Friday, January 30, 2004

How Much Did That Cost?

Have you ever been curious about a product's cost? Have you ever wondered ... I'm paying $30.00 ... but what is the retailer making off of my purchase ... and in turn ... how much is the manufacturer or distributor making? I've always been curious about these things. The 3rd party iPod accessory industry has boomed ... mostly due to the very high profit margin involved in making accessories such as cases and transmitters.

Have you ever wondered what a packaging mistake or packaging upgrade costs a manufacturer?

While this section won't be able to provide concrete details all of the time ... I believe I'm tied enough into retail and to marketing that I can make a very educated guess.

The Griffin iTrip - a packaging mistake for the most popular iPod accessory?

iProng Picture Upload post

This is just a place for me to upload pictures :-)

Thanks for looking:

* This picture post was used to track how many people view this picture.

Monday, January 19, 2004

Recording Phone Call Laws By State

* Major update June 24, 2014
* Content & comment updates


* I have deleted a lot of the redundant and "in article answered" questions. PLEASE READ this entire article (and comments) and do not skim. If you still have a question after reading this reference and ALL comments, I would love to answer your question. Please do not ask questions about face to face or video recording - these laws vary greatly across the country; even within a city.

These laws and the following dialogue pertain ONLY to recording telephone & cellphone conversations - NOT face to face conversations or public or office meetings. You are NOT permitted to record ANYONE (video or voice) without their specific confirmation and written release that they know they are being recorded at any time, in ANY place (even inside your residence or your business) - unless it is a telephone/cellphone conversation - THEN you must also follow each state's laws regarding such. Public EVENTS are the ONLY exception to video or voice recording and fall under fair use laws. <--- Fair use/Public nature does not APPLY to phone recording.

* If a judge will not allow your recording in court and you consider it of case winning relevance - request a new judge - possibly even a new venue. You want a judge who is technology savvy presiding over your case when using telephone/cellphone recordings.

Recording a face to face conversation and trying to combine them with your legal rights to recording telecommunications could result in your case being tossed out on a technicality.

A Reference For Harassing Phone Calls From Debt Collectors


Some things to ask yourself before action ...

1) Was the cell phone a company issued cellphone?

2) Were you on company time or on company property at the time of the recording?

3) Were you damaged by the recording?

4) Did you specifically ask not to be recorded and the phone call he made to you - was it harassing?

If you file for wrongful termination, harassment, etc etc - you may use this as a pendant charge - meaning it will enhance your case.  Rarely can you make a case just out of recording a call. It's usually considered part of a pattern off harassment.

Usually, the only "entity" that can be sued or "punished" by the law is a creditor that records you without your permission.

Remember, there is no such thing as phone call recording PERMISSION or AUTHORIZATION ...

Note that the law is specifically 1 or 2 party NOTIFICATION. No one can deny you the right to record a phone conversation IF you properly notify them and follow the laws within your state.

Recently, I received a phone call from a debt collector. This debt collector refused to listen to me and kept interrupting me ... I started recording the phone call. I asked her "what state she was calling from" ... she refused to tell me (A creditor rules violation) ... I looked on my iPhone - it said Carrolton, Texas. Texas is a one party notification state. Although I did not have to inform her she was being recorded; I did. She stated,
"I do not give you permission to record this conversation."

She could have said, "I don't authorize you to record this conversation." ... and it means the same thing.

My recommendation isn't to argue ... just continue the conversation and continue recording.

Understand a few facts about this conversation and a few very common myths:

1) If you are in a one party state and the other person online is in a one party state - you do not have to inform them they are being recorded. You knowing that you are recording, qualifies as the one party notification. This is not an interpretation of the law. IT IS THE LAW!

2) If you are being recorded, you have the right to record the conversation AS LONG AS you follow the laws of your state.

3) There is no such thing as "permission to record" - continuing a conversation IS a permission granted by the other party. One cannot "authorize" or "de-authorize" you from recording. I feel silly typing that, but if someone who you are in a heated argument with threatens you about permission, it makes it SOUND ominous. Don't let their ignorance of the law intimidate you. If the other party continues the conversation after your notifying them that you are recording - they are granting you the right to record. PERIOD. Again, this is not an interpretation of the law. IT IS THE LAW!

You may have OTHER rights if the other party "claims" you do not have permission to record a phone conversation (Particularly if they are a creditor, law enforcement officer, or attorney*). Many people, especially law enforcement and creditors, PRETEND to know the law regarding recording of phone calls. Often, they THINK phone call recording and face to face recording are the same. It is not. There are specific laws governing each. Phone call recording happens to be very concrete.

Please also know that it is your RIGHT to request (properly & politely) for any recording a company/attorney may have of you and they are required by law to make it available to you. Note that this doesn't mean they are required to make it convenient for you to have the recording. The other party is also not required to give it to you any form that you request. As an example, you cannot request a CD, tape, transcript, or email. It is up to the other party to determine what "form" they will provide the recording. A general rule of thumb is 30 days from a WRITTEN request.

* You may want to request dismissal in court, dismissal of debt collection, and/ or sanctions if a person claims you do not have a right to record. Seek out a good attorney for further instruction.

* If a judge will not allow your recording and you consider it case winning relavance - request a new judge - possibly even a new venue. You want a judge who is technology savvy presiding over your case.

* Feel free to refer anyone to
the reference you are reading for clarification.

* I have worked
very hard to maintain this page and try to respond as promptly as possible to any comment ... please consider clicking on an advertisement to kick a few cents back my way or even better sending me $1 through Paypal - see the right side bar.

* Post your comment or question
AFTER reading all of the comments. I usually will answer your question within a couple hours. I monitor and moderate these comments carefully. I realize it's a lot to read. But if you do, this will answer 99% of all your questions.

* PLEASE understand that this is not a substitute for a good attorney's advice. Many attorneys seem to be using this database on my site. While I spent a long time researching this database, it's well documented and well researched, and I consult with friends and an attorney -

If I'm being harassed by phone, I send a letter to the other party* - notifying them by mail that ALL conversations will be recorded.

* Sending certified with signature confirmation is recommended.

Mr. X,

Due to the nature of our communication, please know that I will be recording all calls to phone number (xxx) XXX-XXXX for reference or possible evidence in court proceedings. This applies to
ALL of our telephone conversations. This may be your ONLY notification.


Philip Smith
* Obtaining a notary seal on such a letter may also be another good step.

I can record ANYTHING I wish - laws may prevent me from using this information, but it is ALWAYS up to a judge to allow ANY evidence as admissible whether obtained illegally or not. That being said ... know that a sneaky attorney could call for a mistrial because you submitted evidence improperly or illegally. Read
ALL of the comments below to see where I have thoroughly discussed this scenario.

To clarify; know that one can record
anything without notification - even in a 2 party state. It is a threat to use or actual use of these recorded conversations to defame, frame, or harass where these laws come in to play.

I make sure I record most of the phone calls I make to verify content here on FixYourThinking ...

I also record most phone calls that relate to my business dealings.

It's very easy for someone to say something and not follow through, or just forget what they said on the phone.

Most newer cell phones can record calls directly into the phone - my Sony Ericssson s710a records it directly as an MP3.

Here are the laws for recording phone calls state by state ... be aware, that most of the time, your phone calls are being recorded - sometimes without your knowledge. Most states are
"one party consent". This means that only one person (even the one who initiates the recording) need know.

One way to avoid these laws entirely is to chat and record through instant message - most IM programs automatically keep a file on your computer. VOIP phone conversations and audio chat ARE NOT governed by these laws! BUT IF YOU HAVE A PHONE NUMBER associated with your VOIP phone (IE A Skype-In/Vonage #) then you must follow the same laws as a normal phone conversation.

Also know that this is a disadvantage of phone call recording websites or "circumvention numbers" - you are ONLY allowed to record calls that you initiate or are a part of or for a number that it has been pre-established that you are being recorded. Just because these "mechanisms for recording" exist doesn't mean they are legal.

A good way to look at this:

• Apple doesn't allow applications in the App Store and AT&T/Verizon/T-Mobile/Sprint do not promote such "circumvention" because it is illegal.

• There ARE applications for the iPhone though if you jailbreak your iPhone.


• Because you own a gun doesn't mean you can shoot and kill a person.

• You can shoot and kill a person. It is against the law.

• You can shoot and kill a person in self defense.

If you are in a two party notification state and you are TOLD you are being recorded; you have no legal rights if you continue your conversation beyond that point. Arguing with the recording party over
the right to record is consent to record; based on laws governing harassment.

It is best to gain confirmation and identification.


"Roger, why can't you support me as my boss"

"As your secretary, I expect more clarification from you so I can do my job."
Extrapolate and adapt those identifiers for your situation.

Court evidence is much more credible with as much proof as you can obtain (even if there is a known person or an admittance by the recorded party that they are who they are). Plus, you can carry the argument further by saying,
"He knows he's my boss and he's putting me in an awkward position." <--- saying that to a jury puts a lot more weight on the recorded conversation and gives you the rare opportunity to interject an opinion about the Defendant. Concerning police assisting in a phone call recording: as long as the other party KNOWS the police is recording the call they can admit the evidence into court. You can try to claim that you were set up - most jurisdictions don't allow police entrapment. MOST police jurisdictions don't know the laws or proper procedure regarding phone conversation recording. You will want to make sure that the call is played in its entirety in a court room for two reasons. 

1) Context of the statement

2) Confusion of the issue - a lengthy call will be lost in translation with a jury.

You may also want to check into your rights as far as police involvement - believe it or not; an individual has more rights to record a call than the local police officers do. The only way this makes a difference is if the nature of the call was terror related or you made a threat to harm a high ranking government official.

Again, make sure that their recording is within context and object to any interpretation as hearsay.

A phone recording made from a out of state phone line or made to an out of state party, has to have the party informed of the recording and his/her consent or the tone on line, every 15 seconds, or a consent in writing before the recording is started.

Just because you have a spoofed telephone number from a different state does not mean you have the rights of that state's phone number. In other words you must always go by your state's laws, but more importantly, the state lawof the person who's call you are recording.

Scenario from a comment:

What charges would be brought up against someone that recorded me? How would I use my right to my privacy in court?

It's what is called a pendant charge.
You must have action or cause to "use" the law. One can't really prosecute solely on the basis of someone recording you - even though it's breaking the law. It can be done but the cost of an attorney or the frustration of representing yourself in a complex law that even most judges don't understand - wouldn't really be worth it.
Are you trying to get custody of a child and need to prove the other spouse isn't trustworthy or is oblivious to the law? Good point to bring up to the judge. 
Are you in a battle with a creditor? They must follow the law to a tee to collect. If they record you without telling you OR use your recorded info for ANYTHING other than the stated purpose (which is usually "quality control") ... Then you MAY have rights to cancel that debt. Remember, no matter how much an attorney will argue to the court, "quality control" is NOT an ambiguous term. Calls, simply stated as "quality control recorded", unless stated that the information may be collected and used against you, is NOT legal to be used against you in court.
Here are the laws state by state:

States Requiring One Party Notification

District Of Columbia
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
West Virginia

States Requiring Two Party Notification

New Hampshire

ONLY times you relinquish consent in a two party state is when:

1) You are a government official and your conversation isn't 100% COMPLETELY government business related.

2) You are using a corporate issued cellphone and it is contractually stated that the calls may be intercepted AND the issuer of the cellphone has allowed a warranted tap

3) You have already agreed to a previous or ongoing tap onto your phone

4) You call a law enforcement officer, judge, or government official

5) You are calling to or being called from an Indian reservation or foreign phone number that does not originate in the USA

The phone call, is in all ways not allowed into evidence, if the
OTHER phone was being tapped and did not include a message that the call was being recorded or if the caller did not say you were being recorded - remember - staying on the phone after someone informs you that you may be recorded IS consent.

Warranted taps ONLY APPLY TO INDIVIDUALS not general phone lines.

The following states have exceptional amounts of case law regarding telecommunications recording - here is a sampling and brief clarification.

A large university library is an excellent resource to research case law - a librarian will be more than happy to help you.


Arizona is a "one-party" state, ARS 13-3005.A(1)(2), and also permits a telephone "subscriber" (the person who orders the phone service and whose name is on the bill) to tape (intercept) calls without being a party to the conversation and without requiring any notification to any parties to the call, ARS 13-3012(5)(c).


Although California is a two-party state, it is legal to record a conversation if you include a beep on the recorder and for the parties to hear. This information is included with California telephone bills:

California prohibits telephone monitoring or recording, including the use of information obtained through interception unless all parties to the conversation consent (California Penal Code Sections 631 & 632). There is no statutory business telephone exception and the relevant case law all but excludes this possibility. California courts have recognized "implied" consent as being sufficient to satisfy the statute where one party has expressly agreed to the taping and the other continues the conversation after having been informed that the call is being recorded. Violation is punishable by a fine of up to $2,500, imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. A civil plaintiff may recover the greater of $3,000 or three times the amount of any actual damages sustained.


Connecticut is a two-party consent state. The State Police strictly enforce wiretapping laws.


Illinois is, by statute, a two-party state. However, case law from both the Illinois Supreme Court and various Illinois appellate courts have declared Illinois a one-party state in the case of private citizens (businesses and individuals -
NOT law enforcement). The consensus is that one-party consensual recording is merely "enhanced note-taking" and since some people have total recall without recording, how can the other party have any expectation of privacy to a conversation held with another person.

Illinois requires prior consent of all participants to monitor or record a phone conversation. Ill. Rev. Stat. Ch. 38, Sec. 14-2. There is no specific business telephone exception, but in general courts have found extension telephones do not constitute eavesdropping devices. Criminal penalties for unlawful eavesdropping include up to three years' imprisonment or $10,000 in fines and the civil remedy provides for recovery of actual and punitive damages.

In Illinois; It is illegal in any way to tap into cordless home phones via a scanner or other device.

2012: There have been recent court rulings in Illinois regarding wire taps and recording of police conversations.


In the state of Indiana, it is one party authorization. As far as what is admissible in court it is still being tested per each case individually by the prosecutors office in the county in which the investigation or case was done.


Massachusetts requires consent of all parties unless another exception applies (Massachusetts Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 272, Sec. 99). Telephone equipment, which is furnished to a phone company subscriber and used in the ordinary course of business, is excluded from the definition of unlawful interception devices (Id. at 99(B)(3)). Office intercommunication systems used in the ordinary course of business are similarly exempt (Id. at 99(D)(1)(b)). The criminal penalty is a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment for up to five years, or both. In civil litigation, an injured party may recover actual and punitive damages as well as costs and fees. It is a separate violation to divulge or use the information garnered through unlawful interception and an additional penalty of up to two years in prison or $5,000 may be imposed on this count.

New York

New York is a one party state, however some courts will not admit an interview with a witness to an event if they were not informed they were being recorded. Judges may use their discretion on a case by case basis.


Pennsylvania requires the consent of all parties. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. Sec. 5704(4) with the following exception: any individual may record a phone conversation without the other party's consent if:

The non-consenting party threatens the life or physical well being of the consenting party, or any member of his/her family.
The non-consenting party commits any criminal action (the statute specifically uses the example of telling the consenting party that they have marijuana they want the consenter to buy, but does state ANY criminal act).

Felony penalties may be imposed for violation of the Pennsylvania statute.


Washington requires the consent of all parties. Some companies manage to work around that by going to the Indian reservations or any federally owned property to make the call - Federal law is a one party consent.


Wisconsin is a 1 party state, but legislators are constantly trying to introduce laws to change it to two-party state. Any evidence gathered by a one-party consensual recording is inadmissible except in murder or drug related cases.

The Wisconsin Statute 885.365 for recorded telephone conversation (1) states "Evidence obtained as the result of the use of voice recording equipment for recording of telephone conversations, by way of interception of a communication or in any other number, shall be totally inadmissible in the court of this state in civil actions, except as provided by 968.28 to 968.37." Exceptions are it the party is informed before the recording is informed at the time that the conversation is being recorded and that any evidence thereby obtained may be used in a court of law or such recording is made through a recorder connector proved by the telecommunications utility as defined in WI Stats 968.28 - 968.37 (which is the stat for court ordered wiretaps) which automatically produces a distinctive recorder tone that is repeated at intervals of approximately 15 seconds. Fire department or law enforcement agencies are exempt as are court ordered wire taps.

This does not allow a person that's not a part of the conversation to record any part of the conversation without the parties to the conversation being informed the 3rd party is recording the conversation.


Electronic Communications Privacy Act. United States Code. Title 18. Crimes & Criminal Procedure. Part I – Crimes. Chapter 119 – Wire & Electronic Communications Interception & Interception Of Oral Communications.

Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press: A Practical Guide To Taping Phone Calls & In-Person Conversations in the 50 States & District Of Columbia

Broadcast of Telephone Conversations, 47 C.F.R. §73.1206 (1989)

P.L. 99-508 ("The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986"), amending 18 U.S.C. § 2510

18 U.S.C. § 2510 - (1999) (Wire & Electronic Communications Interception & Interception of Oral Communications)

FCC Consumer Information Bureau:

“Recording Telephone Conversations”

“Interception & Divulgence Of Radio Communications”

U.S. Department of Justice:

USA Bulletin, September 1997 Vol. 45, No. 5, 6. Electronic Investigative Techniques I, II:



Telephone Tape Recording Law. Ralph Thomas. National Association Of Investigative Specialists.

Dealing with Phone Calls from Debt Creditors Looking for Your Payment

* Even though I've tried to contain the comments to one page and eliminate redundancy - comments have now spilled onto a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th page. Please remember that your question may be answered on another page of comments. (You may have to click on "newer comments" to see them)

Refer to these related Fix Your Thinking articles:

Unmask Anonymous or blocked caller IDs

How Can I Place A Call Anonymously

Also see this wikipedia article:

Saturday, January 10, 2004

Your Rights, The Law, & Litigation

* UPDATED March 13 2008

This section of FIX YOUR THINKING provides references to laws, legal issues, and your rights. Status of many of Apple Computer's legal proceedings can be found in each 10k filing - an annual report on the company's financials. See the 2005, 2006, and 2007 10k reports [ legal issues ] at the bottom of the section below.

* picture courtesy of ENgadget

July 15 1992: Apple Sues Microsoft Over Windows/Provides ammo for Lindows

August 9 1999: Apple Sues eMachines for iMac knockoff

August 2 2000: Apple Sues "Anonymous Sources" of Rumor Websites

Jan 24 2000: Apple Wins Battle Over ColorSync Technology

Jan 31 2002: Apple sued over OSX support for early G3s

May 1 2003: Umax Settles Concerning Scanner Support/Rebates For Macs

Sept 11 2003: Apple Sued By The Beatles Over iTunes Music Store

Jan 1 2004: CNN: Apple Faces Potential iPod/iBook/PowerBook Lawsuits

Jan 2 2004: California Bans PowerBooks/iBooks In Front Car Seats

Feb 5 2004: Apple & Unova settle patent issues over batteries/scanners

Feb 24 2004: Eminem sues Apple over use of song in commercial

March 10 2004: French sue Apple over iPod

March 12 2004: Apple sued because PowerMac G4 causes fire

March 19 2004: Apple Resellers renew lawsuit effort

April 22 2004: Apple among 31 others sued over use of JPEG compression

July 20 2004: BTG Sues Apple & Microsoft over software update process

September 21 2004: PowerLogix Seeks Damages From Competitors/Partners

October 6 2004: Apple & Others Sued Over LCD Display Patent by Honeywell

November 10 2004: French Court Dismisses Virgin Ent. Claim on iTunes/iPod DRM

December 6 2004: Apple sues over domain name

December 16 2004: Apple sues anonymous sources for leaking product information

December 21 2004: Apple sues BitTorrent P2P users for distributing MacOS 10.4

January 5 2005: Apple Sues Think Secret for product leaks

January 6 2005: Apple sued for unfair practices over iPod/iTunes link/DRM

March 1 2005: Former Apple Employee Sues For Wrongful Termination

March 7 2005: Hong Kong company sues Apple over iTunes Store web verification

March 15 2005: Apple wins lawsuit for cybersquatting w/ web domain

April 28 2005: Apple Sued By Distibutor Tiger Direct For Tiger Mac OS 10.4

May 21 2005: Lesbian Sues Apple For Racial & Sexual Orientation Discrimination

June 13 2005: Apple Sued Over iTunes Interface

August 26 2005: Apple iPod Settlement for 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Gen Battery Problems

September 13 2005: Australian Apple Reseller Buzzle Claims Apple Responsible For Demise; Files Suit

November 4 2005: Apple sent cease & desist from Lugz shoe company over Eminem iTunes TV ad

December 5 2005: Apple Sues iOps Over iPod Mini Ripoffs

January 5 2006: Apple sues BURST.COM for media streaming patent invalidation

February 2 2006: Apple Sued For iPod causing Hearing Loss?

February 2 2006: Judges Says iPod/iTunes Monopoly Suit Can Move Forward

February 10 2006: AT&T Sues Apple over MPEG 4 Patent in Quicktime

May 8 2006: Apple Computer Wins Lawsuit Brought on By Beatles Apple Corps Records

May 15 2006: Creative Files Lawsuit Against Apple For iPod Patent

May 19 2006: Apple Files Countersuit Against Creative For Prior Art

June 6 2006: Apple files 2nd Lawsuit Against Creative/Requests Injunction

June 14 2006: Vermont Man Sues Apple Over iTunes "Click Song To Play" Patent

June 19 2006: Apple Sends iPodMyBaby.COM a cease & desist

August 23 2006: Apple Settles With Creative Over iPod Patent

August 28 2006: Kantrowitz, Goldhamer & Graifman Announces Class Action Against Apple Computer for stock options fraud

September 2006: Apple settles iTunes Interface Patent Suit

November14 2006: Apple Settles lawsuit Over ADC 17" LCD Problems In Australian Market

January 3 2007: Apple sued for iTunes for "digital platform" by Intertainer

January 5 2007: Lux Pro (maker of imitation iPod Shuffle) Sues Apple For Dominating Mp3 Market

January 11 2007: Cisco Sues Apple Over "iPhone" Name

January 16 2007: Apple Files Suit Against iPhone OS Skins/Themes Creators

January 23 2007: Apple Sued Over iPod Click Wheel Functionality

February 23 2007: Texas Mp3 Sues Apple Sandisk & samsung over patent for MP3s that was granted 10 Years AFTER MP3's became widely known

March 27 2007: Apple named w/ dozens of others in Bluetooth patent suit

April 23 2007: Apple sued over use of tabs in Mac OS 10.4 by Patent Squatting Firm

May 18 2007: Apple sued for Macbook screens being "grainy" & "sparkly"

July 4 2007: Apple sued for various copyright claims; iTunes Song Distribution/ Apple TV imagery

Sept 26 2007: Shareholder wins judge order to see Apple options records

Sept 27 2007: South carolina Prison Inmate Sues Apple For Making OJ Simpson A Hitman (True)

Sept 28 2007: Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates

Oct 2 2007: Suit claims Nike, Apple stole idea for Nike+ iPod Sport Kit

Oct 5 2007: Apple Sued For Bricking Unlocked iPhones

March 13 2008: Apple Sued By ZapMedia For iTunes Patent

Lawsuit Filed Against Apple For tIme Machine & iPod/iPhone Interface

Most lawsuits filed against Apple are decided in Apple's favor, settled, or dismissed before trial.

More complete details of Apple litigation can be found in the EDGAR online 10k reports Apple files with the SEC (look towards the bottom of each report):

Apple's 10k 2005 Report on Litigation

Apple's 10k 2006 Report on Litigation

Apple's 10k 2007 Report on Litigation


Some helpful internet resources:

A place to get consideration from an attorney for free!

Your right to have satellite TV/Internet Access at Condos & Apartments

Legal Information Institute

Laws concerning parody/fair use of imagery


National Do Not Call Phone List

Carry the US Constitution & Bill Of Rights on your iPod

Tuesday, January 06, 2004

Apple Related Recalls & Safety Warnings

* UPDATED May 9 2008

This section features various product recalls, notices, and safety information, plus, information on customer complaints.

May 9 2008 Apple agrees to settlement for faulty iBook/PowerBook AC adapters

October 5 2007 Apple admits to aluminum iMac problems

November 6 2006 Apple extends PowerMac G5 Power Supply Replacement program

August 21 2006 Apple makes voluntary "high standards recall" on MacBook Pro batteries

July 26 2006: Silent Apple Recall on Macbook Pro Batteries

June 26 2006: Apple extends eMac repairs for video distortion issues

September 28 2005: Apple Recalls Some iPod Nanos (non issue)

August 19 2005: Apple Extends iMac G5 Repairs for Video Issues

May 20 2005: Apple Voluntarily Recalls some iBook and PowerBook batteries

February 23 2005: JBL recalls iPod Soundstage Speaker/Docks

September 27 2004: Apple extends repairs for LCD displays in aluminum PowerBooks

August 19 2004: Apple Recalls Some G4 PowerBook Batteries

March 3 2004: Apple acknowledges noise on Dual G5 machines

February 6, 2004: Apple responds to Safari Browser Update complaints

January 29 2004: Apple Repair Extension/Recall - Dual USB/White iBooks

February 1 2002: Information regarding PowerBook G3 Hinge Problems

November 2001: Information concerning PowerBook G4 paint flaking

July 6 2001: Apple recalls rectangular black PowerBook G3 AC adapters

Summer 2001:Apple informally recalls Graphite Base Station 1.0 models

Fall 1994: Problems w/ 68LC040 processors FPU emulation - freezes
(Please assist this site with a link to the above problem)

Monday, January 05, 2004

Attorney General Phone Number Listings By State

Alabama (334) 242-7300

Alaska (907) 465-2133

American Samoa (684) 633-4163

Arizona (602) 542-4206

Arkansas (501) 682-2007

California (916) 445-9555 (Location of Apple Computer, Paypal)

Colorado (303) 866-3052

Connecticut (860) 808-5318

Delaware (302) 577-8400

District of Columbia (202) 727-6248

Florida (850) 487-1963

Georgia (404) 656-4585 (Location of Daystar Digital)

Guam (671) 475-3324

Hawaii (808) 586-1282

Idaho (208) 334-2400

Illinois (312) 814-2503

Indiana (317) 232-6201

Iowa (515) 281-3053

Kansas (785) 296-2215

Kentucky (502) 696-5300

Louisiana (225) 342-7013

Maine (207) 626-8800

Maryland (410) 576-6300

Massachusetts (617) 727-2200

Michigan (517) 373-1110 (Location of Tandy / Radio Shack)

Minnesota (651) 296-6196

Mississippi (601) 359-3692

Missouri (573) 751-3321

Montana (406) 444-2026

Nebraska (402) 471-2682

Nevada (775) 684-1100

New Hampshire (603) 271-3658

New Jersey (609) 292-4925

New Mexico (505) 827-6000

New York (518) 474-7330

North Carolina (919) 716-6400

North Dakota (701) 328-2210

N. Mariana Islands (670) 664-2341

Ohio (614) 466-3376 (Location of Motorola)

Oklahoma (405) 521-3921

Oregon (503) 378-4732

Pennsylvania (717) 787-3391 (Location Of Kensington Computer Products)

Puerto Rico (787) 721-7700

Rhode Island (401) 274-4400

South Carolina (803) 734-3970 (Location Of Digital Lifestyle Outfitters)

South Dakota (605) 773-3215

Tennessee (615) 741-5860 (Location of Griffin Technologies (iTrip, etc), DVForge, MacMice)

Texas (512) 463-2191

Utah (801) 538-1326

Vermont (802) 828-3171

Virginia (804) 786-2071

Virgin Islands (340) 774-5666

Washington (360) 753-6200 (Location of Microsoft)

West Virginia (304) 558-2021

Wisconsin (608) 266-1221

Wyoming (307) 777-7841

* if you would like to add to the Mac related business locations state by state, please post as a comment to this page