Yet another class action lawsuit has been filed against Apple and AT&T, targeting the two companies' practices when it comes to the iPhone. Extremely similar to the suit filed a week and a half ago by Californian Timothy Smith, California resident Lucy Rivello and Washington resident Paul Holman have accused Apple of entering into an unlawful agreement with AT&T that ultimately caused the two companies to commit a number of illegal acts. This includes preventing the iPhone from being unlocked and used on other carriers, as well as keeping third-parties from developing software for the iPhone.

The 24-page complaint details the history of the cellular industry in the US, going back to the differences between GSM and CDMA, EDGE and EVDO, the purposes of SIM cards and how phones that use them differ from phones offered by CDMA carriers, and so on. Rivello and Holman also point out AT&T's refusal to issue unlock codes to iPhone owners despite being willing to do so for phones from other carriers, which they say is illegal. The suit cites the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and recent provisions that allow customers to lawfully unlock their phones.

The plaintiffs also cite a statement made by Steve Jobs in September: "We try to stay ahead. People will try to break in, and it's our job to stop them breaking in." This, combined with allegations that Apple worked directly against third-party computer applications to add legally-purchased ringtones to the iPhone, the discovery of multiple unlocking methods, and the plethora of third-party native iPhone applications, led up to the now-infamous statement made by Apple the following week. "Apple has discovered that many of the unauthorized iPhone unlocking programs available on the Internet cause irreparable damage to the iPhone's software, which will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed."

Indeed, when the 1.1.1 firmware update was issued, many phones that had been unlocked were rendered inoperable, and all third-party native apps for the iPhone had been disabled. The complaint says that this was no accident: Apple and AT&T conspired to make this happen, despite many claims to the contrary by Apple representatives. "On information and belief, Apple expressly designed its software release version 1.1.1 expressly to disable Third Party Apps and to disable any unlocked SIM cards, and to create technical barriers to install new Third Party Apps or unlock the SIM cards," reads the complaint. The companies then proceeded to void the warranties of all iPhone owners who had installed third-party applications and refused to service them—more unlawful actions, say the plaintiffs.

Finally, the lawsuit accuses Apple and AT&T of being in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, the California Business and Professions Code, The Cartwright Act, The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The Federal Trade Commission Act, The Communications Act of 1934, and The Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Now, to the meat of the manner: money (that's what I want!). The suit says that the plaintiffs and the class have been injured in their business and property and are entitled to direct and consequential damages of "no less than $200 million," as well as punitive damages of "no less than $600 million." The plaintiffs also call for an accounting of all "improper earnings" by Apple and AT&T, an injunction prohibiting all of the aforementioned conduct, attorneys' fees (including interest), and for anything else that the court deems appropriate.

It's a bit early to say whether this complaint will stand up in court, but it could prove to be a major irritant to Apple and AT&T if it is certified as a class action. The lawsuit certainly covers a number of points about Apple's and AT&T's actions that have ruffled more than a few feathers. It appears as if the crux of Rivello and Holman's argument centers around the companies' intent when it comes to bricking the iPhones and then voiding warranties. The plaintiffs and the class may end up having to prove somehow that Apple intentionally wrote its 1.1.1 firmware to render unlocked and hacked iPhones inoperable.