California resident Timothy Smith on Friday filed a class-action lawsuit against Apple, alleging that the iPhone maker violated the state's antitrust law. The suit was filed on behalf of Smith by Damian Fernandez, the attorney who's been seeking plaintiffs for a class-action case against Apple over iPhone bricking.Specifically, Timothy P. Smith v. Apple Inc. charges the iPhone maker with violating the Cartwright Act, because, according to the court papers, "Apple prohibits iPhone consumers from using and purchasing a cell phone service other than through AT&T."

The suit also says that cell phone unlocking is completely legal, citing traditional copyright law as well as the more recent Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

In addition, Smith's suit claims that "as a result of Apple's unlawful and anti-competitive conduct, consumers continue to pay artificially inflated prices for the iPhone and AT&T's cell phone service."

What is Smith seeking from Apple? Interestingly, the suit doesn't name a dollar amount. While that would be surprising if this were a one-off action, it's not all that unusual in a class action. In the latter, members of the class usually get some form of redress (say, discount coupons and a small amount of money), while the attorneys get the big payout.

The suit is asking the court to issue an injunction against Apple, which prevents it from selling the iPhone with any software lock. It also asks that Apple be enjoined from denying warranty service to users of unlocked iPhones and from requiring iPhone users to get their phone service through AT&T.

The suit is a class-action case, which means that Fernandez expects additional plaintiffs to join Smith. Right now, Smith is the only party involved. Court papers say that Smith and Fernandez don't yet know the exact size of the class. The document simply points out that there are estimated to be 1.28 million iPhone owners and that several hundred thousand of them are believed to have unlocked their devices. Those who've been bricked would presumably be potential plaintiffs.

I pinged Fernandez about that and also asked him about the omission of a specific dollar figure. Here's what he e-mailed me back:

The complaint alleges that we are seeking "an amount according to proof at trial." We do not yet know the exact number of iPhone owners and the exact number of consumers damaged by the iPhone update. In California, it is not necessary to state the exact amount of money sought. It is sufficient to state that it will be proven at trial.

From the court papers, the damages Timothy Smith is seeking in his ibricking suit against Apple. (Click picture to enlarge, and to see the second part of this doc.)

Fernandez's action could be the tipping point in the iPhone bricking snowball, which has been steadily gaining steam regardless of whether the problems some users suffered as the result of the software update were completely unintentional. Indeed, no one has proved any negative intent on Apple's part.

Technology aside, the whole episode has clearly been a public-relations disaster for Apple. Earlier this week, I thought things had died down.

However, with the filing of this suit, it seems like the PR heat will continue. Remember also there's another suit potentially taking shape. On Thursday, I wrote about New York attorney Jean Wang, who's considering filing a class action against Apple over the recent iPhone price cut.

P.S. Here are the week's other posts on the topic:

• Apple Users Talking Class-Action Lawsuit Over iPhone Locking
• Apple Sticking To Guns Amid iPhone 'Bricking' Fiasco
• California Lawyer Seeking Plaintiffs For iPhone Class-Action Suit
• Nokia Touts Its Open Platform As Antidote To Apple's iPhone
• Is iPhone Update Bricking Legit Users?
• iPhone 'Brick' Problems Apparently Easing For Apple Updaters