Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,691
39,595



Late last week and early this week, both of the plaintiffs in the ongoing class action iPod lawsuit that Apple is fighting in court were disqualified, leading Apple to file for a dismissal. The judge presiding over the case ruled that the lawsuit would continue, however, and lawyers for the plaintiffs have now tracked down a replacement, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Barbara Bennett, a 65-year-old amateur ice dancer from Boston was flown into Oakland this morning to testify in the U.S. District Court. Bennett reportedly purchased an iPod in late 2006, which falls within the September 12, 2006 to March 31, 2009 dates covered in the lawsuit.

ipod-original.jpg
Bennett told the court how she learned to skate backwards and used iPods while skating. Attorneys questioned her about when she purchased the devices. The iPod Nano she bought in late 2006 appeared to qualify her as a class member.

"We're on the right track," Judge Rogers said to the attorneys after they interviewed Bennett.
Judge Rogers initially offered to put the trial on hold for two days to give Apple time to investigate new plaintiffs, but the company declined, leading the judge to continue the trial. She also informed Apple that the snafu over plaintiff purchase dates could give the Cupertino company a reason to appeal. "You now have an appealable issue," she told Apple attorneys.

The iPod lawsuit has received quite a bit of attention since it began last week, as it featured a video deposition and emails from former Apple CEO Steve Jobs. In the case, the plaintiffs have argued that Apple had an obligation to allow third-party companies to load music onto the iPod, and that its moves to block competitors created a monopoly.

Apple, however, has argued that pressure from record companies and a desire to protect customers from malicious content kept it from making iTunes and the iPod more accessible to third-party companies. The lawsuit, which seeks $350 million in damages, is expected to last for several more days, with the jury deliberating on a verdict next week.

Article Link: Lawyers in iPod Class Action Lawsuit Track Down New Plaintiff
 
This will never go through. Apple will keep finding ways to set it back until it is not worth the money to continue the suit
 
I think my 5th generation iPod may have been bought within this time frame... I either got it in late September of 2005 or 2006...

The back of it says:

Serial No.: JQ60695JTXM
Designed by Apple in California Assembled in China Model No.: A1136 EMC No.: 2065
Rated 5-30V 1A Max. TM and (c) 2005 Apple Computers, Inc. All rights reserved​

The (c) 2005 is making me think that it was probably bought in 2005... but maybe that just indicates when the model was designed, not when I actually bought it?
 
Congratulations. How did they possibly find a person from 8 years ago that owned an iPod?
 
This is almost at the level of ambulance chasing. Have they done a late night, cheap television commercial as is done by law firms for pharma or product liability lawsuits?
 
I'm really wondering how many people keep their old iPods and receipts from 8 years ago? I have an old iPod but I sure as hell don't have the receipt for it. I'm really curious if a 65 year old can remember that far back.
 
I don't see how her hobbies or occupation are relevant to the case or for anyone here to comment. What difference does it matter. All that matters is whether or not she purchases the iPod in the timeframe and is a viable plaintiff. End of story.
 
I don't see how her hobbies or occupation are relevant to the case or for anyone here to comment. What difference does it matter. All that matters is whether or not she purchases the iPod in the timeframe and is a viable plaintiff. End of story.

It's a well known fact that 65 year old backward ice skaters use ghettoblasters, not iPods.
 
It's a well known fact that 65 year old backward ice skaters use ghettoblasters, not iPods.

At that age, his big thing was the five transistor radio in the front pocket of his t-shirt as it played Link Wray and Elvis songs.
 
I'm sure the lawyers have already come up with a way to make it seem like this woman's life was irreversibly destroyed by Apple's DRM.

If that turns out to be too much trouble, there are probably one or two people with "affected" iPods on these forums that would consider it a huge honor to testify against Apple.
 
I'm really wondering how many people keep their old iPods and receipts from 8 years ago? I have an old iPod but I sure as hell don't have the receipt for it. I'm really curious if a 65 year old can remember that far back.

I have the receipts for all my apple stuff. I've probably got my 1993 LC 475 receipt somewhere.

And yes I know plenty of 80 year olds who remember backto when they were 4 or 3 so yeah, 65 isn't even that old.
 
Assuming Apple loses, will the damages be based upon the damages this one person is determined to have suffered or will they be based on the seriousness of the offence?

Just what I was thinking. They need a plaintiff who has been damaged.

Did this plaintiff in question have DRM'd music from another vendor that was erased by Apple?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.