A Saratoga, Calif., attorney is increasing the legal heat on Apple in the wake of the iPhone bricking dispute.
[People Coming Via Slashdot: You want this post from Friday, Oct. 5, 7:00pm, which reports on the actual filing of the suit: Apple Class-Action Suit Filed By California Man Over iPhone Bricking.]

Lawyer Damian Fernandez has launched the Apple iPhone Lawsuit Web site, where he's actively soliciting people to lawyer up for a little litigation.

Posts Fernandez on his site:

If you would like to join in filing a lawsuit against Apple Inc., you should contact us immediately if any one of the following categories applies to you:

--You own an iPhone and you want to transfer to a wireless carrier other than AT&T. You fall into this category even if you did not unlock your iPhone or have your iPhone disabled by an iPhone update

--Your iPhone was disabled, malfunctioned, or you had third-party applications erased after you downloaded iPhone update 1.1.1

--You took your iPhone to Apple for repair and Apple refused to honor your warranty because you did any one the following: (1) unlocked your iPhone, or (2) installed a third-party application.

(He's also adding in a couple of unrelated categories, including users who've incurred cancellation fees transferring to AT&T and those who had roaming charges.)

Careful readers will note that my previous post referred to a person who was querying Apple's iPhone discussion forum to find out whether there was any interest in a class-action suit against the company. (Apple subsequently deleted the post.)

Fernandez's solicitation of people to join the suit, and the fact that he's actually a lawyer, obviously, kicks the legal activity up a notch.

The big question: Can he win a suit, or is Apple insulated by the fact that it's given advance warning to iPhone users that bad things (very, very bad things) would happen to those who messed with a mobile device they'd paid good money for?

P.S. See my original post, Apple Users Talking Class-Action Lawsuit Over iPhone Locking, as well as Apple's official response in the follow-up, Apple Sticking To Guns Amid iPhone 'Bricking' Fiasco.

[Update: Tuesday, Oct. 2, 5:30 p.m.] Damian Hernandez pinged me to ask that I make clear that, because of laws regarding lawyer advertising, he's only seeking California residents to join in his suit. As well, he's added a sixth category to his class-action list, which is people who purchased a third-party warranty at extra cost because of Apple's released statement that it will not honor warranties on unlocked iPhones.

I asked Damian a question that I think is on the minds of all the people who've posted comments here and on my previous posts. Namely, why does he think he can win? A lot of people are taking the position that Apple warned users of the consequences of unlocking or downloading third-party apps. Therefore, users agreed to a "contract" and have nothing to complain about or litigate.

He politely declined to answer, saying he couldn't because of rules of professional conduct prohibiting pre-lawsuit communications.

So, I'll throw the question open to any attorneys out there, because their comments are worth more than our layperson speculation: Is there a case here?

[Update: Friday, Oct. 5, 7:00pm. See Apple Class-Action Suit Filed By California Man Over iPhone Bricking.]