Lawsuit: Apple Watch should not be called "COâ‚‚-neutral"
Environmental organizations in Germany have already accused Apple of using the term COâ‚‚ neutrality incorrectly.
Apple Watch Ultra: How eco-friendly is it really?
(Image: Apple)
Apple advertises its Apple Watch of the last two generations with the claim that it is now "COâ‚‚-neutral" when using certain bands. The company even wants to compensate for the user's electricity consumption with a "carbon offset". However, such statements are viewed critically by environmentalists and criticized as possible greenwashing. Following a similar lawsuit in Germany filed by Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) last year, seven Apple Watch buyers in California have now joined together in a class action lawsuit.
Apple is said to have contributed nothing
The civil case before the Federal Court in San Jose (Dib et al v Apple Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 25-02043) alleges that Apple falsely labeled three variants of the Apple Watch – Series 9, SE and Ultra 2 – as "carbon neutral" and "environmentally friendly". This is "false and misleading", the plaintiffs claim, according to a report by Reuters. The devices, which were launched on the market in September 2023, use carbon offsets, among other things.
Videos by heise
The plaintiffs, who come from California, Washington, D.C. and Florida, see at least two projects that Apple supports or has carried out as problematic. One of them, "Chyulu Hills" in Kenya, is said to be located in a national park that has been subject to a deforestation ban since 1983, while another, the "Guinan Project" in China, was already "densely forested" before the carbon offset started in 2015. In both cases, climate gas reductions were achieved there without Apple contributing anything. "Since Apple's claims of carbon neutrality are based on the effectiveness and legitimacy of these projects, Apple's claims of carbon neutrality are false and misleading," the statement of claim said.
DUH sued for similar motives
The plaintiffs emphasize that 70 percent of customers in the US and Canada now consider it important that products are environmentally sustainable. They say they would not have purchased the appliances if they had "known the truth". The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages plus a ban on Apple's marketing claims that the devices are "carbon neutral".
In Germany, the DUH sued on similar grounds. Apple's statement was "a marketing gag" and deceived customers. Specifically, DUH criticized exactly which compensation projects Apple relies on. It is unclear whether these can actually guarantee the promised effect. Apple's so-called "Restore Fund" is "largely non-transparent" and provides no information on long-term monitoring.
Empfohlener redaktioneller Inhalt
Mit Ihrer Zustimmung wird hier ein externer Preisvergleich (heise Preisvergleich) geladen.
Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass mir externe Inhalte angezeigt werden. Damit können personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen (heise Preisvergleich) übermittelt werden. Mehr dazu in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
(bsc)
