged iPhone slowdown issues, pending court approval.

The settlement consolidates five class action lawsuits filed between 2017 and 2018, which accused Apple of intentionally slowing certain iPhone models through software updates without user consent.

The claims also alleged that Apple failed to disclose that replacing batteries could improve device performance and that the company’s actions encouraged users to upgrade to newer models.

Apple denies any wrongdoing and states it has never intentionally degraded user experience.

To qualify for compensation, devices must be iPhone SE, 6, 6 Plus, 6s, 6s Plus, 7, or 7 Plus, with iOS 10.2.1 or 11.2 installed before December 21, 2017, and registered with Israel as the country at registration.

Eligible users will submit claims online if the settlement is approved.

🔗 Source: Calcalist

🧠 Food for thought

Implications, context, and why it matters.

Apple’s proposed Israeli settlement sits alongside bigger legal fights

Apple’s proposed US$3.2 million (NIS 10 million) settlement in Israel is smaller than other payouts tied to iPhone slowdown claims, often called “Batterygate.”
Apple agreed to resolve a U.S. class-action case for up to $500 million. It also reached a multistate deal with 34 U.S. states and the District of Columbia for $113 million 1.
In Canada, a similar class-action case ended with a settlement of up to $14.4 million 2.
In Israel, enforcement also included a formal probe by the Consumer Protection and Fair Trade Authority (Israel’s consumer watchdog). Investigators questioned Apple Israel CEO Rony Friedman about claims that Apple did not disclose a slowdown feature in updated iPhone versions 3.

The fallout led to clearer battery and performance disclosures

After “Batterygate,” Apple added iOS 11.3 tools that display battery health. The update also lets users turn off performance management, also called throttling, after an unexpected shutdown occurs 4.
The episode raised more questions about how software updates change older devices. In the Canadian settlement context, the lack of clarity about updates came up as a consumer concern 2.
The dispute also fed the “right to repair” movement (a consumer-advocacy push for easier fixes and access to parts). Attorneys general said that hiding important details about battery-related slowdowns nudged people toward buying new iPhones instead of replacing batteries 5.