Think About It: An i-Diotic Lawsuit
February 3, 2006
THINK ABOUT IT: An i-Diotic Lawsuit
Iiiiiiit’s that time again, friends! From the same people who brought you Crazy Woman Vs. McDonald’s Coffee, Bitter Old Harpy Vs. Girls Who Gave Her Cookies and, of course, the Michael Jackson trial, it’s once again frivolous lawsuit time! This time, I’m ashamed to say, the stupid lawsuit comes from my own home state of Louisiana, where a man named John Patterson has filed suit (in a California court, natch) against the Apple corporation, claiming that their iPods have the potential to cause hearing loss.
There are many, many things wrong with his sentence, but let’s start at the beginning. For those of you who don’t know what an iPod is, it’s the most popular form of MP3 player, a device which allows you to store a great deal of music and listen to it just about anywhere. You can hold a heck of a lot more music on an iPod than you could listen to on a portable CD player or cassette player, and it’s much smaller and more portable. I got an iPod for Christmas and am amazed at the fact that I can transport eight hours of Muppet songs on a piece of plastic about the size of my thumb.
Apple has sold approximately eleventy billion of these devices since their debut in 2001, which actually just begs the question of why it took so long for some moron to try to file a class action lawsuit against them. After all, these days our society has gotten so ridiculously litigious that virtually any company that shows any hints of success pretty much walks around with a great big target painted on them. (As evidenced in Stupid People Who Broke a Bottle of Spaghetti Sauce in the Aisle and Slipped On It Vs. Target.)
According to the Associated Press, “Patterson does not know if the device has damaged his hearing, said his attorney, Steve W. Berman, of Seattle.” I think this is particularly important. Patterson is not suing over anything that has actually happened. Patterson is suing over something that may happen.
“But that's beside the point of the lawsuit, which takes issue with the potential the iPod has to cause irreparable hearing loss, Berman said.” Italics are mine, because somebody has to use them as they were originally intended - to explain why people make jokes about lawyers. This guy is actually arguing that, legally, it doesn’t matter if his client has suffered any damage at all. He gets to file a class-action lawsuit because he might suffer damage.
Using this logic, what’s to stop me from filing suit against the manufacturer of my car, my cell phone, Advil and 20th Century Fox? After all, I have not yet seen the movie Big Momma’s House 2, but I might see it in the future, and I think I should be compensated for all the mental and emotional damage that would invariably result should this ever happen.
Put aside, for the moment, any feelings you may have about Apple in general or iPods in particular. (I know some of my readers are part of the powerful Washington Anti-iPod Lobby.) Do you really want to set a precedent of allowing people to file lawsuits over damages that may happen? Particularly damages that only could happen as a result of stupid and gross incompetence on the part of the user? Sure an iPod could damage somebody’s hearing, if you play the music at a volume reserved for loudspeaker announcements at the Indy 500. Does any sane person need for someone else to file a class action lawsuit to know this?
Evidently, according to the lawsuit, if the iPod is played at the maximum possible volume, it could cause damage in “28 seconds.” Friends, when I turn on my iPod, if it’s at a volume even slightly higher than I’m comfortable with (which, I promise you, is nowhere near the maximum), it does not take me 28 seconds to turn it down. The only way someone could suffer hearing loss without it being a result of their own idiocy is if they are lying in a hospital bed, sedated, when someone else sticks the earbuds in their ears and turns it on, leaving them unable to either reach the volume control themself or signal to their would-be helper that they would like the volume to be reduced, please.
Heck, if we’re going to continue to allow people to sue for potential injuries they themselves are entirely responsible for, I’m going to file a lawsuit against Q-Tip. After all, if I were to jam one of those things directly into my ear canal, I could rupture my eardrum. Heck, if I were to drive an ink pen directly into my ear canal, I could rupture my eardrum too! Maybe I should file a lawsuit against Bic just to be on the safe side.
Now that I think about it, maybe I should sue George Forman. If I were to place my hand directly on the heated surface of his grill and close the lid, holding it down so that I couldn’t free myself, I could be seriously burnt. (On the plus side, though, my hand would be far lower in fat than if I had cooked it in a frying pan.)
Whatever the result of this lawsuit, I’m willing to bet that in the future all iPods will include a disclaimer along these lines: “Caution - Listening to this device at high volume levels at extended intervals could cause hearing loss.” Of course, it will not include the following phrase: “But then, if you had two brain cells to rub together, you would know that already, wouldn’t you?”
I think we should get rid of that. In fact, I think we should get rid of all warning labels entirely and replace them with the following label, which should be included with every product sold in America, including balls of cotton: “WARNING! If you use this product in an incompetent manner, you could get hurt. If you jam it in your ear, it could damage your hearing. If you swallow it, it could choke and/or poison you. If it’s sharp, you could cut yourself with it. If it’s hot, you could burn yourself. If it’s cold, you may get stuck to it like that kid in A Christmas Story. If you suffer any ill effects as a result of using this product in a fashion outside the obviously intended functions, it is not because we made a bad product. It is because you are an idiot. Have a nice day.”
Blake M. Petit is also considering a lawsuit against whoever made his bed, because he stubbed his toe against it once. Contact him with comments, suggestions or an ambulance chaser of his own at BlakePT@cox.net, visit him on the web at Evertime Realms and view the Evertime Realms Livejournal, blakemp
THINK ABOUT IT: An i-Diotic Lawsuit
Iiiiiiit’s that time again, friends! From the same people who brought you Crazy Woman Vs. McDonald’s Coffee, Bitter Old Harpy Vs. Girls Who Gave Her Cookies and, of course, the Michael Jackson trial, it’s once again frivolous lawsuit time! This time, I’m ashamed to say, the stupid lawsuit comes from my own home state of Louisiana, where a man named John Patterson has filed suit (in a California court, natch) against the Apple corporation, claiming that their iPods have the potential to cause hearing loss.
There are many, many things wrong with his sentence, but let’s start at the beginning. For those of you who don’t know what an iPod is, it’s the most popular form of MP3 player, a device which allows you to store a great deal of music and listen to it just about anywhere. You can hold a heck of a lot more music on an iPod than you could listen to on a portable CD player or cassette player, and it’s much smaller and more portable. I got an iPod for Christmas and am amazed at the fact that I can transport eight hours of Muppet songs on a piece of plastic about the size of my thumb.
Apple has sold approximately eleventy billion of these devices since their debut in 2001, which actually just begs the question of why it took so long for some moron to try to file a class action lawsuit against them. After all, these days our society has gotten so ridiculously litigious that virtually any company that shows any hints of success pretty much walks around with a great big target painted on them. (As evidenced in Stupid People Who Broke a Bottle of Spaghetti Sauce in the Aisle and Slipped On It Vs. Target.)
According to the Associated Press, “Patterson does not know if the device has damaged his hearing, said his attorney, Steve W. Berman, of Seattle.” I think this is particularly important. Patterson is not suing over anything that has actually happened. Patterson is suing over something that may happen.
“But that's beside the point of the lawsuit, which takes issue with the potential the iPod has to cause irreparable hearing loss, Berman said.” Italics are mine, because somebody has to use them as they were originally intended - to explain why people make jokes about lawyers. This guy is actually arguing that, legally, it doesn’t matter if his client has suffered any damage at all. He gets to file a class-action lawsuit because he might suffer damage.
Using this logic, what’s to stop me from filing suit against the manufacturer of my car, my cell phone, Advil and 20th Century Fox? After all, I have not yet seen the movie Big Momma’s House 2, but I might see it in the future, and I think I should be compensated for all the mental and emotional damage that would invariably result should this ever happen.
Put aside, for the moment, any feelings you may have about Apple in general or iPods in particular. (I know some of my readers are part of the powerful Washington Anti-iPod Lobby.) Do you really want to set a precedent of allowing people to file lawsuits over damages that may happen? Particularly damages that only could happen as a result of stupid and gross incompetence on the part of the user? Sure an iPod could damage somebody’s hearing, if you play the music at a volume reserved for loudspeaker announcements at the Indy 500. Does any sane person need for someone else to file a class action lawsuit to know this?
Evidently, according to the lawsuit, if the iPod is played at the maximum possible volume, it could cause damage in “28 seconds.” Friends, when I turn on my iPod, if it’s at a volume even slightly higher than I’m comfortable with (which, I promise you, is nowhere near the maximum), it does not take me 28 seconds to turn it down. The only way someone could suffer hearing loss without it being a result of their own idiocy is if they are lying in a hospital bed, sedated, when someone else sticks the earbuds in their ears and turns it on, leaving them unable to either reach the volume control themself or signal to their would-be helper that they would like the volume to be reduced, please.
Heck, if we’re going to continue to allow people to sue for potential injuries they themselves are entirely responsible for, I’m going to file a lawsuit against Q-Tip. After all, if I were to jam one of those things directly into my ear canal, I could rupture my eardrum. Heck, if I were to drive an ink pen directly into my ear canal, I could rupture my eardrum too! Maybe I should file a lawsuit against Bic just to be on the safe side.
Now that I think about it, maybe I should sue George Forman. If I were to place my hand directly on the heated surface of his grill and close the lid, holding it down so that I couldn’t free myself, I could be seriously burnt. (On the plus side, though, my hand would be far lower in fat than if I had cooked it in a frying pan.)
Whatever the result of this lawsuit, I’m willing to bet that in the future all iPods will include a disclaimer along these lines: “Caution - Listening to this device at high volume levels at extended intervals could cause hearing loss.” Of course, it will not include the following phrase: “But then, if you had two brain cells to rub together, you would know that already, wouldn’t you?”
I think we should get rid of that. In fact, I think we should get rid of all warning labels entirely and replace them with the following label, which should be included with every product sold in America, including balls of cotton: “WARNING! If you use this product in an incompetent manner, you could get hurt. If you jam it in your ear, it could damage your hearing. If you swallow it, it could choke and/or poison you. If it’s sharp, you could cut yourself with it. If it’s hot, you could burn yourself. If it’s cold, you may get stuck to it like that kid in A Christmas Story. If you suffer any ill effects as a result of using this product in a fashion outside the obviously intended functions, it is not because we made a bad product. It is because you are an idiot. Have a nice day.”
Blake M. Petit is also considering a lawsuit against whoever made his bed, because he stubbed his toe against it once. Contact him with comments, suggestions or an ambulance chaser of his own at BlakePT@cox.net, visit him on the web at Evertime Realms and view the Evertime Realms Livejournal, blakemp