Tango-loving ice dancer recruited as plaintiff to save increasingly-ludicrous Apple iPod suit

“With their $1 billion lawsuit against Apple Inc. on thin ice, consumer attorneys found their new lead client — an amateur skater who holds an eight-year grudge against the iPod maker for making it a hassle to listen to the tango and Hungarian music she loves,” Karen Gullo and Robert Burnson report for Bloomberg.

“The other thing Barbara Ragan Bennett, 65, brings to the case is her iPod Nano bought in 2006. That’s the most important credential to serve as lead plaintiff on behalf of 8 million consumers in a case alleging that Apple tried to maintain a monopoly on digital music from 2006 to 2009,” Gullo and Burnson report. “The two previous lead plaintiffs were taken off the case after Apple questioned whether their iPod purchases qualified them to be representatives in the class-action case.”

“On the stand with the jury absent, Bennett described herself yesterday as a consultant and ice dancer from Marshfield, Massachusetts. She said she e-mailed the judge to volunteer herself as class representative for the case after reading that the lead plaintiffs had been withdrawn,” Gullo and Burnson report. “She said that after buying her Nano in 2006, she couldn’t always find the “rare music” she enjoys, including tango and Hungarian, for sale on iTunes. As a result, she had to buy CDs of the music and copy it onto her laptop before syncing with her Nano, she said.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: At this point, Apple’s attorneys have to be waiting for the “judge” to exclaim, “Smile! You’re on ‘Candid Camera.'”

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Bob” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Apple’s lawyer accuses the media of asking to see ‘a dead man’ in Steve Jobs video testimony – December 10, 2014
News organizations fight to release Steve Jobs deposition video – December 9, 2014
Judge: Apple iPod trial will continue despite no plaintiff in case – December 9, 2014
Apple’s Eddy Cue explains why DRM for music was a necessary evil – December 5, 2014
Apple iPod judge asks if lack of plaintiff dooms trial – December 5, 2014
Apple on trial: Were iTunes updates really an anti-consumer scheme?
Steve Jobs on RealNetworks in 2011 deposition: ‘Do they still exist?’ – December 3, 2014
Steve Jobs said Apple took pains to protect record contracts – December 3, 2014
Star witness in Apple lawsuit is Steve Jobs – December 1, 2014
How to kill the DRM in your old iTunes Store music purchases – March 18, 2014
Apple asks judge to dismiss FairPlay lawsuit following Steve Jobs’ deposition – April 19, 2011
Apple’s iTunes Store goes DRM-free and 3G via iPhone; variable pricing coming soon – January 6, 2009
Major music cartels demand concessions from Apple before inking DRM-free iTunes Store music deals – December 15, 2008
RealNetworks ‘Harmony’ stops working on iPods but nobody notices for a month and a half – December 15, 2004
Real’s online petition for music ‘freedom’ backfires bigtime – August 17, 2004
Real cracks Apple’s Fairplay; to sell iPod-compatible songs without Apple’s authorization – July 25, 2004
Jobs to Glaser: Go pound sand – April 16, 2004


    1. iTunes is required by law to sell every tango, mango, groovy movie and cookie book going back 10,000,000 years and forever more, from each and every business.

      Oh, wait. No, they are not.

    2. Sounds like she is not in the class.

      For her to have a claim, need needs to have purchased the Tango music on Rhapsody, and tried to side (hack) it to her iPod. Buying a CD and loading it into her computer is exactly how everyone did it and is expected to do, even to this day.

      AGAIN, complete BS.

    3. “She said that after buying her Nano in 2006, she couldn’t always find the “rare music” she enjoys, including tango and Hungarian, for sale on iTunes. As a result, she had to buy CDs of the music and copy it onto her laptop before syncing with her Nano, she said.”

      Hey Barbara Ragan Bennett the issue is not about finding and buying rare music in iTunes but inability to play digital music purchased from other providers on iPod players.

    1. Hell, if those ambulance chasers paid me enough I’d be their lead plaintiff. But, I bought an iPod in 2005 and an iPhone in 2007 & 08 & 09, and iTunes music in all of those years, so I don’t know if I qualify or not.

  1. Desperation, if accurately reported. I thought the original suit involved RealNetworks! She’s probably never heard of RealNetworks. And she actually WAS able to he move her music from CD’s onto the iPod in a two step process, which is cumbersome but hardly constitutes damages. In fact, it’s the same process we use today in getting music on CD’s onto an iPod. Copy ’em to iTunes and sync. What other method could she have used in 2006? As far as I know, the iPod has never carried the software to extract music directly from CD’s.

    What a legal joke. I’ll bet Apple’s attorneys will sleep well tonight.

    1. yes! her situation has nothing to do with the alleged damages. and she emailed the judge no less! so now the judge is on record as having recruited plaintiffs for the case.

    2. Considering her age and that CD’s have being available for about 30 years also that tango is anything but new, my guess is that she already had that music on CD’s while iTunes ability to rip CD’s actually saved her some money as she didn’t need to repurchase her music as she probably had to do when CD’s replaced vinyl records

  2. If this suit is not thrown out of court in microscopically short order, the entire American legal system will be held up for ever more as THE prime exemplar of crass and utter stupidity.

    The only people who will benefit are the bastard lawyers, whose venal and rapacious actions have brought the entire profession into disrepute.

    For shame!


    1. In the long run, this is about the Trial Lawyers long sought goal of just eliminating the need for plaintiffs at all. . . skip those vexatious irritants and allow THEM to choose who to sue directly. Then watch how much money they can extort extract from the economy for deserving lawyers everywhere. . .

    1. Ha! Perfect! And you can sue Mazda *and* the maker of the cassette player.

      But I just want to be your lawyer. Doesn’t even matter if the case has legs or not – I’ll get paid somehow. Sorry about you.

    2. Tom, I think you too have a winnable case..my eight track cartridges will NOT fit in the USB outport of my iPod. I have contacted the law firm of Dewey, Cheatham & Howe to handle a class action suit. Senior law partner, Moe Howard, promises an expeditious and rewarding result. If you’re interested please contact:

      Moe Howard, Senior Partner
      Dewey, Cheatham & Howe
      ℅ Columbia Studios
      Hollywood CA 91601

        1. botty . . . again, I catch you talking to yourself. I know the nice people on this site can’t stand you but there is no reason to shame the family name by talking to yourself nearly every post.

        2. Hold on, hold on. . . 8 Tracks were superior to cassettes. . . you never had to rewind and they didn’t hiss. . . no techy Dolby sound reduction needed to play them. And don’t you miss the exciting streamers coming from he player occasionally when you pulled them out? Oh, wait, you got streamers with cassettes too.

  3. Okay, I was going to comment that since the original two “lead” plaintiffs were dismissed due to not actually qualifying for the suit, Apple should call for a poll of the other 8 million people to reassess whether or not they qualified, as well. After all, if the originals and their attorneys were confused about the issues, who can say about the other 8 million? But then we get the doozy of the new lead having to rip CDs into iTunes, which was hardly the idea behind this lawsuit in the first place. Insanity!

  4. I thought they were arguing that you couldn’t buy rival music and put it on your iPod, now it’s you couldn’t buy Hungarian Tango music on iTunes?

    I very much doubt that her music was available on rival download sites in the US at the time so where is the damage to the consumer?

  5. First we had Judge Lucy (the complete dumbshit) Koh and now we have this moron. There is no class action suit here. Just a bunch of blackberry lunatic attorneys trying to get a paycheck. They are pretending they are relevant. Stupid Judges are worse than stupid economists, and that is not easy to do.

    This judge is trying to make sure the idiot lawyers get a pay check.

    The idiot dancer got her music onto her iPod. That means no harm, no foul. Let’s see ya get your dumb music on your blackberry, sweetie.

    There is no evidence that the Judges of America are qualified to do anything. Refer to current trials for mass murder by mentally ill fools. And said fools get to keep running around for years, while they manipulate the legal system. Guess who is winning that race. Yep. A big flock of them just went over.

  6. No wonder Apple lawyers want to fight this case on it’s “merits” instead of getting it dropped. It figures – in a case where the plaintiff keeps changing, why not the defendant? The old dancer has already replaced the iPod with iTunes. Before we know it, MDN might be hauled in for misleading these knobs into the Apple ecosystem! (Was MDN even around in those days?)

    Strange days. We had an old values-based Senator yesterday doing a Shiite self-whipping, announcing to the world from America’s top chamber that Americans are torturers and all-round bad people. Those angels of ISIS will probably now be clamoring for life-size posters of Dianne Feinstein. They’ll place severed heads at her alter.

    1. As signed by Dwight D Eisenhower, US Military Code of Conduct, Article V, Section C:

      “c. It is a violation of the Geneva Convention to place a prisoner under physical or mental duress, torture or any other form of coercion in an effort to secure information.”

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.