Apple Computer’s iPod Nano music player, marketed for its sleek beauty, cannot withstand normal use without becoming severely scratched, often to the point where its screen is unreadable, a consumer group said today in a lawsuit filed in San Mateo Superior Court. Moreover, Apple is refusing to give refunds to purchasers who bought the defective product, while forcing others to pay a $25 fee to get a replacement that is supposed to be ‘free’ under Apple’s warranty.
The suit, brought against Apple Computer, Inc. under the state’s consumer protection laws on behalf of California purchasers of the recently-introduced Nano, demands that Apple recall and repair the defect, without charge, or refund the purchase price to dissatisfied customers. The lawyers in the case are the Burlingame, California-based law firm of Cotchett, Pitre, Simon & McCarthy, and attorneys of the non-profit, Los Angeles-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR).
Reports of problems with the Nano became apparent within a few weeks of its introduction last fall, with many consumers complaining on the Internet. Apple has acknowledged there is a problem, at first urging customers to buy a third party cover. Apple now supplies a ‘sleeve’ to cover the Nano.
“Selling ‘cool’ stuff isn’t ‘cool’ if the stuff doesn’t work as advertised and Apple fails to comply with its obligations under its warranty and California laws,” said consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield, a lawyer for FTCR in a statement. “Like every other industry, Apple must fix products that are defective for free, and refund the costs incurred by its customers.”
“We sent Apple a letter asking that they acknowledge and remedy the problem,” said Bruce Simon, co-lead counsel and partner in the Cotchett firm in a statement. “They chose to not even respond and left us no choice but to bring this case.”
The lawsuit notes that many Nano users pay substantial additional money purchasing music and videos on Apple’s iTunes web site. The iPods, including the Nano, are the only portable devices on which iTunes downloads can be played.
FTCR is a citizen advocacy organization that works in the legislative and judicial arenas. In recent years it has sued cell phone companies, automobile insurers and HMOs for illegal practices. In a previous case against Apple, resolved last year, the Cotchett firm forced the company to offer replacement batteries, or a replacement iPod, for customers whose iPod batteries had failed after only a few years of use, and to issue refunds for certain charges.
More info in the complaint (.pdf) here.
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. Only $49.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related articles:
iPod nano ‘scratches’ lawsuit really only benefits attorneys – October 26, 2005
Report: Apple relaxes 5G iPod return policy; to include protective cases with future iPod nano units – October 26, 2005
Class-action lawsuit filed against Apple over iPod nano scratches – October 21, 2005
PC Mag’s Ulanoff on iPod nano scratches: ‘I could see a jealous competitor planting the story’ – October 06, 2005
Mossberg: Apple iPod nano scratches easily, get a case to protect it – October 06, 2005
Apple iPods have always been far too scratchable, protective cases required to keep iPods pristine – September 30, 2005
invisibleSHIELD offers rugged, clear protection for Apple iPod nano and other iPod models – September 30, 2005
Got some nano scratches? Restore your iPod nano to new condition with a $4 can of Brasso – September 29, 2005
The Motley Fool: Apple did the right thing in quickly addressing cracked iPod nano screens – September 28, 2005
iPod nano ‘screen issues’ really just FUD? – September 26, 2005
Apple responds to iPod nano screen issues – September 27, 2005
Brilliant.
My nano is defective. I keep downloading videos for and the screen is so scratched that I can’t see them play.
Heh.
I’d love to know what percentage of Apple’s operating costs is eaten by Apple’s legal department.
My car gets dirty when I park it outside, so it is defective.
My glasses get scratched when I drop them, so they are defective.
My television doesn’t entertain me when I turn it on, so it is defective.
Unethical lawyers pander to idiots, so they are defective.
I’d love to be an Apple lawyer.
Anyone care to guess whether this action was brought by PC users? Anyone care to guess how long it takes to find a Microsoft connection to this one–like the one in Louisiana?
MDN Magic Word: “about” – We all know what this is really about.
America’s Achilles heel: a legal system that encourages idiotic (and costly) lawsuits.
’nuff said.
P.S. Don’t like nano’s casing? Don’t buy one!
My Chevy has a bunch of scratches on it from driving through the neighbors bushes.
Do I go after Chevy for defective paint or the neighbors for scratchy bushes?
Can I get some advise from a hungry lawyer?
Funny, last I checked, Apple has basically been replacing them for free with no questions asked. Have these people actually asked Apple for one first before running to their lawyers?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1510
“The iPods, including the Nano, are the only portable devices on which iTunes downloads can be played.”
That’s funny, I could have sworn you could burn your music to an audio CD and play them on a Discman. I could have also sworn that you could then rip the audio from those burned audio cds into MP3s that can play on pretty much every digital audio player and many mobile phones and PDAs.
I must be mistaken…
i bought a nano on day of release, i also bought a screen protector because screens (of any sort scratch) hmmm mixed feelings on this i think
As with all high tech devices, you should take care of your iPod. Do you throw your LCD monitor in your trunk? Do you throw your laptop in the floor of your car when you are traveling? Wake up people!
I agree, the entire iPod line scratches to easily, regardless of how careful you are with them. Apple should strive to improve the surface and finish of them in the future.
*too easily
Legal maintenance is a standard expense these days. I honestly doubt that each new lawsuit adds expense, as Apple has a full-time legal team already paid to deal with this.
Lawsuits are just something corporations deal with on a day-to-day basis. The media likes to trumpet the filing of each new suit as an earth-shattering event, but the corporation just shrugs and adds it to the pile. Apple’s lawyers will determine whether these guys have a case. If they do, Apple will settle. If not, the case will drag forward over the next few years. Meanwhile, life goes on, and Apple keeps selling iPods.
OH MY GOD!
The paint has faded on my house after being exposed to sunlight for three years!
Lets sue the building contractor for making such a crappy house!!!
Oh my God!
I am ashamed to admit that I am, in fact, a lawyer. WAIT, before thowing rotten fruit, hear me out. You see, I am so sick and tired of all the ridiculous lawsuits it makes me want to disassociate myself from my profession. Something HAS to be done about the state of the legal system in America. It encourages frivolous lawsuits from people without meritorious claims by allowing them to prosecute their case without any risk whatsoever. You see in America, as long as I can get a lawyer willing to work on a contingent basis (which is by far the most common financial arrangement for this type of suit) I can a file a lawsuit against anyone without personal risk. If I win I make millions, if I lose I am not out ANYTHING. For the lawyers, its even better than the lottery because the odds are better. You take all the cases that have ANY chance of winning (even bad cases have some chance of winning or settling) and when they do (or the other party settles because its too expensive for them to defend every case at trial) the “winnings” more than make up for the time spent on cases that are lost or dismissed. A class action is even better because the winnings are much bigger. In many cases the actual plaintiffs receive pocket change (literally) and the lawyers make millions.
Apple is in the envious position of making a lot of money by having great products that people want to buy (including me). That is, there are a lot of people out there that are envious of their money and want some of it for themselves. Unfortunately Apple will now need to spend millions on legal fees even if they win every suit. If they lose one or two because of the insanely stupid decision of a jury here and there (a common result and the reason why many cases are settled rather than going to trial), it will cost them even more. All this will be passed on to you and I in the form of higher prices for Apple’s products, less capable products that are crippled to avoid lawsuits (like an iPod that is incapable of attaining a high volume) or simply the lack of certain products altogether, which the company deems too likely to result in high legal fees. This is already happening in the medical arena where medical devices and drugs are available in other areas of the world, like Europe, but not in the US.
At least two things need to happen to help solve this: 1. The US needs to adopt the “loser pays” system that is common in other parts of the world – including Europe. This would require the loser to pay the other party’s legal fees if they lose. So if you bring a stupid suit against Apple because your iPod didn’t make you breakfast in the morning and you lose, you would have to pay Apple’s legal fees to defend against your suit. This sounds entirely reasonable to me, but wait for the hue and cry from special interest groups and plaintiff’s attorneys saying that this leaves the poor little guy with no legal redress against the big bad evil corporate empires. Actually, they still have redress, they just need a meritorious claim.
2. This one is more difficult: People need to start taking personal responsibility for their actions. I am not sure how this can be done. Maybe the battle is already lost. I don’t see a legal or political solution to this. I think it may boil down to good parenting and education.
Until such changes are made perhaps Apple should put a big sticker on every item they sell stating in big letters, multiple lanugages and international symbols “If you are an idiot, please don’t by this.” OK I know they wont do that, but it would make a point.
Apple won´t win this one….ecspecially in a California court.
Fed Up Lawyer –
I can´t afford a lawyer, will you represent me for free?
I (so help me god this is true) left my iPod NANO in my shirt pocket and threw the shirt in the wash. It went through a complete wash cycle, then a complete dry cycle.
IT STILL WORKS JUST FINE.
Define “defective.”
Just took a look at the FTCR website. What a bunch of wild ass liberal left wing CRAP.
Hope Steve Jobs is happy with his political affliliations now.
The question is: “Is there any real scratch-proof or scratch-resistant plastics that can be used that won’t add a tremendous cost?”
I have a scratch-resistant coating on my glasses, but even-so, it still scratches. I’m beginning to wonder about people who expect these things to be indestructible. It’s a piece of technology people! It is not, and I repeat NOT, a brick!
I have a 3G iPod and yes, it has scratches on the display, but not any more than on my watch or my glasses.
MDN-“activity” as in: There is too much legal activity from stupid people!
Fed Up Lawyer — this sort of pukerama is becoming common over here in the UK too…
…also ‘Health & Safety’ issues are turning us into a culture that’s frightened of its own shadow. One of my unfavourite examples is a much-treasured woodland walk, in which some officious do-gooding b*****d has hung red ‘danger’ signs from every other tree, presumably in the expectation that you just might walk into them. Who knows? Madness…
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool grin” style=”border:0;” />
“Fed Up Lawyer –
I can´t afford a lawyer, will you represent me for free?”
Can I obtain your services or products for free?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
In England if you lose a lawsuit, you pay the court costs and the other party’s costs, thereby eliminating frivolous lawsuits.
We use most of England basic law rules, why was this one eliminated?
Oh yes, by Congress, because most of them are ambulance chasing lawyers–or were, before feeding from the public trough.
Oops! that “Can I obtain your services or products for free?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />” comment was FROM me regarding zelfort’s comments – got the Name field mixed up. Sorry zelfort.
Ipods scratch much too easily. Hopefully this will spur Apple to introduce a better product.
I bought a PC running “ruim dous” and it is suposto run without virus but we know what happens so it really is defective
Some people think iPods are toys. They are in fact technology. Don’t let the size fool you.
Fed Up Lawyer, since you are “in fact, a lawyer.” Tell me, don’t judges have the power to throw out unmeritorious cases?
I’m aware there are some jurisdictions that will let just about any case proceed. Wouldn’t it make more sense to tighten up the judges and laws in those jurisdictions than force a “poor little guy” to bet his house on a meritorious case that a jury/judge just happens to get wrong?
Or maybe you can garauntee that all meritorious cases will win.
The article itself seems written by a disgruntled person…”Apple is refusing to give refunds to purchasers who bought the defective product, while forcing others to pay a $25 fee to get a replacement that is supposed to be ‘free’ under Apple’s warranty.” Uhmmmm…seems to me that someone scratching their iPod doesn’t mean the iPod is defective…if it scratches itself…uhmmmm…all by itself…then maybe it’s defective. Plus, until the court says it’s defective, it isn’t, so stop writing articles that make it sound so. Darnit.
Ge whiz, you put your Nano – a premium consumer product – in your pants or backpack pocket, with all the minute crud that accumulates over the years, exert tensile forces outside its specifications and shock horror, it scratches.
My God, sue Apple for not providing a free force field to protect it from my own ignorance and stupidity.
Wankers.
This issue shouldn’t be around by now. C’mon Apple, make the iPod with some harder plastic.
Fed Up Lawyer – Agree completely with what you wrote. In addition to personal responsibility, I believe personal civility should be added to your list.
Another area that needs reform in the U.S. is the “Low Cost” Winner approach to government contracts. You do get what you pay for. Europe has a much better approach. My understanding to their approach is, simply put, upon receiving all the bids, they throw out the highest and the lowest and find the average of the remaining bids. The bidder with the closest bid to the average wins the contract. Not a perfect approach but at least contractors do not have to use the cheapest material they can find.
I, for one, wouldn’t mind driving on a road that doesn’t need a major repair / overhall every couple of years.
Peace.
ziggybop,
The system works pretty well in Europe and other places, though it is not perfect as you describe (no system is). Also, judges will not throw out an unmeritorious claim – they will only “throw out” a claim that does not, or cannot, meet the elements of the claim asserted. This is a very low threshold.
Why doesn’t Apple just make this easy on themselves and do something similar to what Colorware does? It wouldn’t cost Apple much at all to do this at the factory, and it would eliminate these stupid assed lawsuits.
http://www.colorwarepc.com/content.aspx?id=57
Fed Up Lawyer, can we all Mac users file a class action law suit against Harvey Rosenfield, the lawyer for FTCR for he is a defective law student and a defective lawyer to our society?
BTY, DCX executive Tom Lasoda just reveled today that “lawsuits are responsible for an extra $500 in costs for every car and truck sold in the United States.” Damn those lawyer crooks in this country!!!!
This would be a non-issue if the iPod was still a niche product. If only OCD audiophiles carried them like they were solid gold, there would be no complaints. Unfortunately, idiots can buy iPods, abuse them, and say they (the iPods) are defective. You don’t take your desktop computer out and drop it from 15 times its height or carry it loose in your trunk with 200 lb. (90.7kg) of gravel and then file a suit against the manufacturer for not making the computer well enough.
To Fed Up Lawyer,
I agree with you. No consequence actions are a problem whether they be lawsuits or anything else (see his point #2). There must be consequences for our actions.
To Those Who Think otherwise,
A “loser pay” system does not necessarily forbid the underdog from filing suit. Many of you ask “fed up lawyer” for free legal services. Contingency based lawyers ARE providing free legal services to you. They only get paid when you win. In a “loser pay” system, contingency-paid lawyers will still be free. The crux is that now either you, or the lawyer, will need to pay legal costs if you lose. This does not prevent meritous lawsuits from taking place at all. It just forces you to make sure you have a legitimate case.
MW: schools: Where I wish they taught this stuff. :-\
Kord Robin said
“Lawsuits are just something corporations deal with on a day-to-day basis.”
And we wonder why the windows users of the world are in complete disbelief that macs are virus free and just work.
“Viruses, lost productivity, downtime, malware, adware, spyware, wipe and re-load are just something users deal with on a day to day basis”
Windows defects bleeding over into our real world attitudes about eveything else?
I’ve got a strong friendship with many of the people at the local Apple store here where I live (as I did work there for a long time) and I can tell you these Nano scratch claims are ridiculous.
How do I know this?
The staff at this particular Apple store, in a bold attempt to satisfy people’s response to this FUD about the delicate nature of the Nano, regularly and repeatedly throw, toss, scrape and perform whatever abusive behavior they can to this Nano to PROVE what a bunch of nonsense these claims are. I’ve seen this Nano in question. While it certainly doesn’t look new, even I was amazed at the condition of the device. While having some scratches and surface blemishes, it is FAR from being unusable or the screen from being unreadable.
This is a true story. This is why I’m so fed up with these Nano lawsuits. They are baseless and probably sponsored by competitors.
thelonius Mac, you comment is about as stupid as this lawsuit is.
Pepole put their keychain, wallet and cell phone in their pocket. The cel phone are bounded to be scratched. Should those crooks suit the mobile phone companies?
You dolts who are minimizing the scratching problem with the Nano are nothing but ignorant TOOLS!
THERE IS A PROBLEM!
The Nano scratches from just contact with the CLOTH of a shirt pocket!
This is one lawsuit I totally support!
Glad I bought a Mini instead when I saw three day old Nano’s at the Apple store that looked like they had been slid across a parking lot.
A friend of mine owns one that is almost opaque and could hardly be used to watch a video.
Apple apologists are worse than any other! Especially the morons who obviously don’t even have any experience with the topic at hand.
Well, the back does scratch remarkably easy..even in this nice case I got for it, the fabric managed to cause minor scratches.
As for the screen, its in perfect condition.
Did you personally see that screen “Mr. Rolleyes”? Because that would be a neat trick… watching a video on a Nano
The merits of this particular class action lawsuit notwithstanding, I find it amazing that groups of all kinds have come at Apple over the years for all sorts of dubious issues (iPod battery life, anyone?), yet, to my knowledge, not one single consumer watchdog group or business consortium has ever brought a class action against Microsoft for its absolutely insecure OS. The losses a person might endure from a scratched iPod case pale in significance to the verifiable costs associated with Windows security issues. When you factor in the innumerable hours spent by individuals and IT departments either protecting or repairing the OS on their PCs or Windows servers, it staggers the imagination that no aggrieved party would seek redress. Really, MS gets of far too easy on this issue.
A product can only be defective if it fails to perform the function that the manufacturer states it will perform. I have never seen in any of the documents that came with my Nano that part of its performance was an indestructible surface. It is only promised to download and play audio and images, as long as it keeps doing that how can it be defective. Apple never promised a scratch proof surface. They did not promise that my Nano could communicate with martians either so I would not have a leg to stand on if I tried to sue Apple because my Nano could not call Mars.
Macromancer — I agree with you that the nano is much toughter than these fools are claiming it to be, and that many people now buying the nano are much stupider than they should be permitted to be.
But as to your second comment above, theloniusMac is correct . . . that Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights website absolutely reeks of unabashed and inflammatory left-wing, uber-liberal, anti-business, socialist, Democratic bullsh!t.
Steve Jobs’ penchant for ill-advised liberal leanings aside, I hope Apple absolutely CRUSHES these motherf-ckers. And I hope they do it in a big, PUBLIC way.
Macromancer, you are wrong about this “Taxpayer” group. theloniusMac‘s comments were dead-on.
I have two 3rd Gen iPods and a 5th Gen iPod with video. I am equally careful with all – the old 3rd Gens still look like new and the new 5th Gen looks like shit. Apple can talk all they want about using the same plastic, but any fool, including me, can see the difference in construction and wear.
When I received a notice in the mail about the battery settlement I trashed it — if one comes along about THIS situation, I’ll be lined up at the Apple store for my replacement.
I don’t mind paying 400 bucks for a piece of shit – the price of education – but I refuse to pay for the pleasure of being insulted by Apple. Apple will lose this one – they can sell an easily scratched case but they can’t sell a case with a view screen that can become un-viewable before the warranty runs out and expect the buyers to accept it.
MW: “public” ha
Anybody who owns anything black knows how easily scratches show. A black car, a black guitar, etc, will be scratched by anything harder than the stuff it is made out of. There are alot of things harder than lexan or the acrylic polymer or whatever, living in your pocket. That’s why white is the best color for the iPod. Black is beautiful but man you have to treat it with kid gloves. You know that foaming brush they have at the car wash? Wash your black car with that just once and your paint is screwed. Now, somebody is going to come up with an iPod protectant, polish, or reconditioner, like they have for car finishes, and make a killing. Kind of like a Meguiar’s for iPods.
http://www.meguiars.com
Why is this story keep popping up. My 6 month nano is still perfect.
the other Mark says “This does not prevent meritous lawsuits from taking place at all. It just forces you to make sure you have a legitimate case.”
Again will you guarantee that all legitimate cases will win?
“In a “loser pay” system, contingency-paid lawyers will still be free. The crux is that now either you, or the lawyer, will need to pay legal costs if you lose.”
Take the Erin Brokovich example. What lawyer is going to bet the firm on a case when, at the beginning of the case, the incriminating memos, the expert testimony and the scope of the case is unclear? Even then, meritorious and legitimate cases have been known to fail.
I highly suspect those who favor “Loser Pays” are the same who’ll claim the American justice system is FUBAR.
Fed Up Lawyer says “judges will not throw out an unmeritorious claim – they will only “throw out” a claim that does not, or cannot, meet the elements of the claim asserted. This is a very low threshold.”
If true, then how about adding another hearing where the merits of the case have to reach some level of reasonableness?
Changing the system to “Loser Pays” still leaves the “poor little guy” out of the system as he would have to bet his house, if he even has one, on the outcome of the case. The “poor little guy” doesn’t walk in the door with conclusive intestigative evidence, certified expert reports and researched legal precedents. Someone has to pay for this and be ready to pay the winner if the judge/jury/lawyers/witnesses have a bad day in a loser pays system.
In regards to Fed Up Lawyer’s comments you are on the right track when advocating the view that a losing litigant’s costs could be paid by the litigant themselves. We have this system in Australia and it works just fine.
However what is missing in-depth all encompassing legislation that forces an aggrieved party to first make a complaint to a government authority. The way this works is that the aggrieved party has to first make a complaint to say a department of consumers affairs. If this organisation finds in favour of the complainant then the authority has the power to order/fine/award damages/withdraw from sale the offending article.
If the complainant then wants to pursue the matter further they can then sue for personal damages in common law.
If the matter hasn’t first been forwarded to the aforementioned government authority then they have no legal ground to pursue the matter.
This approach does presuppose that two very important steps are undertaken:
1. That governments have to decide to govern; and that means passing legislation to establish this arm of government and to give the organisation the power to investigate AND prosecute and
2. That such legislation will curb the powers of lawyers.
By taking on a powerful interest group such as the American legal profession there would be a hell of a bun fight for any government wishing to go down this path. It can be done…and it was done in Australia. In the United States however there has been less government intervention and more (much more) reliance on the pursuit of individual claims.
However this approach works in most advanced economies and perhaps individual states in the United States should pursue a legislative course of action.
Apple needs to avoid selling their goods to retards
misanthrope — An appropriate name. I think you are one.
Mo is right. Anything black shows EVERYTHING more — the good, the bad, AND the ugly. Black is for suckers. Black should be an iPod color for sale to clumsy mental defectives only if it’s available in the same material that the iPod mini’s were. Nice, metallic enclosure. MUCH more impervious to scratches and damage of any kind.
But anyway, here we go again in America– some stupid motherf-cking assclown f-ckheads are too f-cking ignorant and irresponsible to take care of their high-priced ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY and the rest of us are going to have to pay for it. You want a motherf-cking iPod that doesn’t scratch asswipes? Then they’re gonna cost ALL OF US a helluva lot more money . . . because they’re gonna cost Apple a helluva lot more to produce! Dipshits.
Besides, the simple law of averages and basic reasoning tells you that this is bullsh!t. The nano’s are selling so goddamn well that if this were a real issue outside of the walking lobotomized dolts who don’t know how to care for things then there’d be so much bad word on the street that the product would’ve RIGHTLY been pulled. But it’s NOT being pulled, because only the mulletheads who date their sisters are having any problems.
F-cking amazing. Be given the ability to acquire wonderful new technology that frees up your time and allows you to enjoy your daily existence immensely more than before, and all some people can do is scream “It broke! It broke! I did nothing wrong! I’m gonna sue! Waaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!” Why don’t you just bring it back and get a new one GRATIS from Apple, you buncha sh!tfaces, since that’s what they’re offering. I swear some people are too stupid to live.
This country never ceases to amaze me.
Its defective. Both the nano and the iPod video have screens that scratch if dust particles flow over them.
I am a big Apple fan, but this is going to turn into a disaster for Apple I am afraid.
I got rid of my beautiful iPod video before the scratches made it unsaleable.
d — It’s ‘unsalable’, jackass. And you probably meant ‘unsellable’.
Oh, and . . . I don’t believe you.
listen, I love everything apple, and I’m on my third iPod. But there are scratching issues beyond what any reasonable person would expect from a piece of hardware from apple.
I bought my 60 gig, 5th generation iPod the day after Christmas. When I got it home, I took it out of the box and put it directly into the sleeve that apple provided. Plugged it into the iMac and let iTunes do it’s thing and charge it up. I got up the next morning, took it out of the sleeve and guess what…. it was scratched. I hadn’t even played one song on it yet and it was scratched.
Checked the inside of the sleeve, no foreign objects.
I took it back to the apple store, showed it and my receipt to the manager, and he replaced it.
Seriously…. nothing touched the screen but the felt inside the sleeve, and it scratched. Some of these screens are defective, not all I think, because some people aren’t having any trouble whatsoever. My replacement iPod went directly into a hard shell case and is in pristine condition.
It’s deja vu all over again, What a waste of time, effort and resources that Apple could be dedicating to R&D!
A recent report stated that viruses cost business around 60 Billion per year, now that DOES warrant a lawsuit, so why hasn’t it happened? Not frivolous enough?
Business Week had a fascinating article about the lawsuit “problem” awhile back. Essentially the point was that, while other countries are far less litigious than the US, their businesses are also much more highly regulated. We have a culture of minimal regulation. Lawsuits, while annoying, are what take the place of regulation as the “enforcement mechanism” that keeps businesses in line.
If you push through “reform” that seeks to lessen the number of lawsuits, eventually, someone will get hurt and will be unable to take action. At that point, the consumers will demand either that they be allowed to sue, or that regulation is increased to lessen the chance of their getting hurt in the first place.
I don’t remember anything from Apple guaranteeing that an iPod cannot be scratched. Had there been, a lwasuit might be fine, but this one is in nobody’s interest.
Great discussion started by fed up lawyer. Nice one fella!
Bottom-line:
Apple used VERY SOFT PLASTIC on its iPod nano (and iPod video). Think about folks: DUST scratches the screen. It doesn’t have to be that way.
Also, remember that when Steve Jobs introduced the nano, he slid it out if the little pocket in his jeans. Can you imagine sliding it in and out of that pocket, say, even 10 times? It would look like shit.
I love Apple, and have a PowerBook, an iMac, and a PowerMac. And I have bought an iPod video — which I have to avoid touching and keep completely covered up (i.e. a clunky case, although one of the better ones out there, the Agent 18). But, the point remains:
Apple went for the CHEAP with the plastic used on this product. Their motives, if any, for doing this are not the issue. What is the issue is that customers are paying a lot of money for products that are looking like shit within a short amount of time.
This will haunt Apple. The next iPod is rumored to come in April and will be a full-front LCD screen (like a laptop screen) that avoids fingerprints and scratches. I suspect the iPod nano will be updated in the September timeframe to be something much better, to pent-up demand for the holiday season. At that point, people will look back on the 2005 nano and the 2005 iPod as the iPods that were so susceptible to fingerprints and scratches — i.e. the flawed iPods.
Mark my words.
I love Apple, too, but you folks need to stop looking at them with such rosy-colored glasses all of the time.
Apple never said there was a problem with scratching. They said there was a problem with screen breakage (on a small percentage of them) and have been replacing those iPods.
iPod scratchign they said was something else, and not something the nanos are any more prone to then other iPods, and you should get a case if you are worried abut it. It is so nice when these articles get their facts right . . .
Anyway, a few people bitchign online does not a defective product make. Until I see some statistics I don’t think there is an issue. If yu care that much about how it looks, get a case, because sooner or later it will scratch just liek all other iPods and every other product ever made.
I see that the Vice-President has decided to listen to his supporters on this site and has started reforming the American legal system
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />