Nano Owners Sue Apple [Archive]

devilot

Oct 21, 2005, 03:41 PM

The plaintiffs are asking for damages including the price paid for the nanos, statutory and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. They are asking for a share of nano profits.That seems like a lot to me... I sort of doubt that this will get as big as the battery issue class action law suite, though.

Hmm... would this new law suit take into account people who heard the initial reports and purchased materials to protect their nanos?

stoid

Oct 21, 2005, 03:46 PM

As Douglas Adams wrote, I hope that the court decides that life itself has been unfair, and as a punishment, it will be removed from those filing this stupid and frivolous lawsuit.

mainstreetmark

Oct 21, 2005, 04:00 PM

A paper towel! I'd hardly call that a "soft" cloth.

I can't even believe they're asking for a share of the profits. That's ridiculous and smacks of greed.

he wants that easy money
it's sad but it's true
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
they want that easy money
i don't understand
if you sceem and you plan you can't get your hands
on no easy money
--TS

MacDawg

Oct 21, 2005, 04:04 PM

Good grief!
Will the insanity ever stop?

A share of the profits?? Ha! Ha!
Sounds like the music industry talking! They ought to just combine the lawsuits!

Woof, Woof – Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

runninmac

Oct 21, 2005, 04:04 PM

They have no merit. Apple has already responded with a fair solution.
You can replace it for free, requesting more than that is rediculous.

Wait?!? Did i miss something? If your nanos screen is scratched you can return it to the seller (in my case my local apple store) and get a new one? If so what do i have to do?

devilot

Oct 21, 2005, 04:06 PM

Wait?!? Did i miss something? If your nanos screen is scratched you can return it to the seller (in my case my local apple store) and get a new one? If so what do i have to do?I thought that applied to customers w/ the broken/cracked nano screens... I think the rest of the customers w/ scratched up nanos are outta luck for now.

MacDawg

Oct 21, 2005, 04:07 PM

I thought that applied to customers w/ the broken/cracked nano screens... I think the rest of the customers w/ scratched up nanos are outta luck for now.

I think that is correct too

Woof, Woof – Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

mainstreetmark

Oct 21, 2005, 04:12 PM

My 3rd Gen iPod has scratches on the screen, even though it's been in the case. I'm gonna go talk to a Lawyer about Apple and Belkin or whoever made my case. Yeah! Money!

devilot

Oct 21, 2005, 04:13 PM

My 3rd Gen iPod has scratches on the screen, even though it's been in the case. I'm gonna go talk to a Lawyer about Apple and Belkin or whoever made my case. Yeah! Money!I am not saying that the customers in this situation are correct, but I believe that their argument is that the nano scratches more easily than previous generations of iPods.

Lacero

Oct 21, 2005, 04:15 PM

Analog Kid

Oct 21, 2005, 04:16 PM

Does Microsoft, Dell or Sony get hit with these kinds of lawsuits?

I buy stuff all the time that breaks, or gets damaged somehow-er-other. Return it or suck it up, maybe decide you don't trust the manufacturer, but a lawsuit for something that isn't dangerous seems a little absurd...

hyperpasta

Oct 21, 2005, 04:16 PM

If the nano does get scrathed extreemly by a paper towel, then they have the right to sue. But I HIGHLY doubt it. If they do, then its oly on some, because my brother has a nano that seems plenty durable.

Keynoteuser

Oct 21, 2005, 04:31 PM

How can someone with a sane mind buy a product, see it got scratched and then not only sue for that money back, but extra money on top of that...and then part of the PROFITS from the ENTIRE PRODUCT SALES? How could a judge NOT throw this out. I mean, that last part alone pretty much tells you they're trying to commit fraud against Apple by getting a lawyer to allow them to "steal" profits from Apple. "My iPod is scratched, so now I not only want my money back, but I want the money you made from all the other shmucks with scratched screens too!"

Nermal

Oct 21, 2005, 05:26 PM

I saw this "news" on Slashdot. Someone commented that they've never heard of anyone suing Casio after scratching their watch, so why should Apple be any different?

Lacero

Oct 21, 2005, 05:27 PM

Casio watches don't cost $249.

Nermal

Oct 21, 2005, 05:54 PM

They do here! :eek:

24C

Oct 21, 2005, 06:17 PM

As much as I love Apple, this class-action lawsuit is necessary. Paper towels should not easily scratch any electronic device meant to be held in one's hand. The fact that the nano scratches while something like a watch face does not, spells serious trouble for the music player maker...snip...
I don't dislike Apple either, but class actions are all the rage on your side of the pond. Paper towels come in all shapes, sizes and textures, just like loo paper in fact, so if you got a Nano what are you going to wipe it with? A wet one or 20 grit? :p
Sorry to be so petty, but my mobile gets scratched by being in my pocket, my watch gets scratched & bashed by being on my wrist, it's par for the course...you move, they wear and tear! As to Apple's material selection, apparently it's no different to 4G iPods and the class actions aren't looming for these, so doesn't that suggest these guys are onto a loser? :D

winmacguy

Oct 21, 2005, 06:26 PM

They do here! :eek:
And so do lots of other things :eek: :mad: (cost more than they should do when you buy them overseas! :mad: )

XNine

Oct 21, 2005, 06:42 PM

I agree that this should be thrown out. If you say that the nano is more prone to scratching your off base. Now, will it incur MORE damage because the screen is smaller, then the same damage to the regular sized iPods? Yes. Technically it will, because a scratch .5 inches long on a regular iPod is not a big deal, but on a much smaller screen, it appears to be more damage.

Bottom line, if you buy an iPod, protect it. If you don't protect it, its your fault.

cwedl

Oct 22, 2005, 05:44 AM

Thats rediculous! wanting a share of the companies profits! I can't believe some people, something like this would only happen in America! I hope they lose and have to pay a lot of money to the courts for waisting their time. Apple should just replace it for them, Like they said they would and throw in a case for it!

idkew

Oct 22, 2005, 09:59 AM

iGary

Oct 22, 2005, 10:21 AM

I don't see them getting what they are asking for, but I do see a little blue hyperlink at the bottom of the Apple homepage coming to a screen near you.

devilot

Oct 22, 2005, 10:33 AM

I don't see them getting what they are asking for, but I do see a little blue hyperlink at the bottom of the Apple homepage coming to a screen near you.I agree... as a nano owner, I'd like the option of choosing to bring it in for 'inspection' and then getting a replacement along w/ a case. The case is for the goof balls who wouldn't think of getting one, those who are too cheap to get one, or those who don't believe they should have to pay for protecting a purchase. The sad part about using a case though, is that it does take away from the tiny form factor of the nano-- which is what drew me to it in the first place. :o

BruinJohn

Oct 22, 2005, 10:38 AM

I think this is such a stupid lawsuit. Of course they are going to get scratched. I mean, many people regard Apple as a high end company, and they sell high end, quality stuff. Would you take your Mercedes off roading and sue the car company when you found that you got scratches on the car? If people wanted a nano style player they can lug around and not get damaged or marred, get a case, or get one of those other mp3 players not made by apple. We don't want your business anyway. I think Apple should blacklist the people suing them for this dumb reason and never sell an Apple product to them again. It's great that Apple is appealing to a wider audience, but its also attracting all these dimwits who want to sue everyone. That's my biggest gripe about the legal system here, the excess of frivolous lawsuits. I mean c'mon, its only freakin' $200, or $250!!!!! Did it cause you physical damage? I guess the only bad affect this scratched nano had on you was to cause you to contract "stupidity" thinking you can sue for such an idiotic thing. Apple, if this lawsuit doesn't get thrown out, win the lawsuit, make these people pay their lawyer fees, and blacklist them so that they can never purchase another Apple product again. We don't want their kind anyway.

Sorry, had to vent. Stupid people are just so stupid.

greatdevourer

Oct 22, 2005, 10:48 AM

There's some scratching on my PowerBook! I therefore demand that I recieve 5% off all 15" PowerBooks sold!

dcv

Oct 22, 2005, 11:09 AM

One word: Pathetic. :rolleyes:

clayj

Oct 22, 2005, 11:14 AM

I agree... as a nano owner, I'd like the option of choosing to bring it in for 'inspection' and then getting a replacement along w/ a case. The case is for the goof balls who wouldn't think of getting one, those who are too cheap to get one, or those who don't believe they should have to pay for protecting a purchase. The sad part about using a case though, is that it does take away from the tiny form factor of the nano-- which is what drew me to it in the first place. :oI pretty much agree with this... once I have a case in hand, I should be able to take my nano in to the Apple Store and get them to swap it out for a new one... if the rumors are true, they're unboxing new nanos WEEKLY just for display purposes, so it wouldn't hurt them at all to put my (slightly-scratched) nano out on display and give me a new one... which would go straight into the case.

But saying that people are 'too cheap to get one' is silly, when there were NO cases available for the nano at all for at least a week or two after the nano's launch. I'd've bought a case the same day as the nano, had one been available.

devilot

Oct 22, 2005, 11:18 AM

But saying that people are 'too cheap to get one' is silly, when there were NO cases available for the nano at all for at least a week or two after the nano's launch. I'd've bought a case the same day as the nano, had one been available.No I'm not talking about you or people in your situation... I'm referring to people such as myself who have received/bought nanos while cases are on the market and still have knowingly chosen not to invest in a form of protection (I did invest so I'm referring to the 'others' :p ).

clayj

Oct 22, 2005, 11:23 AM

No I'm not talking about you or people in your situation... I'm referring to people such as myself who have received/bought nanos while cases are on the market and still have knowingly chosen not to invest in a form of protection (I did invest so I'm referring to the 'others' :p ).Ah, gotcha.

Perhaps the next iPods should come with a few InvisibleShield/Martin Fields-type plastic face protectors in the box?

Of course, you all know my preference: Crystal-hard screens. It's embarassing when my nano and my Gen5 iPod both had scratches on their face within 48 hours, but my (almost) 7 year old TAG Heuer watch's face is PERFECT. Surely if Apple were to begin using a large quantity of crystal, the global market for it would expand and prices would come down?

devilot

Oct 22, 2005, 11:25 AM

Ah, gotcha.

Perhaps the next iPods should come with a few InvisibleShield/Martin Fields-type plastic face protectors in the box?See, I really like that idea over a case because I really do feel like a case detracts from the product's 'natural beauty.' :p Not to mention, I would think that a decal-like face protector is cheaper than a case (I don't know if it though) and it definitely fits in the box better. ;)

iDM

Oct 22, 2005, 11:34 AM

Some people these days make me sick, it's one thing to want your money back(which i still disagree with, they should instead get replacements where the issue was fixed) but asking for a percentage or whatever of sales, are you kidding me???

This for some reason reminds me of when A. Rod wanted a percentage of all team merchandise sales, regardless of whether they were his jerseys, bats, or seat cushions!!!!!

I'd probably buy a A. Rod seat cushion so i could sit on.

macEfan

Oct 22, 2005, 01:54 PM

what greedy loosers those people are

AlmostThere

Oct 22, 2005, 03:20 PM

Why should anyone need a case for an iPod Nano? My (regular) iPod and my mobile phone travel regularly in my pocket, shared with keys, key rings and coins. While there has been a little superficial scratching, neither has been in any way significantly disfigured or rendered unusable (My mobile phone has the same face size as the nano, with a larger screen).

If a portable music player cannot take such "abuse" perhaps it shouldn't be marketed as portable. If there are any disclaimers stating that the Nano is especially fragile, can someone point out where they are? Any Nano owners care to comment on the protection that is supplied with the Nano (e.g. PSP comes with a protective sleeve)?

IMHO, it is not unreasonable to expect a product like the Nano (or any other such device) to be able to withstand, as sold, a few 'in pocket' knocks. Note that the case refers to “scratch excessively during normal usage".

Any company marketing a product that is not up to the intended use should expect punitive damages, otherwise there is no incentive to ensure quality. If it scratches from wiping with a paper towel, there are serious quality control issues. (I assume a paper towel is the same in the US as the UK i.e. the stuff you use in the kitchen to mop up spills).

I mean, many people regard Apple as a high end company, and they sell high end, quality stuff.

Couldn't agree more. If the upholstery stitching in my Daewoo started to come undone, I would take it in my stride. If the same thing happened in my Mercedes, I would complain. I expect high standards from a quality manufacturer - that's what you are paying for.

devilot

Oct 22, 2005, 05:11 PM

If a portable music player cannot take such "abuse" perhaps it shouldn't be marketed as portable. If there are any disclaimers stating that the Nano is especially fragile, can someone point out where they are? Any Nano owners care to comment on the protection that is supplied with the Nano (e.g. PSP comes with a protective sleeve)?

IMHO, it is not unreasonable to expect a product like the Nano (or any other such device) to be able to withstand, as sold, a few 'in pocket' knocks. Note that the case refers to “scratch excessively during normal usage".You are right-- there were no disclaimers for the nano (other than other consumers' protests) and *laugh* 'protection' supplied w/ the Nano? NONE. Um, the plastic wrap that says, "Do not steal music." Does that count? :rolleyes: If it scratches from wiping with a paper towel, there are serious quality control issues. (I assume a paper towel is the same in the US as the UK i.e. the stuff you use in the kitchen to mop up spills).Yes, that is the one and the same-- paper towel. But I don't mind that part so much-- it's the fact that even very gentle cloths are able to scratch the Nano. What are we left to use to even clean it much less avoid scratching?

cfranz

Oct 23, 2005, 04:59 PM

It doesn't really matter if this lawsuit is frivolous or not, or if Apple has a quality issue on it's hands (which may well be -- if you produce 1 millon items in a few weeks, there are bound to be some that slip through).

The important thing here is that (however that happened) some lawyers became aware of the issue. They found some people who where willing to go along with the suit. These people can't really lose, as the lawyers only get paid if they win - or settle. So they sue.
Apple wants this to go away, because it is bad press, and they will settle. Laywers get paid, and the rest is irrelevant (except that Apple will have lost money, and reputation). It nicely sums everything up that is bad about US case law. Rich targets get hit by pie-in-the-sky suits that are simply settled, and *lawyers* profit. No-one else. This is not about Apple or the Nano, or scratches. Neither is this about justice. It's about the 'law industry' (for lack of better words) making money.

Since I'm definitely not a lawyer (shudder), I may be talking utter non-sense, but I have the feeling that this case does have a chance to be thrown out because of the damages claim. It will be very difficult to convince a judge that customers have suffered damages as a consequence of scratching the Nano's screen (provided, of course, that Apple replaces excessively scratched Nanos).

-ch