An iPod owner has filed a federal lawsuit against Apple, claiming the device cause hearing loss in people who use it. What's next? Let's sue Oprah because she promoted a fiction book as non-fiction?
The San Jose Mercury News quotes from the suit that portable music players are “inherently defective in design and are not sufficiently adorned with adequate warnings regarding the likelihood of hearing loss.”
The suit was filed on behalf of John Kiel Patterson of Louisiana. He’s probably of the same Patterson’s who wear “Runs With Scissors” t-shirts.
McDonald’s gets sued because their coffee is too hot. Hot coffee is supposed to be hot. Hot coffee should not be spilled onto exposed skin.
Has Mister Coffee or Folgers been sued? It must be the brand names that attract goofy lawsuits. McDonald’s has also been sued by fat people for making them fat.
Now Apple gets sued for because the iPod causes hearing loss? Can we sue Jay Leno because he makes fun of President Bush. Yes. That’s what makes America so much fun.
It’s also what makes the country a laughing stock. It’s all that freedom. We should sue to have less freedom. No, wait. That’s why we elected a Republican president.
The iPod lawsuit says such music devices can produce sounds of more than 115 decibels (that’s loud) which can damage the hearing of a person exposed to the sound for more than half a minute per day.
Rock concert goers beware. Children of the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and Rolling Stones concerts, beware.
To be fair, Apple provides a warning with each iPod. It says, “Permanent hearing loss may occur if earphones or headphones are used at high volume.” Duh.
Apple should add this phrase to every iPod box: “Warning. You may not purcahse or use the iPod and then sue us for any reason whatsoever, forever, and ever.”
Amen.
I have a difficult time sympathizing with people who sue McDonald’s because they’re too fat. Or the coffee was too hot. It’s like blaming Hooters for adultery.
In many European countries, the loser in a civil court case pays the legal costs of the winner. That’s an idea whose time has come.
JCR, let me add one point. The fact, that millions of people are able to drive around without recieving third degree burns and spending eight days in the hospital should tell you this was not a normal situation. Either the woman was negligent or McDonalds was. Both courts that heard the case sided with the woman (even though the second court lowered the award). I assume some of the judges or jury members have drunk coffee before and drove.