Sometimes I read about the US legal system and despair. Quite often, in fact. Ars Technica reports that three iPad users are now suing Apple over the iPad, and have filed a class-action lawsuit to “redress and end [Apple’s] pattern of unlawful conduct” regarding promises Apple made.

The problem, apparently, is that the iPad, like all electronic goods, has the sheer audacity to shut down when a critical operating temperature is reached—typically around 35°C. This is common among similar products—Kindle does the same, although you might get another couple of degrees out of it.

The idiot claimants argue that because Apple said “reading on the iPad is just like reading a book,” the company is a big, fat liar, because a real book can be used in “the sunlight or other normal environmental conditions” without shutting off.

I wonder if there’s the possibility in law for Apple to sue these people for being cretins? As Ars asks, do Apple’s claims really make the company “guilty of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, deceptive advertising, unfair business practices, breach of express or implied warranty, intentional misrepresentation, or unjust enrichment?”

Maybe these opportunistic dimwits should have gone the whole hog:

• “I made a note in biro in the margin of a book on my iPad, and when I turned the page, it was still there! APPLE LIED TO ME!”
• “I tried folding the page to keep my place in a book on my iPad, but the page wouldn’t fold. In the end, I had to put the iPad in a vice and bend it, but then the entire thing shattered! THIS DOESN’T HAPPEN WITH REAL BOOKS!”
• “When I decided I’d had enough of reading, I opened Safari and surfed the internet and also downloaded my email, while listening to my favourite album, and then it dawned on me: this isn’t like a book at all! I DEMAND APPLE GIVES ME MONEY!”

My advice to Apple: make a ‘special’ iPad for these ‘special’ people—nip into the local stationary shop, scrawl ‘iPad’ on a couple of paper pads and mail them to the claimants. It won’t be quite as magical as the real thing, but at least these idiots won’t be able to complain about it being unusable in the hot sun; nor will they be able to say it doesn’t work exactly like a paper-based object.

Engadget’s report Toshiba shows off Smart Pad tablet prototype, promises launch before October highlights succinctly everything that’s wrong with pretty much every PC manufacturer bar Apple. It talks about Toshiba’s exciting response to the iPad, the so-called ‘Smart Pad’; it looks nice enough (in fact, it looks pretty much identical to an iPad), but there the ‘smart’ ends. This is because the tablet’s due to launch “before October” and run either Android or Windows 7.

That’s right: Toshiba is a few months away from releasing its iPad rival and hasn’t decided which operating system it will run. Clearly, it’s sure to beat the tightly integrated, user-friendly experience of the iPad. That said, you can put money on loads of tech hacks citing it as an ‘iPad killer’, due to some random specs that most users won’t care about.

Depressingly, Engadget also reports that HP’s Slate is no longer a consumer product, and will instead be deployed for enterprise. HP’s acquisition of Palm made me think it was the one company that was about to play the game right, taking on Apple in an Apple-like fashion, by being able to develop a fully integrated computing solution. There is speculation that HP will appease Microsoft by still releasing Slate with Windows 7 but then offer the consumer version with PalmOS, but that makes little strategic sense. That would keep Microsoft somewhat happy, but also fragment the platform and irk geek consumers who somehow think that having Windows 7 on a tablet is a good idea—as opposed to an operating system that was actually designed to have on a tablet.

So what would you do if a review you wrote that smacked of press release/brochure copy got ‘busted’, and a journo contacted you for more info, to get your side of the story?

1. Not respond at all, playing the ‘la la la la la—I can’t hear you’ game.
2. Pull the article, and hope no-one notices.
3. Come clean, admitting that you’d screwed up (or, if there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation, offer said perfectly reasonable explanation and leave it at that).
4. Ban the journo’s IP, and then dig up his personal details and publish them on a hall-of-shame thread, leading, naturally, to said journo continuing investigating any alleged wrongdoing.

Update: Turns out the answer is 4 and 5, 5 being ‘use the DMCA to have the site in question suspended for copyright infringement‘ on what are, charitably, extremely dubious grounds.

Apple’s announced its third-quarter results, and they make for grim reading. Apple only managed to post revenue of $15.7 billion and a net quarterly profit of $3.25 billion. This came in part from Apple selling a mere 3.47 million Macs during the quarter, which in itself represented a pitiful 33 per cent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. With certifiable, deranged analysts expecting Apple to post profits of $900 trillion, the company’s all-time record revenue and earnings increase of just 78 per cent looks miniscule by comparison.

Additionally, Apple reports that 3.27 million iPads were sold during the quarter. “iPad is off to a terrific start,” said Apple CEO Steve Jobs, ignoring the fact that crazed, deluded, stupid analysts had predicted Apple would sell 3.27 million iPads per day and is therefore well behind targets set by these self-important idiots who don’t have a clue and yet get paid huge sums of money to write all sorts of garbage about Apple that never comes to pass.

Elsewhere, since analysts also predicted iPad would be a failure and that Apple would only sell eight units in total, the 3.27 million figure is extremely worrying, since it means eight people now somehow own over 400,000 iPads each and likely won’t have the money or space for any more, which will therefore impact Apple’s Q4 results.

AAPL was up 2.57% today, on the back of the results, but Lenovo was up more at 2.66%, proving that Apple doesn’t know what it’s doing and should really learn from the Chinese company who [SUB: PLEASE ADD SOMETHING ON LENOVO HERE—WHO THE HELL ARE THOSE GUYS ANYWAY?]

We all know the Tories hate the BBC, because they hate anything that’s not privatised. However, due to the public not realising the value the BBC offers, the ‘slow death of the BBC’ stance is now taken by pretty much every political party.

Jeremy Hunt, the incumbent culture secretary, has now suggested the licence fee could “absolutely” fall next year, using the excuse of the UK’s “very constrained” financial situation. (Source: MediaWeek.)

I realise some people are irked about paying for the BBC, but let’s put things in perspective. £145.50 is about £12 per month, or 40p per day. That’s less than the price of a newspaper, half a typical candy bar, or a third of a cup of coffee. It’s less than BT charges me for line-rental alone. It’s only 80p more per week than The Times is charging for online access to its two websites. And yet for your 40p per day/£2.80 per week BBC fee, you get a bunch of ad-free TV stations, ad-free radio (including Radio 6, which, as recent events show, has no effective competition at all), and an ad-free (if you’re in the UK) website, including decent, reasonably impartial news coverage.

Reducing the licence fee will force the BBC into terminal decline. Some will argue removing the BBC will improve competition, but it won’t. Rupert Murdoch already effectively drives everything else in this area, and so you’ll merely see increasing competition for advertising, leading to more dumbing down of content and increasingly advertising-led/advertising-friendly news. People will then pine for the “good old days” of the BBC, but by then it’ll be too late.

If you don’t want the BBC beaten to a bloody pulp, write to your MP. Alternatively, use the 38 Degrees site to speak out against BBC cuts and convince Vince Cable to stand up to Rupert Murdoch.