Consumer Takes Apple To Court Ipod

[marretas 0]

An american consumer takes Apple to cort saying that he has earing problems caused by Apple Ipod Player. This device can produce 115 decibels, a volume that can damage the ears when some is exposed 28 seconds/day. This is the argument contested in cort used by a Louisiana, EUA consumer. His name is Jhn Kiel Patterson, e declaime that iPod has an low desing profile and doesn't include manual to use the device proprably. I remember that 42 Millions of people bought the device.

[jipman 0]

Americans are just plain dumb in these kind of cases, all they are trying to do is making money out of everything they can think of. Even if it means they are making complete fools out of themselves.Any normal human would adjust the volume of their mp3-players to a normal volume. It reminds me of some (american?) people sueing mcdonalds because they burned their bloody mouth on a apple pie that was too hot.ps. I'm not trying to bash americans here, it's just that they come up with so many silly things these days. (War on iraq, george bush, software patents, sueing for silly things).

[qwijibow 0]

But some like music loud.. very loud.some of favouite songs sound okay when played quietly... but some music has just got to be as LOUD as possable.If the ipod's max volum is known to cause damage after only 20 somthing seconds, then why ake it that loud.It is a bit silly trying to sue over it.. but still, companys should take some responcibility.

[Jeigh1405241495 0]

I agree that making a setting on a device that can't be non-dangerous unless used under 20-30 seconds is pretty stupid, on the other hand people sue oveer everything nowdays in America so it's kind of getting out of hand. I still remember when a burglar hurt himself while breaking into someones house, so he sued them because he got injured on their property....(hm, wtf?)But yea I don't think this guy has a case, I mean, if its loud enough to hurt, turn it down. PLus I'm willing to bet that in fine print somewhere in the iPod packaging or manual or whatnot there are various warnings covering their asses against this stuff.

[qwijibow 0]

if its loud enough to hurt, turn it down.

thats the point, music with headphones doesnt need to be loud enough to case pain for it to be amaging to your hearing.

[Sarah81 0]

If a person can't figure out that his iPod's volume is too loud, then he deserves what he gets. Seriously. When your ears ring after you pull out the earbuds, you should know to reduce the volume next time. Oh, and if he's exposed himself to well over 100 db? He's probably had nausea and other nasty symptoms, which should be an added incentive to either turn the stupid thing down or stop using it altogether. Once again, a moron is trying to make someone else responsible for his own stupidity. I mean, really. I have an MP3 player (not an iPod, but that's sort of beside the point) and don't recall seeing any warnings or other instructions about playing the thing too loudly. A blindfolded toddler could figure out the volume controls on most MP3 players, Discmans, stereo systems, etc. I think that Apple should think carefully about limiting decibel output in the future. I don't see the point of being able to make yourself vomit after less than half a minute because, wow, this MP3 player can go *that* loud. But even with that thought, this guy who's suing is still an idiot - and is still responsible for his own stinkin' ears.

[plot 0]

dont be stupid... why would you take a company to court because you are to stupid to understand that if your turn the volvume up its going to get louder.This is like taking microsoft to court because someone hacked into your computer using the windows OS...tell me if i understood the post correctly

[inconnu1405241515 0]

You can open a case for having killed your pet by putting it into a washing machine in trying to clean it; or having damaged your multi hundred thousand dollars suit by using your hair dryer to dry it.The bottom line of the story is that, in many regions of the world, one has the right to file a suit against anything but he is not guaranteed to win over the case.

[Houdini 0]

To stop this kind of nonsense, just make the tort laws so that the loser of a lawsuit pays everything, court costs, other sides attorneys fess, investigation, witnesses for and against the suit, and you will see very few idiost trying to make more money off a lawsuit that could possibly pay more than they could earn in ten lifetimes (if they could earn all that much they would not have damagesd themselves in the first place). I believe it works that way in Great Britan. It is a frivilous lawsuit, by an idiot that not only should lose his hearing but should be laughed out of court and also have his rear end kicked as well.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

Going to court because you don't know how to turn down the volume. This sounds very stupid indeed.I just watched Canadian Bacon and now this, wow .. lol*ps: Canadians don't say about 'aboot'*xboxrulz

[abhiram 0]

Going to court because you don't know how to turn down the volume. This sounds very stupid indeed.

Ah yes, sound stupid ... but what if he wins the lawsuit? That's the whole problem with the American way of suing people. You can actually sue anyone over any minor inconvenience and convince a jury that you deserve some monetary compensation.

[unimatrix 0]

Wow, you know, why not sue Sony for their headphones and walkmans that started the trend 25 years ago? Why not sue Bose or KLH, or Creative, or the artists that created the music in the first place? And people wonder why there needs to be some kind of TORT reform so that cases like this get dismissed and the person that brings it is responsible for both his and Apple's legal expenses.Should you sue craftsman or Stanley tools if you keep hitting yourself in the head with a hammer and keep wondering why it hurts and/or causes death? I mean the product liablity laws and user labels are sometimes down right funny, but have to be there because peopel lack common sense. Like the warnings on Preperation-H boxes. This is like sueing AB for claiming that they made you an alcoholic by producing beer, not the fact that you had a choice whether or not to start drinking in the same place or the responsiblity to seek treatment if it is a problem. Still, there needs to be somekind of TORT reform that would allow judges to make a decision whether a product was defective or some coverup (like the Ford Pinto case) for a design flaw should go to trial, or if the plaintiff is a victum of their own doing. If they choose to listen to their music too loud, that was their choice, time to pay Mircle Ear for some help...

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

how bout this, why not sue every company across the globe because they're charging you a lot for their products. Like Windows XP is very expensive, I don't see people suing them because it's inconvenient to give $200 CAD to a billionaire corporation...xboxrulz

[danzarely 0]

there have been a few similar stories on the atlanta news. i can understand the complaints, and im sure apple will do something about the volume levels, but at the same time if you are dumb enough to blast music in your ears through HEADPHONES then you deserve to lose your hearing.

[the empty calorie 0]

Well let's see, a lady sued McDonald's because she spilled coffee on herself in her car and it was actually hot....what else... oh yeah, people who ate McDonald's multiple times day sued McDonald's because the food made them fat...and I do remember a case where a burglar fell through a kitchen skylight and onto a knife in someone's condition, and sued thew for an "unsafe work environment". The american legal system is absolutely horrible. Those people filing those lawsuits, if they really are that stupid, should not be getting compensation, but they should have been taken out back and beaten with a rake.