iPod Lawsuit Against Apple Given Class-Action Status

[apolloa]

Is this including international customers like myself in the UK? I couldn't care less to be honest about this rubbish, I plug my Chinese Android tab to my Mac, I transfer my music across, easy?

But I don't want to be dragged into some court case making someone ELSE richer.

 

[roadbloc]

This suit is crap.
There was never any limitation that you could not play other music on your iPod. An iPod just didn't support other DRM. You could always rip your music and play DRM free music.

You could always play your music on other players by, burning a CD them re-ripping to MP3. The argument in specious because other players didn't support AAC encoded music at the time.

Plain bull.

So much so, that it's happening.

 

[Ekopy]

I'm pretty sure my DRM protected Apple songs never worked on Zune either. Should we sue Microsoft as well for preventing that? Or how about the numerous other platforms that didn't allow cross transfers of DRM songs. The weak minded sue. The strong would just rip the DRM off and do as they please.

 

[JohnH108]

Is this including international customers like myself in the UK? I couldn't care less to be honest about this rubbish, I plug my Chinese Android tab to my Mac, I transfer my music across, easy?

But I don't want to be dragged into some court case making someone ELSE richer.

They might subpoena you to go & give evidence

 

[miamialley]

Isn't this what Apple has done with iBooks? You must have iOS to view iBooks.

 

[Sabenth]

Is this including international customers like myself in the UK? I couldn't care less to be honest about this rubbish, I plug my Chinese Android tab to my Mac, I transfer my music across, easy?

But I don't want to be dragged into some court case making someone ELSE richer.

ANSWER:
The Court decided that everyone who fits the following description is a Class Member: All persons or entities in the United States (excluding federal, state and local governmental entities, Apple, its directors, officers and members of their families) who purchased one of the iPod models listed below directly from Apple between September 12, 2006 and March 31, 2009 (“Class Period”).

 

[shartypants]

I do not like RealNetworks, I avoid installing any of their software, they are always trying to push their other products when you install their stuff, annoying. Now I'll avoid them completely, jerks.

 

[koolmagicguy]

yay, i bought like 5 ipods that year as gifts for family. I love apple for always doing what they can to make things right.

Yay!! Apple has such a big heart.... and wallet. lol

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Can't wait to fill out 30lbs of paperwork to collect my $2.47

Will it really take that much work?

I got $20 without doing anything in a class action lawsuit against TicketMaster.

I figure I'll end up with another $2-$20 without doing anything from this class action lawsuit (if it's successful) from my purchase of a few albums with DRM + a 5th generation iPod (that was the video one, right?)

 

[griz]

".....who purchased one of the iPod models listed below directly from Apple "

What if you bought it from somewhere else? Why should it matter where you bought it?

 

[koolmagicguy]

Just so you all know, you may only be included in the lawsuit if you purchased one of the iPods in question directly from Apple. I've bought all my Apple products from Amazon.

Also, I'm curious to see how this turns out. Why is this becoming a big deal NOW? If it was ever an issue (debatable), why wasn't Apple sued in 2004?

 

[h1r0ll3r]

yes, you get $0.01 per $100000 that lawyers make.

Fixed that for ya

 

[Rocketman]

The lawsuit claims that the software updates caused iPod prices to be higher than they otherwise would have been.

Wait a minute. The price of the iPod is entirely independent of the price or availability of music of any format. The fact iTunes allows you to rip your own CD's or buy its then DRM crippled music in no way had any effect on the price of the hardware. Whether another format of music vendor could or could not put its music sales on Apple hardware when you need non-Apple hardware to originally buy it legally means the markets are discreet.

But the main point here is the lawsuit is based on a price claim as it relates to Apple's player, which for all practical purposes didn't rely on music sales AT ALL. The legal sales of tracks was pretty small during the time frame of this lawsuit filing and thereafter for years. The vast majority of folks were ripping tracks to iTunes/iPod. Even people who use DRM stripping software or techniques and ripped that content to CD's could then rerip them to iTunes and presumably to any other typical MP3 player as well.

I think there needs to be a friend of the court brief to address this logical fallacy of the primary theory on which this suit hinges.

Rocketman

 

[thejadedmonkey]

That is why I don't get how this even got class status. Can't see how it will go anywhere. All Apple has to do is show their license agreement with the labels that stated that they had to put DRM on the music to sell it.

That's not what this is about. It's about Apple blocking DRM music from playing on the iPod because it wasn't purchased from iTunes, but from a different store. In 2005 or so, the iPod was basically a monopoly on mp3 players, and Apple was using its power to block other mp3 stores.

This is no different from what Microsoft did in the early 90's.

 

[CorporateFelon]

Wait a minute. The price of the iPod is entirely independent of the price or availability of music of any format. The fact iTunes allows you to rip your own CD's or buy its then DRM crippled music in no way had any effect on the price of the hardware. Whether another format of music vendor could or could not put its music sales on Apple hardware when you need non-Apple hardware to originally buy it legally means the markets are discreet.

But the main point here is the lawsuit is based on a price claim as it relates to Apple's player, which for all practical purposes didn't rely on music sales AT ALL. The legal sales of tracks was pretty small during the time frame of this lawsuit filing and thereafter for years. The vast majority of folks were ripping tracks to iTunes/iPod. Even people who use DRM stripping software or techniques and ripped that content to CD's could then rerip them to iTunes and presumably to any other typical MP3 player as well.

I think there needs to be a friend of the court brief to address this logical fallacy of the primary theory on which this suit hinges.

Rocketman

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed that. A lot of people seem to either not reading, or have a poor understanding what is going on based upon their comments.

 

[mlmwalt]

Coincidentally, I got an email from this morning saying that I have iPods that are in the class. Opting out is more difficult than participating, go figure. I'll take my $1.12 per iPod. Of course, it won't be enough to buy a decent cheesesteak, but who cares.

would be better off just settling rather than going through the protacted process of this sort of litigation. As a shareholder, I'd prefer they focus on the patent stuff and not this frivolous stuff.

 

[1239689]

Bl00dy looses. Competitors can't handle loosing out because of their rubbish products.

 

[ShiftyPig]

Wow, what a waste of time, money, and effort.

Not for the attorneys.

 

[Rocketman]

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed that. A lot of people seem to either not reading, or have a poor understanding what is going on based upon their comments.

People have become so accustomed to be sheeple and "trust the government" that critical thinking is being lost to mocking, bullying and pointless dribble.

That would scare the **** out of the founders of our country. But then so would the obvious and observable results of it we see all around us. Starting with fiat money.

Rocketman

 

[GSPice]

yay, i bought like 5 ipods that year as gifts for family. I love apple for always doing what they can to make things right.

just terrible.

 

[koa]

Not for the attorneys.

Not if they lose.

 

[louis Fashion]

No, no, a thousand times, no!

I'm getting free money?

I have been involved in class action suits since the dawn of time.

To Wit: actions against banks, stock brokers, real estate enterprizes, automobile companies, ticket resellers, the list goes on.

I can say I have NEVER received a thin dime.

Class action suits enable lawyers to compare penis length. Nothing more.

 

[mrxak]

I bet anyone who gets money from this class action suit turns right around and buys another track from iTMS with the money. It's certainly not going to be enough to get another music player (and what would you get anyway, besides an iPod?), and there's no other music store worth using. I don't think the suit will hurt Apple all that badly.

Though, I can't imagine this suit actually being successful anyway.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Ha!

This smacks of netscape navigator suing microsoft for internet explorer years after netscape navigator lost any relevance.

Realplayer? Does anyone actually use that thing anymore? I've got it installed on one Mac of mine "just in case" there's some legacy file I need to play but the video and audio quality is so bad it makes youtube 240p look like high definition by comparison.

 

[nokuchikushi]

Wait a minute. The price of the iPod is entirely independent of the price or availability of music of any format.

I think there needs to be a friend of the court brief to address this logical fallacy of the primary theory on which this suit hinges.

Rocketman

I don't support this suit but just thought I should point out that, as I read it, the lawsuit is assuming that the cost of writing the software updates was being recouped in higher iPod prices; that Apple was passing the cost of the software along to the consumer. I don't seem to recall that iPod prices went up each time there was a software update, so who knows how these people make their assumptions. Maybe if they think if they make enough allegations, one or two of them will stick.

If anyone was restrictive and trying to capitalize on a monopoly at the time, it was Real Networks. They were awful, they were expensive, their DRM was unworkable, and they vanished into nothing. Apparently, none of that was their fault.

Also, I doubt there will be a lack of "friend of the court" and countless other briefs attached to this ridiculous lawsuit. Everyone seem to be ganging up on Apple these days. I guess that large bank balance is too attractive to too many people.