That's funny............
Oh, my toilet's handle is broken and my s*** starts to stink the whole house and causes my cat faint... Sue the toilet maker!

Why do people do stupid things then sue for their stupidity?

My iPod got stratched (sp?) = Sue Apple.
My iPod damaged my ears = Sue apple.
I can't make good enough software = sue microsoft
I dunno how to market = Sue Linux.
I poured coffee into my BenQ monitor and it blew up = sue BenQ

and my favorite...
I put Cruise control on in my van and went back to make a coffee... and it ran off a cliff = Sue the car marker (The brand started with a Win but I can't spell it... and you don't want me to try :P)

Anyone else agreing with me?

PS. There was another Apple Ipod related one on Betanews somewhere... but I can't remember what it was :( :P

I get sick and tired of morons who need everything labled for their own safety. This guy needs a sign on his forhead that says "idiot I am not responsible for my own well being".
Last time I checked the Ipod has a volume control, but it must be hard to operate and he only has a learners permit. May the Judicial system let him pay for all the court costs and dismiss his stupidity.

Well i guess Everyone thats in the military and have hearing loss should buy themselves an ipod and sue ipod for their problems that they had before-lol-

may be i should sue my monitor manufacturer too. i think watching my monitor long time gives me eye problems.

People really do have to start taking responsibility for their own actions. Anytime anything that puts loud music or sound in your ear for a length of time can cause hearing loss or tinnitus. Apple did not force him to wear earphones or listen to loud music. It was his decision.

This guy is idiot!!

It's commonly known using ear bud or headset will cause hearing loss.........

What a dumb @$$............!

This is a old story they said this about tape players and then CD players. This is a joke of a law suit.

An old friend of mine has died recently. Below is his obituary. (author unknown)

Common Sense, aka C.S., lived a long life, but died from heart failure at the brink of the millennium. No one really knows how old he was, his birth records were long ago entangled in miles and miles of bureaucratic red tape.

Known affectionately to close friends as Horse Sense and Sound Thinking, he selflessly devoted himself to a life of service in homes, schools, hospitals and offices, helping folks get jobs done without a lot of fanfare, whooping and hollering. Rules and regulations and petty, frivolous lawsuits held no power over C.S.

A most reliable sage, he was credited with cultivating the ability to know when to come in out of the rain, the discovery that the early bird gets the worm and how to take the bitter with the sweet. C.S. also developed sound financial policies (don’t spend more than you earn), reliable parenting strategies (the adult is in charge, not the kid) and prudent dietary plans (offset eggs and bacon with a little fiber and orange juice).

A veteran of the Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, the Technological Revolution and the Smoking Crusades, C.S. survived sundry cultural and educational trends including disco, the men’s movement, body piercing, whole language and new math.

C.S.’s health began declining in the late 1960s when he became infected with the If-It-Feels-Good, Do-It virus. In the following decades his waning strength proved no match for the ravages of overbearing federal and state rules and regulations and an oppressive tax code. C.S. was sapped of strength and the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, criminals received better treatment than victims and judges stuck their noses in everything from Boy Scouts to professional baseball and golf. His deterioration accelerated as schools implemented zero-tolerance policies. Reports of 6-year-old boys charged with sexual harassment for kissing classmates, a teen suspended for taking a swig of Scope mouthwash after lunch, girls suspended for possessing Midol and an honor student expelled for having a table knife in her school lunch were more than his heart could endure.

As the end neared, doctors say C.S. drifted in and out of logic but was kept informed of developments regarding regulations on low-flow toilets and mandatory air bags. Finally, upon hearing about a government plan to ban inhalers from 14 million asthmatics due to a trace of a pollutant that may be harmful to the environment, C.S. breathed his last. Services will be at Whispering Pines Cemetery. C.S. was preceded in death by his wife, Discretion; one daughter, Responsibility; and one son, Reason. He is survived by two step-brothers, Half-Wit and Dim-Wit.

Memorial Contributions may be sent to the Institute for Rational Thought.

Farewell, Common Sense. May you rest in peace.

LMAO! Well put!

My God, I thought people like us were dead! Very well written.

Can't take credit. It's been around for ages.

People are getting more creative by day just to get free money.

I guess someone can sue their school for failing them, after all, they only skip 3/4 of their classes.

Best quote I've seen so far (make sure you read all of it!):

"We have numerous products in the marketplace that have the potential to damage hearing," said Deanna Meinke, an audiology professor at the University of Northern Colorado. "The risk is there, but the risk lies with the user and where they set the volume."

My question is does this idiot know when to stop turning up the volume.

Obviously not. Reminds me of the guy, years ago, who didn't think his lawnmower blade was working, because he couldn't see it spinning, so he checked it with his fingers! This lawsuit will fly out the courtroom doors faster than that idiot's finger flew across his lawn!

You mean... the idiot put his fingers under there?

lmao..

My Dad did that when he was 16. Only lost the tip of his though...and didn't bother trying to blame anyone else for his stupidity...

Yes. There's a lot of idiots in the world.

The point is, why does Apple produce a device which allows the user to turn up the volume high enough to cause hearing loss in the first place ?

You may say that the lawsuit is frivilous, however in France, the French gov't ordered Apple to remove the Ipod from the shelf and reconfigure it to play at a lower max volume.

Most of you are all young enough to still be in that "I'm immune to this and it will never happen to me" state of mind...but wait until you start asking people to repeat what they just said, or you need to keep turning up the voume on the TV because you're having trouble undesrtanding what they're saying.

Besides, those little earbuds produce the s***iest sound quality in the world.

So if you are in an environment that is louder than your iPod, how are you supposed to hear it?

You have to turn up the volume. You keep siding with the morons that blame manuafactures for NOT limiting their products. The point is, it wouldn't matter WHAT level the volume is set at, some fruit cake is going to find a way to sue another over stupid S$%t.

I don't need someone to tell me how loud I can make my stereo, its not up to you to enforce it. If I turn up the volume, I have only myself to blame, that's the issue. You don't assuage blame by saying they could have imposed limits, you put the accountablity where the accountability belongs, the END user. No one told this guy to keep turning his volume up, he did it on his own, and now he wants to blame someone for hearing loss...

This is a TOIALLY bogus claim, don't bring another country's self imposed limits on the USA. 100db is still Loud. IT may take longer to become deafened by the decibel level, but you can STILL do it.

100db isn't necessarily low to someone with very sensitive hearing either. Just because France THINKS they did what they could solve the problem, doesn't mean they have the answer.

You are also taking this claim at face value. There is NO proof the iPod CAUSED his hearing loss in the first place. Sony produced a walkman years ago, and I know their volume was about 120 db, how many lawsuits were there for that? This guy is simply following his lawyer's advice to get a quick buck.

That's ALL there is to it.

I think that if the court can in fact prove that a given lawsuit is frivolous in nature, and the point of the lawsuit was nothing but an attempt to exploit a company with deep pockets using your own stupidity as reasoning, there should be mandatory jail sentences imposed on the plaintiff for being a moron and trying to exploit the court systems.

Maybe that will deter some of the sue-happy idiots from starting lawsuits such as his, and lawyers from taking cases like this in an attempt to score big.

I really think the courts have better cases to deal with than sh*t like this, like corporations that really ARE doing something wrong, or, I don't know, kidnappers, murderers, molesters and rapists.

Like it was said, it's the new lottery. F*cking Ridiculous.

Agreed. This is a ridiculous suit. What the f#%^?

Why don't they just make an update to the OS of the iPod that tells you the dB when you adjust the volume? Is that even possible? I know that on my car radio it tells you, why can't they do that for the iPod. Even though I don't agree with this suit, it would be nice to know.

I agree. Too many people in our society try to exploit the loop holes in our court systems with these ridiculous claims that these, now commonly used, consumer products could impose physical, or mental, damage to the consumer if used improperly by lack of common sense. Plus the judges who favor these types of claims should be at blame for letting these people win.

We SHOULD be more concerned with bigger issues such at rapes or kidnaps but someone had to to something stupid with some consumer product they bought and think it would be funny to push the product to it's limits and sue that company for the damage the consumer inflicted on themselves. When is the stupidity going to end??

You're not alone.

http://www.stellaawards.com/

They can't do this because different earbuds/headphones treat the signal they receive differently. While you might get 98db output from the packaged earbuds, Sony, Koss, Bose, etc., headphones will have a different output level. It may only be a few db off, up or down, but it will be different. Which would lead to more stupid law suits. It would, however, be nice to know the output level on the fly.

Very well stated. I agree totally.

Not *just* the plaintiff. The lawyers taking the case should be subject to review and possible disbarment.

Even better.

Oops! I turned my Ipod up too loud and now I want to sue Apple so they can buy me a hearing aid.

Let the frivolous lawsuits begin.

lame! any earphone wil have the same effect!

or cd player, dvd player, laptop, or other mp3 device...

In my opinion this person needs a reality check. Perhaps this person still has someone holding their hand to cross the road.
I hope they loose and it costs them everything.

If this person wishes to continue to loose thier hearing, perhaps they should hurry up, stand by a Pneumatic drill and get on with it, better not - they may sue the builder!

This is common sense, this won't hold up. You listen to music too loud for too long, you pay for it with hearing loss. Its his own fault for not turning it down if its too loud. Apple shouldn't have to pay for his own brainless stupidity. Take of your body and it will take care of you, moron.

OMG!! I'm gonna sue Samsung for making the default brightness on my crt monitor too bright! My eyesight has deteriorated to the point where I need glasses, and now I'm sufffering emotionally because of it because people are calling me "four eyes". There should be bold, warning stickers plastered all over my monitor warning me that the tube could be harmful to my eyes, as well as my brain for that matter, so it is advisable to reduce the brightness to a more "soothing" level.

OMFG!! people like this un-adulterated f***head should be bound and shot. They are nothing but the scum of the earth, looking for self-serving advantages because they are so f***ing useless to society and themselves. The guy's a f***ing dork and ought to be ashamed of himself!

Or, he just might not have realised it would cause permanent hearing damage.

People who begin every paragraph with a sensationalist acronym, two exclamation marks, and use the f word three times in as many sentances on a public comment system for the world to see ought to be ashamed of themselves.

FCK!! FCK!! FCK!!

"Or, he just might not have realised it would cause permanent hearing damage."

Are you kidding me? That's like you saying: "I didn't realize drinking a quart of antifreeze may kill me", as you're stomach is being pumped in the ER. Give me and everyone else on this forum with common sense a break!

If you take a sample of 42 million people (roughly the number of iPods sold at the start of 2006) I'm sure you'd find some who aren't too bright and don't have a lot of common sense.

Sure, maybe he's just trying to screw Apple, but just because it's rather easy to look at it that way doesn't mean you should assert it as the truth and discount other possibilities.

For example, every time an aircraft flies over my head (which is fairly frequently) I crank up my player so I can still here it, then about 20 seconds later I'll turn it down again. How loud do I turn it up? Pretty loud. Do I have a decibel meter with me to check I'm not damaging my ears? No. Is 28 seconds for permanent damage such a long time? I don't think so.

It's within the realms of possibility.

Simply put, the guy is a leech. He disturbingly defines the all-too-common unaccountable, lazy, no good for nothing twits that walk the earth, dragging Mankind as a whole to the depths of embarrassment; the type of individual who shamelessly and ridiculously points the finger at others for their own stupidity, but in his case it's so much worse because he's going after financial restitution for it as well. That's what makes it so difficult to take.

What the F&$k!! Whose side are you on, you dimwit? You are a F#$!ing moron, a complete F&*king idiot.

I think I satisfied the claimant on this matter..

And its "sentences".

So what you are saying is, basically you are so retarded that waiting for a plane to fly over, and so selfish that you HAVE to listen to music, you CHOSE to turn up the music, rather than simply press the damn pause button.

If you KNOW you live in a path with airplanes, get headphones, you twit. ITs not our fault you can't figure out there are alternatives to ear buds, and you can get noise cancellation. Maybe if you didn't live on a street corner, and lived in a house like the rest of us, you wouldn't have a NEED to turn up the volume, would you, mr. wonderful?

You wouldn't know a decibel meter, if it bit you on the nose.

you forgot to include some sensationalism...

"Or, he just might not have realised it would cause permanent hearing damage."

So ignorance is now a valid reason to sue?

God help us all....

No. It's not.

Even @ 130db, likely more than your headphones could produce, you would not lose *any* hearing.

Even if you miraculously did...who's fault would that be? Yours. 100%. :)

"If you take a sample of 42 million people (roughly the number of iPods sold at the start of 2006) I'm sure you'd find some who aren't too bright and don't have a lot of common sense."

Yes, and they are unfortunate that common sense and intelligence were not bestowed upon them. Must be due to their deficient genes (Alabama is notorious for this kind of thing...they call it inbreeding).

Still, it is not cause for lawsuit. It is natures way of clearing the chaff from the wheat. Culling the fields, as it were. If they lack the common sense and intelligence to turn the damn thing down, perhaps we will be lucky and they will also not realize the danger inherent in parking on railroad tracks and taking a nap.

Tool, that's factually incorrect. I don't disagree with your point entirely, but 130dB is damaging.

A general rule of thumb is that if you need to shout to be heard, the sound is in the range that can damage hearing. Googling numerous websites results in all kinds of information on the relationship between sound pressure levels and hearing loss. Above 85 dB can result in permanent damage to hearing, depending on the amount of continuous exposure.

OSHA says 8 hours. I trust 'em.

For extended periods...yes.

For under a minute? Hardly.

Under a minute, every 2 minutes..That'd pretty much count as one extended period.

A little common sense goes a long way.

Common sense should come sold included with Microsoft Windows or Apple Macintosh (no, I'm not having a dig... :P)

Sorry, double post.

I'm not trying to say she should have won the McD's case; I'm just trying to make the point that it might not just simply be tossed out.

At what point is the coffee ridiculous? 200f/90c? I might think it would be nearly impossible to serve anything that hot given it's coffee. To the point, it's not that ridiculous to make headphones have an effective rate that is STUPIDLY loud.

115 dB = permament damage in 28 seconds, roughly. Does that mean that 115dB is equal to 160f coffee or 200f coffee?

Maybe someone's a dumba** for listening to music too loudly. My point here is that it's not unreasonable to think this will go to trial.

*That said, mark me down for hoping and betting it loses.

Personally I wish all mp3 players had a limiter. I hate turning the volume up for one song then the next blows my ears out. It should be a standard feature.

Further, MP3 files, as far as I understand, actually have a field in the bitstream that sets the amplitude scaling of each frame, so it's not even as if it's that hard to do. "if (scale_factor > limit) scale_factor = limit;". There you go, one line of code in your decoder and you've made your customers happy and avoided a class action lawsuit.

OK, so iTunes uses AAC, but even assuming you couldn't do this for all formats, how hard can it be to get the power of the signal for raw audio and scale the sample values accordingly?

Of course, as the article mentions the iPod is no worse than any other player (that I know of) in this regard. Unfortunately when you sell a device to millions of people someone somewhere will do something stupid with it..

"I hate turning the volume up for one song then the next blows my ears out. It should be a standard feature."

yipyip, thats why i use http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net
(supposedly a experimental version has AAC)

Yup. With MP3Gain...It's all good.

Yeah, but I shouldn't have to preprocess all my files.

That would require standards. Which, in the case of Audio, is 100% subjective.

Good luck with that. :D

What you may think is too loud, I probably find ... tame.

No, that would require a slider in a menu somewhere so that we can set the limit we like, and when you set it too high the manufacturer could even show a "Danger of damage to your hearing" warning.

That would involve monitoring my device. I say no, this isn't pre-school, I don't need someone holding my hand, thank you.

You give me the device, and I will determine what's too loud. This idiot that is suing, its NOT an example of the common sense variety.

It wouldn't involve monitoring your device. You'd be able to drag a slider in a menu screen to set the limit either really quiet or really loud. If you set the slider above a certain loudness value it would show a warning on the screen that it could damage your hearing - though it would still let you set it. There's no device monitoring going on here.

Also: Some people need to set their devices louder than others not because their ears are less sensitive but some headphones need more power to drive them.

"Also: Some people need to set their devices louder than others not because their ears are less sensitive but some headphones need more power to drive them."

Could that be because they are already partly deaf? Do try to realize that 120 decibels is 120 decibels, no matter what type of headset it's produced from. Also try to comprehend the guy that has to further depress the accelerator so he can drive 100 mph, because he's dring UPHILL! Does this mean he doesn't deserve a speeding ticket?

You ought to give a little - a lot - more thought to your comments. Are you some sort of bleeding heart Liberal?

"Do try to realize that 120 decibels is 120 decibels, no matter what type of headset it's produced from."

The iPod doesn't know the power it needs to supply to any particular headset to get 120db. Go read the tech specs of a few headsets and notice that they all have different sensitivies listed.

Do some research before you try to call me out.

A lesson on headset sensitivity is something I don't require in order to illustrate my valid point. The fact is most mp3 players are capable of producing ear-dammaging sound pressure levels through most TYPICAL mp3 player headsets, especially with the volume at near Max over a long period of time. 120 decibels is a number I chose arbitrarilly, though it doesn't have to be that high to cause permanent hearing damage. LONG-TERM listening at moderately loud levels is enough to cause hearing damage to many people. It's the same sort of thing that happens to many people working in noisy factories who refuse to wear hearing protection because it isn't "masculine" looking, or just not "cool". Too bad but that's the truth.

umm..did you read your own post? A device that has to determine the volume of a particular song for a certain volume level IS MONITORING, you retard!

That's monitoring it for sound. Its monitoring for level... its determining the level and then warning me that its too loud.. and I don't need someone to pre-determine what is too loud for ME!

lmao...

Common Sense....may you rest in peace, old friend.

Only someone moronic enough to buy an iPod in the first place could even conceive of launching such a lawsuit this stupid.

I'm certainly not surprised...

d00d get with the times, your so mid 2004. having an ipod means u have a bigger p£nis

well what if a girl has an ipod?.....HEY-NOWWWW

(.) (.) ---> ( o )( o )

Oh god....ASCII Pr0n.

Now I've seen it all.

ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI.

stupid questions need stupid answers!:)

*groans*

That was...ungh.

Good one!

I think we need to take up a collection and send roj an iPod. It's so obvious that he wants one, but just can't afford it.

Do you see a smaller increase in peni$ size if you only buy a Shuffle? Can customers expect greater performance based on a larger capacity or advanced features, like video? How about a click wheel, can I get a click wheel for my peni$?

I'm envisioning a whole new spam campaign here.

ROFLMFAO!!! :) :) ;)

Oh would you, please please PLEASE????

I mean, it's so hard up here in Canada, we live in igloos and an iPod would go great with my dog sled. Can you color code it in WoodenBrown please?

I call BS.

I have relatives in Canada, and they moved out of the igloo months ago.

Glad ya got the joke! ;o)

iPod has many problems, but as with Windows, I don't see a reason to sue Apple over it. Hmm... Maybe I'll make a quick buck by suing Apple over forcing me to use iTunes and Quicktime

This guy is the reason they have to put on bottles of bleach "do not drink" and why coffee must say "caution hot" (its damn near impossible to get a good cup of coffee anymore because of how scared everyone is of another lawsuit) because in order to have any product out now you have to cover your ass...pretty soon no matter what product you buy is going to have even more ridiculous warnings...I can see it now....when you go buy a car theres going to be a warning on it "caution using this device in an unsafe manner could cause harm against you or someone else or death we are not liable if you use car in a manner that is not intended for its use"
this is just like all the other lame lawsuits "my kids played grand theft auto and went on a killing spree...its all rockstars fault!"

Well, somebody was going to do it eventually. The next attempt at winning the new American lottery: Sue big company X using popular product Y. From what was said in the article (on the defensive side), I don't think this guy will win (thankfully). This isn't the first time we've seen this before (and not the last, unfortunately).

"I spilt coffee on myself, realizing then it was not cool, but in fact hot. Give me money."

"Your food made me fat. Give me money."

"There's a finger in my chili. Give me money."

Give ME a break.

this 20 dollar bill gave me a papercut.... give me ... Doh!!!!

I hope this idiot gets counter-sued for 100 bagillion dollars!

What’s next a lawsuit against all manufacturers of portable video devices (PSP, Dvd Players) because they hurt your eyes?. I hope this guy loses and gets send to jail for wasting tax payer’s money in stupid lawsuits. Unfortunately, lawyers that lend themselves for money or fame should also be punished. This guy needs to wash his ears more often.

lol, whether this is simply another case of sue-happy customers, if given the chance, and was told i could recieve a fairly huge payout from a case like this, you bet your sweet a** i would go ahead and sue. they'll be the laughing stock and i'll be rich

Synopsis of formal complaint to be filed against Betanews:

The layout of Betanews is such that, on popular stories, the comments can well exceed 150 comments. In such a scenario, one is *forced* into excessive and debillitating use of the "scroll wheel".

This leads to, what my team of crack lawyers (LOC) like to call, "limp-flicker syndrome". I am now, completely and totally unable to give the finger to my fellow man.

This has lead to a great amount of trauma and personal horror, not to mention the physical aspect of having to now voice my disgust with my fellow man instead of using a much simpler hand gesture.

Sure...I could always use the other hand, you say. Sadly, this would be true were it not for the results of many years spent surfing the web for pr0n, which has left that hand completely incapactitated. Suit of pr0n industry forthcoming.

In respect to damages, I modestly ask only that Betanews name me "King of the Net", and provide 1 person to follow me at all times, to give the finger to anyone whom I feel may deserve it.

Oh...and uh....ONE MILLION DOLLAHS!

MUahahahahah!!1111oneoneone

Thank you.

(LOC, Lawyers On Crack, DDS, MDD, MOD, STFU)

Sorry to hear about your limp flicker.

heh

If I could, man...you'd *so* be getting the finger right now. ;P

HAHAHAHA

why not jusr CLICK the scroll wheel and move the mouse up/Down.....

it works.-)

Well why didn't they TELL me that!!! That would have helped a bit. Now I'll sue 'em for not pointing that tidbit of wisdom out to us!

How dare they!

Suesuesuesuesuesue!!!!

LMFAOOOO!

LOLs ..... *** thumbs up ***

ahhh great .....
see mr. PC_Tool .... now im going to have to sue you too ...
Due to a very positive comment i was forced into giving mr. PC_Tool a thumbs up, thereby causing a trauma in both fingers due to unproper streching
Will probably consider a suit against milk companies for not including enough calcium on their products, altho this will be considered for later.
A settlement would be agreed upong mr. PC_Tool aknowledging this by not ever posting funny comments on Betanews, probably will countersuit Betanews for allowing this type of behavior as well. :P .....

( sorry, i have too much free time on my hands, don't judge me or ill sue you for that too )

in that case, why not go ahead and sue the following

1.- Betanews - for making their website waste bandwith
2.- Betanews - for concentrating so much text in one site there by causing eye strain
3.- your ISP - for not providing enough bandwith while browsing betanews
4.- you keyboard's manufact. - for having you type things instead of just thinking them and automatically tranfer them to the screen
5.- Microsoft - For not having invented this previously.
6.- ME - for wasting around 2 minutes of your life by making you read this

:P
(ok .... ill shut up now )

Well, ill sue you if when you sue them, you dont cut me in on the profits. Since you would be stealing my thoughts, id have a case to sue you:-0

Classic!!!

"sorry, i have too much free time on my hands, don't judge me or ill sue you for that too"

In that case, as you're suing him, i will have to sue you. You having more free time then me, is unconstipational.

"unconstipational"

That's just ... wrong.

You sir, will be hearing from my lawyers.

What an interesting forum.

"And that's all I have to say about that."

You use your middle finger on the scroll wheel? weird...

I use my middle finger for lots of things. Or...I used to. ;P

Someone finally cut it off?

Didn't you read the complaint?

People, please...read the thread you are replying to, not just one post of it.

You don't want to end up like this guy.

Wow, chill...it was just a joke. Pick your sense of humor back up off the floor.

*looks at the audience*

He don't know me very well, do he?

"Also, the earbuds shipped with the device contribute to the problem as sound is not diluted before entering the ear, the complaint alleges."

WTF? I'd sue Apple if they sold me earphones that dilluted my music. It's like suing Exxon for not dilluting the gas enough to keep your car from going so far you get lost and can't get home.

It's his hearing that is at fault. If he couldn't handle 115 decibels he didn't deserve an iPod to begin with.

Yeah!! Sue 'em! I lost my hearing because I put 4 15" Subwoofers in my car, I craked 'em up and now I'm deaf! it's all the Manufacuters fault! Booo!!

Lol...rediculous. Some people just don't use thier brain..This reminds me of the McDonalds lawsuit.

"Your Honor, I am suing this fast food chain because I'm a fat f*ck!"

Idiots...

stupid f*ck.. you got fat because you are stupid!

haha..

Time out, time out. First of all, you guys are all under the assumption that an individual who lost their hearing brought this up. Chances are it was the lawyer who decided to sue!

Basically, here's how it works: some lawyer comes across a small-town newspaper article or hears from a friend of a friend that Joe Schmoe has lost his hearing because of loud noises. Mr. Lawyer calls Mr. Schmoe and asks him if he has an iPod. Mr Schmoe says yes, so Mr. Lawyer says, "We can try to sue Apple for this, and since it's a high-profile company, I won't charge you for it, we'll just make it class action and I'll get part of the cut." Mr. Schmoe, having nothing to lose, goes along with it.

That's how it works! In almost all of these cases of stupid lawsuits. The typical person doesn't know the judicial system well enough to even think about suing Apple for hearing loss.

So blame these stupid lawyers who do it. Note: I'm not attacking all lawyers, just these money-hungry ones who look for stupid cases.

Sad but true...

i pushed ear buds in till touched brain, now i stoopid

me sue apple

lol

roflmao...

Exactly!

QYB. You lost your hearing because you listened to your music to loud. Common sense would go a long way with this guy.

Considering the effects of loud music over an extended period of time have been known for *well* over a decade, I am not the least bit ashamed to call each and every person involved in this a complete and total moron who is wholly deserving of any hearing-loss / public humiliation this shall cause them.

I have no pity. I sincerely hope Apple feels the same. It is time to stop catering to people who cannot abide common sense.

I have a sound system in my car.. I listen to excess of I would say 80db.. and I am not deaf.

Then again my headphones aren't right next to my hear, however.. your ponit was "extended period". Its a case by case basis. I have been doing this for well over 5 years, for at least 2 hours every day, and on weekends it could be several hours dependino on what I am doing..

So the effects of loud music is personal, not general. Maybe this guy has sensitive hearing.. and he shouldn't be using an iPod or headphones/ear buds.

I agree with your point, just saying, that I am a case for loud music my whole life, and it hasn't dampened my hearing at all.. I have better hearing then probably anyone I know. I can hear a cell phone ringing above my loud music, in other cars..

According to OSHA, if you are subjected to above 80db for an 8 hour period or longer, you should wear hearing protection. (if it's a work environment, it's required)

Pretty much anyone should be able to take in excess of 130db for periods of time up to about 3 hours. Longer than that and you will begin to lose certain ranges....permenantly.

45 minutes in the car each way with the volume set to 110 ain't gonna hurt no-one...

And this is ambient noise. The db reaching your ears being the db recorded. So headphones @ 110 would be the same as an ambient 110 (The source would likely be greater...).

Sorry. TMI?

Oh, cool, I thought I was on the threshold.... now thanks to you, I can listen to it even louder!

And people from 4 blocks away can hear my Porsche singing!! woohoo!

:lol:

So long as you are within your district ordinances, go for it. :D

Just don't turn the Porsche into a shaking pile of rubble while yer at it, mmmmkay?

Cool! I actually drove up next to a cop, and didn't know it.. I was playing some hip tune, can't remember exactly, probably Luda, but anyway, I was looking around and wasn't paying attention, and he was right next to me.. I know it was very loud and *boom*ing, but he just smiled and banged his head as he drove on.. I thought it was hysterical.

I was like yeah!

OK, these lawsuits are just becoming rediculous. This ceased to be funny about 1,000 lawsuits ago. Enough already. Someone needs to develop a backbone and tell these people that you can't sue someone for something stupid.

This guy took HIS device, took HIS music, and took HIS headphones, and listened to HIS music too loud. So where is the lawsuit? Should Apple limit the volume on the device? Personally, they are too low for me.. I like them louder.. Which is why I don't own one, I have to have headphones that amplify the music. No I am not deaf, I *LIKE* my music that way.

Anyway, the point is, this is not a lawsuit that deserves attention. Eating too many whoppers at Burger King isn't a lawsuit. Macdonald's did not make that other guy fat, and the coffee didn't fall into her lap on accident, they ALL had something to do with it, and they feel stupid about it, and some Lawyer said "Hey..did you know...?"

Its sickening.

Hearing loss? Bah... i suggest to this guy to try using a power drill to clean out his ear canal, it's probably just wax.

Before you get to McDonald's, that lawsuit - had you looked further than the headlines - truly did have merit. When served a food product, even coffee, it is reasonable to believe that you could consume it without hurting yourself. That coffee was served at over 160 degrees causing 3rd degree burns. When they handed her that coffee, they were negligent. Had the coffee been a scalding 140 degrees, she wouldn't have been permanently disfigured.

In this case, you have a manufacturer that could have limited a device within common safe limits, but chose not to. It is inherently the consumer's responsibility, but don't expect this to get tossed out. It's likely that it will beg the question of why they'd do it in France, but not here.

Is that in ¤F or ¤C???? PLEASE SPECIFY

drumcat...what a bunch of bull. When they handed her the coffee, she took responsibility for her actions. Maybe next time she won't try to put cream and sugar in her coffee while driving. Maybe you should look further than the headlines - by industry standards, 175 degrees is considered "optimum". What's next for McDonalds? - someone going to sue them because they handed them a Big Mac and they decided to eat it whole and choked on it?

This Apple case is even lamer yet - how about this - I drive 80 mph, get in an accident and sue the car manufacturer because they didn't limit the max speed of the car to 70 mph?

I agree with most who think people should start taking responsibility for their own stupid actions. Give me LESS governmental controls, not more.

I would hazard a good guess that's it's 160 degress F .... as a if you were able to hold a coffee at 160 degrees C, then that lady would sure to hell have a case! Belive me, that's HOT!

lol, microwaving coffee with sugar makes it hot, i KNOW. But how could she get pissed off about 71¤C(160¤F) coffee, thats normal serving temp.

What they failed to tell you, is the health department actually has a mandate for coffee to be SERVED at between 140 and 160 degrees, otherwise McD could be slapped with fines from the health code..

That was something that DIDN'T come out during that debacle..

So 160 may have been the case, but realistically, once its transferred from the pot, to the styrofoam cup, and allowed to steep for a few minutes while waiting for the order, and then transfered to the customer, and the customer drove for a least a couple of miles, we could be talking 15 minutes before the incident, making that coffee more like 120 degrees..

So 160, MAYBE at the point of the pot, but NO WAY was it 160 in the customers hands...

She had it in her lap, and why she wasn't fined for a safety violation for having coffee between her legs, is beyond me.. That could be considered a distraction to her driving which contributed to her braking suddenly, which is why the coffee spilled in the first place.

We all know McD was not at fault, she got away with one because she was OLD. Period. She was like 70 or something, and the jury felt sorry for a an old lady, stupid as she was.

She also only got about 50,000 instead of the millions she was looking for. . . .

Excellent point!

I got a speeding ticket, and I am taking it to Porsche so they can refund me for having such a flashy, fast car... They should have put a governor on it at 70 like you said, and I would not have gotten a ticket..

its impossible anyway, water boils at 212 F. 160 C would be 320 F. Water is vapor at that point.. and coffee has a higher boiling point, but no way would it be 160C and still be coffee.

I see your point, but she was a stupid b$%ch. McD was not at fault, but jury, found otherwise..

Still pandering that urban legend??? Dude, you gotta get a factual story to tell!

It's the only one he knows.

Meanwhile, the truth:

1: Stella Liebeck was a 79-year-old grandmother who was the passenger in her grandson's car. The car was stopped and pulled over at the time of the spill.

2: McDonalds served the coffee at roughly 190 degrees. 190 Degree liquid will cause third-degree burns within 2-7 seconds of contact with the skin.

3: Stella was wearing cotton jogging pants, and the 190 degree liquid soaked into the pants. She received third-degree burns to her thighs and genitals. These burns required skin grafts, 7 days of hospitalization, debridement and other extensive treatment.

4: McDonalds admitted that the coffee was not fit for human consumption at the temperature they served it.

5: Over 700 men, women, and children had been burned prior to Stella's lawsuit.

6: Stella offered to settle with McDonalds for just $20,000, BEFORE she filed the suit. They refused!

7: Any common consumer product which can cause third-degree burns (the worst kind) in two to seven seconds is seriously dangerous. McDonald's had ample evidence of this and refused to take action. NOW, they serve their coffee at 158 degrees, somewhat less dangerous.

This lawsuit is retarded... You should know when not to turn it up all the way. Self-decipiline i suggest? Well either way... this is almost as bad as the person who suied mcdonalds for hot coffee

Once again, another human being with no sense of responsibility. If you're that stupid then you deserve to lose you hearing. These kinds of people are the ones that makes stupid warning labels pop up on everything.
It must be easy to be that stupid. I think I’ll try it.
I’m gonna sue Dell cause my computer made me fat and lazy cause I don’t want to get a life. After that, Compaq, HP, Alien Ware, I’LL PUT THE SYSTEM ON TRIAL!
If you are one of the losers out there like this, may God have mercy on your soul…

Its like the big
SMOKING KILLS
and
QUITING SMOKING WILL REDUCE THE RISK OF YOU GETTING LUNG DISEASES
signs across half the pack of smokes, Apple could start using their laser engraving to print
LOUD MUSIK MAKES YOU DEAF or
THIS PRODUCT CAN DAMAGE YOUR HEARING.

Is that what US consumers want?

...and that reminds me, some other idiot in California sued Phillip Morris for lung cancer, from guess what? SMOKING!!

There is even a warning label on a product, and yet he STILL wins the lawsuit..amazing!

It's the same damn reaosn we have tags on our Hair-dryers telling us not to use them in the friggin' shower.

Apparently, there are people out there stupid enought to think that drying their hair while still in the shower is a "Good Idea™".

hahaha.. I forgot about that..

We can save time by just blowing ourselves in the shower! -smirk-

*sigh* haven't we all tried....

Okay...that's just sick.

i need to get more flexible first, before i can attempt something like that.

yes, but you were laughing.. I heard you all the way over here..

Invasion of Privacy?

That's it, bucko. You just got yourself a lawsuit!

bucko? OK, where is my palm pilot, so I can call my ambulance chaser.. I mean attorney.

I find your comment offensive.. funny, but offensive..

Just out of curiosity... why wouldn't Apple do that worldwide? I'm not suggesting the suit has merit, but 115 db's is pretty stupid and pointless. I'd be all for a feature unlock on that, shipping with 100 db.

Frankly if you listen to anything that loud, it's akin to staring at the sun. You can, but...

What if someone wants an iPod that is hard of hearing? Now another group sues for discrimination, because the hearing challenged, can't get good quality enjoyment out of their product.

People should just be more responsible and adjust the volume accordingly. What if you work on the flighline, or a contruction site? They need to turn it up, and possibly 115 db may be JUST enough..

Personally, I don't want some engineers limiting anything because its THEIR descretion on what I do with MY product. BS! Give me the product, and if I blow out my ear drums, oh well. Its my fault.

If this guy were local, I would tell this dork to his face, he is a moron, and he needs to learn how to turn the volume down. And how do we know his hearing loss is from this device? He could be lying..

Maybe his wife is yelling at him all these years, he is blaming Apple.. he can't sue his wife..

"What if someone wants an iPod that is hard of hearing?"

MUHAHAHAHA An iPod that is hard of hearing HAHAHAHA :)

Yes I know what you meant.

Why I outta..

Yeah, I was smoking on some crack, sippin on da syrip, rollin' down the street, hanging with the homies, kickin' tunes, and hittin' someone up on the cell, while I was scriblin that stuff..

I will try to remember to spell check carefully to make sure I don't any words out :)

don't any words out.
.......^
....leave

But you probably that.

"The suit points to the fact that the device was pulled from French shelves and software installed that limited sound to 100 decibels. However, the same was not done within the United States."

Why sue apple? sue the US goverment instead:-)
European law makes the limitations, so sue the USgov for not having the same laws. american morons (no offence intended).

Soon everybody will be suing every big company. General Motors for air polution(lung damage). Nokia for CTR screens (sight damage). British Airlines, for letting people travel without sun protection.

g** d*** PPL!!!!! USE SOME COMMON SENCE.
Consumers need to take more responsability.

"g** d*** PPL!!!!! USE SOME COMMON SENCE."

"american morons (no offence intended)."

Good one. So now I can call you a moron! (no offence intended)

BTW you are not a moron. You do see my point though, right?

First of all, 100db is rather loud, and listening to it sustained at that volume will still impair your hearing, it has nothing to do with hearing loss, its a limiter, but that doesn't keep you from listening to songs for hours on end at 100db.

Secondly. there has been a suit against fossil fuel companies years ago, that's been tried, and failed.

Third, what the hell does British Airways (not Airlines) have to do with sun protection? What do they have a sunroof installed on planes now, Mr. Wizard?

And, You need to learn to use a spell checker.

Its "common sense" & "responsibility". So maybe YOU should follow your own advice.. moron.

"Why sue apple? sue the US goverment instead:-) "

Why sue anyone? Why not make it fatal instead, and rid ourselves of some chaff best left out of the human genome.

If you cannot be held accountable for protecting your own health from EASILY PREVENTABLE damage, then you deserve every ounce of pain and suffering derived thereof.

Amen.

wow, got me there for a second.
next time use "arrogant eurotrash", "damn pothead", "hippie" or "f***-up".
im more use to hearing these:-)
and yes i do see your point.

This is probably gonna happen to me someday. Except it won't be from an iPod. Too degrading.

Can I sue any company that makes Fireworks because of my Dad's hearing loss?

How about electric guitars and drums?

If you're stupid enough to buy one and use it, you pay the price.

you can sue anybody for anything. whether the judge tosses it out before you get a word out is another topic for discussion.

I say we start this discussion now.. because this is getting a bit out of hand.. don't you think so?

There should be a lawsuit agency.

Let me see, Mr. Twirp. Yes Mr. Twirp, how can we help you today?

I want to sue Apple for my hearing loss.

And what seems to be the problem, Mr. Twirp?

I am deaf because the volume on the iPod is too loud.

I see, Mr. Twirp. Does that iPod have a volume control, or is it stuck?

Well, I guess it has one, I don't know, never used it.

Great, Mr. Twirp, here is what you should do. See the spanish guy down the hall, his name is Manual. You should read his stuff, next time. NOW GET OUT!

"spanish guy down the hall,"

And here I was waiting for a Monty Python reference...

Dammit.

ok, help me out..

Which reference should I have used?

I suppose you could have gone either with the good ol' Inquisition (spanish reference), or the much maligned, Arguments ("No, I'm Insults...you want Arguments, he's down the hall, on yer right")

Yes, the quote has been, for lack of a better word, maligned... Hence my above comment on it being much maligned, usually by myself...

Of course, the Bruce bit should be obvious. (if you'd mentioned anything remotely relating to it, that is.)