MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Only in America!

Probably coming in the UK. Litigation for litigations sake!

More Whiners, compaining they have never used a rechargeable battery before, and that Apple should have TOLD them that they get weaker as they get older. I say to tell them to grow up, spend the $49 for the new battery, and treat it properly. My 5 Hour TiBook battery now gets 2 hours, Should I make a class action lawsuit out of that as well?

How many people in the class action lawsuits do you think actualy did the first step of fully charging and fully discharging the battery on the first run? If they can't prove they did, then they should not be allowed to sue.

So tired of the money grubbing bastards that feel cheated because they dont understand what they bought. Apple didn't make the battery, if it lasted 5 hours when bought and made the 1 year age before losing life, then it should be the users responsiblity to replace the battery, not Apple.

Ah, well...Lawyers will be boys.

Apple could have avoided this by simply making the battery user-replaceable, similar to a cell phone. It is not uncommon to replace a cell phone battery each year.

In addition, they could have used this to their advantage by making the battery rechargeable outside the iPod, once again similar to most cell phones, so the user could always have a fully charged spare.

I am amazed that this simple ability (spare battery replacement/charging) for ANY portable product eluded the iPod designers.

Lokiz...

You've hit the nail on the head. Couldn't have said it better myself.

I'm going to start a class action lawsuit against the lawyers who started this class action lawsuit. My charge will be that they have irreparably harmed society through their greed, ignorance, and willful misrepresentation of any form of harm experienced by their complainer clients.

I hope Apple wins each and every one of these with extreme predjudice (i.e., if any of these litigants [or lawyers] bring anything similar against Apple again, the courts will quite possibly fine them and may hold them in contempt).

I think of it this way.

If the iPod battery fails during the one year warantee you get a whole new iPod even if it is 350 days after purchase. If the battery in my car fails within the warantee period I get a "pro rated amount" off the purchase of a new battery, i.e., if the battery fails after 350 days out of a 365 day warantee I'll most likely get less than 5% off the price of a new battery -- plus I have to pay for installation. I do not get a new car, nor do I even get a completly free battery. Seems to me Apple's policy is MUCH better than the battery warantees I have been used to all my life.

If the iPod battery fails after the warantee period is over Apple will sell me a new battery including installation. If the battery in my car fails after the waranteee period the battery company will sell me a new battery plus charge me for installation. Again, it seems like Apple's policy is much better than the battery warantees I've been used to all my life.

If the iPod battery fails after the warantee period, I can buy a third party battery and they will either install it for me or I can install it myself. If my car's battery fails after the warantee period, I can buy a third party battery and they will either install it for me or I can install it myself. In this comparison it seems Apple's policy is no different from my car's battery.

Each and every one of these suits should be thrown out of court, with exteme predjudice, based upon these examples (and I am sure there are hundreds of more examples people could cite).

there is also a new class action lawsuit regarding the odds of winning a song from iTMS/Pepsi promotion.
Here is the link:
http://macserialjunkie.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29784

shadowself: Your first and third comparisons are okay, but number two is deceptive. Apple charges you for installation. Just because they don't add the installation charge separately doesn't mean you aren't paying for it. Compare they're battery replacement price with a third party battery (without installation), and you'll see how much Apple charges for installation.

I'm not complaining about Apple's Battery Replacement Program, mind you. Just keeping you honest.

The Trial Lawyers of America will make a Republican out of Steve Jobs yet. They are the leading obstacle to real tort reform in our country. Although we (The US) are only a small fraction of the planet's population, we have the majority of the world's Lawyers.

Although I'm a big fan of Apple, I work directly as an authorized service provider, and Apple's batteries, as of the last 3 years, are, in a word, junk. Apple informed us that batteries for the white iBooks are a "consumable", which wouldn't be a problem, except for the fact that so many fail after such little usage. Our Apple Hardware tech disassembled one of these batteries and found that there is a small pcb board with some circuits embedded within the battery, and since such parts are listed as "electronic components", we were able to get Apple to cover these batteries for us. We have a long standing relationship with Apple, and out lead hardware tech has been instrumental in getting Apple to fess up with these "oversights". By the way, this doesn't stop at iBook batteries. Granted, we have very little iPod service come through our doors, but enough to know that Apple dropped the ball somewhere along the line. I know, this could be flame bait, but I am not afraid to point the finger at my favorite computer company when they don't deliver a quality product. Simple fact is, it might do Apple good to be jousted from their pedistal before things get any worse. These things happen, and unfortunately, in this day and age, both teams have lawyers. It is most unfortunate that the class suit needs to be filed, but what other recourse do consumers have? Grin and bear it? Not for a $400 product. There is a leg to stand on, and like my pop used to say "if you are going to do something, do it right the first time". If Apple followed that advice, they wouldn't be in this situation.

Flame away

I'm sure no one here really knows all the details in this case, Apple can do wrong. Maybe the iPod batteries are sometimes faulty, if I were a consumer with this problem it would be unfair to ask me to prove that I "did the first step of fully charging and fully discharging". Don't forget that we are consumers, and class action suits exist to help us. The lawyers are necessary evils. So I hope the people win if they're right or that Apple wins if they're right.

Do you guys remember the Dull laptop that has an explosive battery? I wonder why those boys "lawyers" aren't filling for a law-suit against Dull?
I know that it didn't happen but once with Dull, but an inccident like that one is enough.
I'd use the F word, but I have too much respect for people who read from this site.
My 1st iPod is more than a year old and it's still working like a charm, my second is just a few weeks old and it's shinning. Love them both dearly.

I wonder what the total number of plaintiffs is, and if each suit alleges a different failure by Apple. This may be a bigger can of worms than it appears.

I agree 100% with Aryugaetu. Had Apple simply made the battery a user replaceable part and offered spares and a charger, this wouldn't be a problem.

Everyone is used to their mobile phone battery dying after a year or so and they just get a new one without too much complaint (phone usually, rather than a battery!). A new phone is acceptable because they want newer and snazzier phones or if not, a nice new battery (the one I got last week was £12) is a reasonable cost. That it should cost so much to get a replacement battery for the iPod and that it needs either professional fitting or a certain amount of bravery is a problem with the design of the iPod.

Design isn't just about looking fantastic (which the iPod does), it's also about functionality. And part of the functionality should be an easily replacable battery. The iPod is the only device I own that has its battery sealed inside with no simple user access.

But at least they don't blow up !

Well if the manual tells how many charges (appx.) the iPods are good for, then these people have no case. If there is nothing in the manual about how many charges one should expect to get out of thier device or if there is no 'snippet' in the manual about the nature of lithium batteries, then, yes, apple is at fault in some way. The Gameboy advance manual SP says the battery is good for about 500 charges, and clearly states that battery life will reduce in time. If there is nothing in the manual (I don't own an iPod, so if someone will please enlighten me) about how long you should expect the battery to last, then I'd be pissed, too, when I couldn't recharge my battery for very long.

TheCrunge, this is exactly the strange attitude most of us Europeans don't understand. If I buy a product with a one year warranty, I expect the company to take responsibility for that year. That's what warranties are about. If the product fails just after that product, fine. The company only said it would definitely work for a year. Tough luck. Do I sue them? No, I just don't buy anything from them again, as I'd rather buy a product with a high likelihood of working after the warranty period. Did the company sell promise me something it didn't fulfil? Nope, it only guaranteed the product would work for a year. Now unless I could prove that the product was deliberately manufactured to fail after the warranty period I don't have a case. The company has fulfilled it's obligation, and whether I like it or not, I got what I paid for. As a thinking and responsible human being it's up to me to inform myself before I buy, the law doesn't treat people like idiots.

Crunge and B, I can only hope that "right" wins out in this case. But you will likely never know because a settlement will not include an admission of guilt. Even if the lawyers for the complaintants "win" (i.e., win a judgement, gain a settlement with Apple, or just force Apple to settle regardless of the legal merits of the case because of fiscal expediency) then I doubt that the iPod owners will gain much from the result. The lawyers will score a big chunk of money and a few class action representatives will get a modestly large settlement in return for fronting the case. But the average class action participant will likely see little of consequence. A co-worker recently received a check for $0.03 (yes, three cents) as the result of a class action settlement for which he never signed up as a participant. I suppose his "rights" were protected...

I believe that the idea of class action lawsuits has merit. In case it wasn't clear in my previous post, howevver, my opinion is that the class action system is being terribly abused for the profit of a few. In the end we all pay for it.

The battery is replaceable at Laptops for Less:
http://store.l-f-l.com/cgi-bin/cp-app.cgi?rrc=N&pg=prod&ref=616-0159

Truly pathetic and an indictment of the American legal system.

It's going to get to the stage where a consumer has to be effectively read a Miranda declaration and explicitly endorse that they understand how a given item works.

That'll make shopping a painful experience.

Lawyers start these suits and walk away wtih 75% of the money.. enough said. My ipod lasts all day at work, sans pausing to actually work a little...

mccfr - imagine having to fully understand a scsi raid array or a cisco router as a condition of purchse. All those IT people who only know how to keep windows systems barely running are in for some trouble...

It's amazing Apple can do no wrong in the eyes of so many on this website. Warranty has nothing to do with life of the machine. Yes there is a one year warranty on the iPod. But do you really believe that is the life expectancy of it? Hell no. It better not be. I spent $500 on my iPod. I better get more than one year of use from it. Stop kissing Apples butt people. They are my favorite company too, but it doesn't mean they can do no wrong. If there is a large amount of batteries failing, Apple should own up to it and take responsibility for it.

The same thing was happening with iBooks. They have a one year warranty. Does this mean its SOL if my iBook dies after one year. Maybe. But when hundreds are dying just after one year, there is something the matter. And Apple has acknowledged it finally. And yes, my iBook died one week after my warranty was up.

Jeff S:

I agree with you to a point, but my problem is with 'frivoulous' litigation which stifles creativity and effectively allows a consumer to abdicate any responsibility for issues that could be avoided by reading the ****ing manual.

Scotty: I hadn't even contemplated the corporate market, but it's the logical extension of what I'm talking about.

Aryugaetu, Hywel:

I believe it was just a engineering design decision. Check out the info at: http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/

My eMachines died the week after warranty. That was the third time it died, in fact. I was out of luck.

My Mac was a comfort through such a troubling times

I was part of a class action suit against CitiBank. I didn't even know about the suit until I got a check in the mail for thirty-seven cents! Why bother? The lawyers probably made a killing.

Third party batteries exist. The plantiffs should get over it.

If most of us here happened across a story about Microsoft getting slapped with half a dozen suits, then you'd all break open the champagne. I agree that these class suits never result in any sort of "award" to the plaintiffs, and yes, many lawyers are indeed snakes, but you are generalizing that every lawyer is out to screw for a buck and that the plaintiffs are whiny bastards who just want to make a buck. There is probably something that you feel strongly about (and like I said, you'd have a grin a mile wide if MS were under the gun). Litigation should be a last resort, of course, and in this case that is what it is. Apple has left no alternative but to make us invoke our rights to sue. Unfortunately these days, "suing" has become synonomous with skeezy dealings, but you'd be surprised how many suits for far more frivolous things are filed every day. All we can hope is that the justice system prevails and the right party is identified. Sometimes, the blindness from my fellow Mac brethren is embarrassing. It's starting to look like hypocritical elitism from these comments. Apple can do wrong. It is OK to sue. It will all come out in the wash.

Another .50 cents to each iPOD owner and $1 million + to the lawyers.

Insane!

How about a class action lawsuit for all manufacturers that use the same battery technology as Apple?

thecrunge. Yes, it is OK to sue when the claimants damages are not frivolous. Public safety is a good one.

What do the claimants in the iPod battery suite expect to achieve from the class action suit? A five dollar rebate for a new battery? Apple has already rectified the situation by offering a battery replacement program and third party batteries abound. This is not a safety issue where the monetary settlement is only a small part but public safety is enhanced.

Rechargable batteries do not last forever and they are expensive to replace. The cell phone battery analogy is perfect.

Rechargable batteries are like any other consumable. Your mileage will vary depending on use/abuse. My 1st gen iPod still gets great battery life (6+ hours easily). I don't recharge until the battery is completely drained. No hocus pocus. No rocket science. Only the sleazy lawyers will profit from this.

I should start a class action lawsuit, I bought a computer a few years ago and it was the fastest thing around, now that I have tried the latest, my computer is a lot slower... and my electric razor wont stay charged like it did before, my new carpets are dirty... Get a life!

I think the problem lies in the fact that Apple stated that the battery "should last the life of the iPod", a silly claim it never should have made.