Apple to pay $22.5M in suit over scratched iPod nanos
Apple has agreed to a settlement in a class action lawsuit brought by customers who experienced quality issues with the easily-scratchable surface of first generation iPod nanos.
The suit alleged Apple knew the glossy front surface scratched easily but misled customers by failing to disclose that information.
As part of the settlement, Apple has agreed to pay $22.5 million without admitting any wrongdoing.Â* The agreement goes into effect pending an April approval hearing at California Superior Court in Los Angeles.
The announcement would bring to an end a three-and-a-half year legal battle between the iPod maker and unhappy customers. Â*It all began mere weeks after the nano's release in September 2005, as early adopters began toÂ*express discontentÂ*with the players' susceptibility to scratches and, in some cases, cracks in their LCD displays. Â*Apple acknowledged the cracking in a statement, but said it was a "real but minor issue involving a vendor quality problem" that only affected less than one-tenth of 1% of the total iPod nano units shipped.Â*
In a complaint filed the the following month, owners claimed the device "scratch[ed] excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen ... unreadable." Â*Nano owner Jason Tomczak said even the act of rubbing a paper towel on the face of the nano left "significant scratches."
The iPod nanoÂ*was introducedÂ*inÂ*September 2005, with chief executive Steve Jobs predicting it would "change the rules for the entire portable music market." Â*The 2GB model was priced at $199, while the 4GB sold for $249.
A first-gen iPod nano scuffed up from normal wear and tear | Photo: Chris.JP's Flickr album.
U.S. customers who purchased a first generation nano without an included slip case will receive $25, assuming they submit a claim form.Â* Customers who bought the digital media player a little later, afterÂ*Apple began to include a free slip case in the package, will receive $15.
Apple has also agreed to $4.5 million in attorney fees and an award of litigation expenses of up to $200,000.
A court-orderedÂ*websiteÂ*provides more information, including aÂ*linkÂ*to a form where customers can enter their iPod nano's serial number to make sure they are eligible for the payment.
According to the site, customers can expect to wait as long as a year after the April hearing if the case is appealed before they receive their reimbursement.Â* All claim forms must be postmarked on or before June 10, 2009, in order to be eligible.Â*Â*Full instructionsÂ*are available at the website.
The settlement applies only to the first-generation iPod nano.Â* Later versions and other iPod models are not included.
Full details, including a list ofÂ*frequently asked questions, are also available.
The suit alleged Apple knew the glossy front surface scratched easily but misled customers by failing to disclose that information.
As part of the settlement, Apple has agreed to pay $22.5 million without admitting any wrongdoing.Â* The agreement goes into effect pending an April approval hearing at California Superior Court in Los Angeles.
The announcement would bring to an end a three-and-a-half year legal battle between the iPod maker and unhappy customers. Â*It all began mere weeks after the nano's release in September 2005, as early adopters began toÂ*express discontentÂ*with the players' susceptibility to scratches and, in some cases, cracks in their LCD displays. Â*Apple acknowledged the cracking in a statement, but said it was a "real but minor issue involving a vendor quality problem" that only affected less than one-tenth of 1% of the total iPod nano units shipped.Â*
In a complaint filed the the following month, owners claimed the device "scratch[ed] excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen ... unreadable." Â*Nano owner Jason Tomczak said even the act of rubbing a paper towel on the face of the nano left "significant scratches."
The iPod nanoÂ*was introducedÂ*inÂ*September 2005, with chief executive Steve Jobs predicting it would "change the rules for the entire portable music market." Â*The 2GB model was priced at $199, while the 4GB sold for $249.
A first-gen iPod nano scuffed up from normal wear and tear | Photo: Chris.JP's Flickr album.
U.S. customers who purchased a first generation nano without an included slip case will receive $25, assuming they submit a claim form.Â* Customers who bought the digital media player a little later, afterÂ*Apple began to include a free slip case in the package, will receive $15.
Apple has also agreed to $4.5 million in attorney fees and an award of litigation expenses of up to $200,000.
A court-orderedÂ*websiteÂ*provides more information, including aÂ*linkÂ*to a form where customers can enter their iPod nano's serial number to make sure they are eligible for the payment.
According to the site, customers can expect to wait as long as a year after the April hearing if the case is appealed before they receive their reimbursement.Â* All claim forms must be postmarked on or before June 10, 2009, in order to be eligible.Â*Â*Full instructionsÂ*are available at the website.
The settlement applies only to the first-generation iPod nano.Â* Later versions and other iPod models are not included.
Full details, including a list ofÂ*frequently asked questions, are also available.
Comments
It would have been nice if Apple had put decent scratch resistant coatings on their products, but other than surface scuffing, my nanos have been among the most durable piece of pocket electronics I've ever used, and I used it 4-8 hours a day, 5 days a week. The hold switch went bad on one, but the Apple Store rep gave me a new one right away without any rigmarole.
2. Each user gets a max of $25
3. Lawyers get $4,500,000
Looks like 1&2 got screwed over by 3.
-Matt
-
"In the suit, lawyers for the plaintiffs charge that screens on the nano ?scratch excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen on the Nanos unreadable, and violating state consumer protection statutes [...] and causing Plaintiff class members to incur loss of use and monetary damages.?
The suit goes on to allege that the player's screen "scratches so excessively that the items shown on the screen can no longer be viewed by the user. In fact, if users were to put their nanos in their pockets with common items such as coins, keys, a money clip, a credit card, or even the earphones that accompany the nano, the devices would likely scratch so badly that viewing the screens would be extremely difficult, if not impossible."
--
People understand the screen can get damaged and would thus be unusable. But there is a question of reasonableness. It's unreasonable to think that if you wiped the screen clean with your T-Shirt it would be so scratched that it would be difficult to read the menu. that's Apple's fault.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...en_issues.html
-
"In the suit, lawyers for the plaintiffs charge that screens on the nano ?scratch excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen on the Nanos unreadable, and violating state consumer protection statutes [...] and causing Plaintiff class members to incur loss of use and monetary damages.?
The suit goes on to allege that the player's screen "scratches so excessively that the items shown on the screen can no longer be viewed by the user. In fact, if users were to put their nanos in their pockets with common items such as coins, keys, a money clip, a credit card, or even the earphones that accompany the nano, the devices would likely scratch so badly that viewing the screens would be extremely difficult, if not impossible."
--
People understand the screen can get damaged and would thus be unusable. But there is a question of reasonableness. It's unreasonable to think that if you wiped the screen clean with your T-Shirt it would be so scratched that it would be difficult to read the menu. that's Apple's fault.
I understand what you are saying, and everyone deserves a good product. However, we all know that there is a good use of class action suits, and I'm afraid this is not one. An ipod is a luxury item and will be technology out of date in less than 3 years. Financially penalizing a company for this hurts everyone except the law firm handling the action. $25 does not fix the problem.
There are more important uses of this energy and money.
Think about it.
"A first-gen iPod nano scuffed up from normal wear and tear"
You can't seriously tell me that is normal wear and tear. It looks like they took some kind of circular buffing device and scratched it up.
Is that supposed to be scratched just from your finger? If it is supposed to be from your nails whose nail goes all the way around the wheel. I just don't buy the pic. Sorry.
And I just saw the last part:
$4.5 million in attorney fees
I see...
Jimzip
So, where can I get my money?
On another note, I'd like Apple to pay me back for my faulty MBP for a burnt out gfx card and overheating issues, even though the Apple techs say its my fault because I run the fans too high. Totally different story.
Millions of people are starving around the world and the wealthy waste their time suing for $25.
SHame on all those people who raised this law suit, you should be focusing your effort in doing something good in the world.
Only in America!
Millions of people are starving around the world and the wealthy waste their time suing for $25.
SHame on all those people who raised this law suit, you should be focusing your effort in doing something good in the world.
word!
17. How do I tell the Court that I don?t like the settlement?
If you?re a Class Member, you can object to the settlement if you don?t like any part of it. You can give reasons why you think the Court should not approve it. The Court will consider your views. To object, you must send a letter saying that you object to In re iPod nano Cases, Case No. BC 342057, JCCP No. 4469. Be sure to include your name, address, telephone number, the Serial Number of your iPod nano, your signature, and the reasons you object to the settlement. The objection and any supporting papers must be mailed to and actually received by the following addressees no later than March 27, 2009:
COURT
CO-LEAD COUNSEL
DEFENSE COUNSEL
Clerk of the Court
Superior Court for the
County of Los Angeles
Central Civil West
600 South Commonwealth Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90005
Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP
c/o Lee M. Gordon
700 South Flower Street, Suite 2940
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Pearson, Simon, Soter, Warshaw & Penny, LLP
c/o Bruce L. Simon
44 Montgomery St., Suite 1430
San Francisco, CA 94104
Penelope A. Preovolos
Morrison & Foerster LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2482
When that got stolen 2 weeks later (they broke into my car to get it) I immediately replaced it.
Yup it scratched. (After a while I stopped the process with a simple film cover.)
Am I going to take advantage of this? No way. I have a conscience.
Probably the best device I ever owned. (Until my touch.)