Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo Faces Continuation Of Seizure Lawsuit
Thanks to 2TheAdvocate for its article discussing a lawsuit against Nintendo regarding their videogames causing seizures. The suit, which has been in progress since July 2003, claims that Nintendo "failed to report that its games contain defects that presented a 'substantial hazard' and create an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death." In Nintendo's defence, they claim that they "instituted some recommendations... [including] a limit on the number of times per second a light can flash, and a limit on the brightness of certain lights and their duration on the screen." As a result, "the number of seizures reported to the company by consumers has dropped from 22 in 1999 to six in 2003." The trial will continue until later this month.
Please... people aren't suing the makers of picket fences for giving children epileptic seizures as a car drives by it, so why are they attacking video game makers? This is ridiculous... Next thing you know people with red-green color blindness are going to be suing city and state governments for picking red and green for stop-light colors (red-green color blindness means you cannot differentiate between the two colors).
Thus annoying the hell out of everyone who isnt at risk
20 fucking poeple out of the millions that play nintendo? .000002% of pople will probably be alergic to everything.
You know, it sucks to be them, but
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
If the parents were reponsible, they should know better than to let their seizure prone children play video games. There's a warning on the inside of every instruction manual. Note to parents: read them! Nintendo shouldn't have settled out of court the last time they were sued. That was like an admission of guilt for them. This time the case should be thrown out of court.
Why are we even considering discombobulating an entire industry over a tiny fraction of the population? There's already warnings on the games. And where the hell is a rational suggestion like having a "No-Seizures Mode" switch on the back of every console to severely cripple it's graphics engine?
Even the original Nintendo back in the 80's had the same issues and Nintendo warned back then it could have effects. I'm assuming that this lawsuit is from someone who did not know of a pre-existing condition and had a seizure.
Funny I'd think they'd be thankful they had it in the comfort of their living room near people instead of when they see a electronic billboard or police lights in a fast moving car they're driving.
First page of any game I've ever played Nintendo, PS/PS2, Xbox, Sega, and all the other assorted Ataris and such mentioned that their games might possibly cause seizures. It's play at your own risk folks not a excuse for a get rich scheme.
"Since those recommendations have been instituted, the number of seizures reported to the company by consumers has dropped from 22 in 1999 to six in 2003."
So, there were 22 seizures reported in 1999. That is a really miniscule number as it is. Then, in 2003, there were only 6 known seizures reported - in comparison, that's virtually nothing at all.
How on EARTH can this family believe that "Nintendo should have reported that its video games were not safe and not suitable for use because they triggered seizures" , and expect that Nintendo should "rank all games according to the seizure risk, reformat all its games to reduce the chance of seizures, fund a nationwide advertising campaign to inform the public about the chance of seizures, allow all game owners to trade high seizure risk games in for low seizure risk games and to establish a refund program so everyone with Nintendo games can get their money back" ? This really looks to me like they're taking it way too far - it's not Nintendo's fault that their son had a seizure: Video games cannot and do not suddenly make seizures happen by some bizarro magic - there has to be a pre-existing condition for them to even take place. Nintendo shouldn't be expected, by anyone, to have to go back through all their games to 'reformat' them, either - if people have a condition involving seizures, and they get seizures from video games, then no amount of going back and making adjustments to hundreds of old video games is going to change that fact. And again, that fact is not Nintendo's fault (or anyone's, for that matter).
And as for wanting the court to order "Nintendo to put warnings about the possibility of video games triggering seizures on the video game packages and on the screen while the game is in use" , well, that's just ridiculous. 1: They already have those warnings in the packaging and manuals. In Europe, they often include an additional seperate card/sheet to warn about seizure risks, AS WELL AS the warnings printed in every single manual for every single game and console released. And 2: Did they even consider that the majority (going by number of seizure complaints compared to game sales, as in the article), who don't get these seizures, might be annoyed by having the view of their game obscured by some on-screen warning they don't need? Actually, come to think of it, did these folks even check the warnings and manuals and stuff through with their kid before letting him play the game(s)? I would hope that they did take the preventive measure of reading the included warnings. If not, why not? They certainly seem worked up enough about their son getting a seizure to try and sue somebody who's not responsible for it over the matter.
Also, how come they're not also suing the likes of Sony and Microsoft, and trying to demand that they do the same things as they're trying to demand of Nintendo?
What's next? Are they going to sue the makers or wearers of stripey shirts for triggering their kid's pre-existing condition, too?
As others have indicated, this is an excuse for people to try to get free money.
I recall that most of these seizures manifested themselves in children with no history of prior seizures, making the whole exercise of warnings pointless.
While a minute percentage of children and adults are negatively affected by flashing lights and/or images the fact remains that it is impossible to tell from one circumstance to the next when a seizure will be triggered and which individuals will be affected.
I wonder if I can sue dance clubs too.. I don't see any warnings when I step in by the Bouncer that says "Exposure to disco lights can cause seizures". While we're out it, let's sue the Sun too... Every sunny day sky should display Exposure to direct sunlight can cause seizures . That's another reason why this litigious society has to be seriously revised.
It's one thing to be negligant, but I think Nintendo has done what they can reasonably expect to do here to protect those that might be sensitive to light before they buy the game, much less play it. Just like warning labels on the sides of over-the-counter mediciations and vitamins, and I've yet to hear of a suit that a person claims that one of these did something that was clearly on the outside of the package that he wasn't expecting.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
There is only so much you can expect a company to do for such a small percentage of the population. For example, I expect food companies to properly label their products with ALL ingredients, to have 800 numbers to call if this isn't possible given the size of the package, and to warn about possible contaminants from other products manufactured at the same facility. This is a reasonable expectation that imposes no undue burdon on the company. I certainly don't expect them stop making the products my kid is alergic to or to include so many warnings in bold print across their logo that people stop using the product. That's just silly. The relevant information in small print on the back of the package is more than sufficient.
Nor do I expect other kids to have to stop eating foods my child can't have. I'd appreciate it if they washed their hands every now and then but I'm certainly not going to sue them for eating a PB&J.
Parents need to do their job, watch their children, and stop expecting the rest of the world to do this for them. Kids have parents for a reason. If the courts are in any way just then Nintendo will win this case.
The plaintiffs in this case should be HAPPY that their kid had a seizure while at home playing video games so that they could discover the kid's underlying condition in a safe place rather than finding out about it after a public seizure and serious resulting injury. I can see it now, the kid at 18 goes off to a rave at state palace in New Orleans and dies on the floor from having a seizure from the strobes and then getting trampled by all the junkies.
These people are obviously just tornado bait coonies looking for an easy buck.
Because nintendo makes games mostly for young kids
If you really believe that, you're missing something. Really.
Nintendos games are often the best, for all ages. I'm 30, and I play lots more on the Gamecube than on the Xbox and PS2 I also have.
it's in my head
I think that this lawsuit is frivolous - the seizure warnings have been in place for as long as I can remember. And 6 seizures is an incredibly small number, for as many people as play video games.
On the other hand, I can kind of sympathize with these people. A friend of mine had a seizure while we were playing Xtreme G 3 on the GameCube a couple of years ago. It was scary.
I heard a strange noise coming from his direction, and when I turned and looked, I realized that he was choking, and had passed out. His body tensed up and was contorting in unnatural ways. It was all I could do to keep his head from banging into the endtable as he slid out of his chair. After a few excruciating minutes he just went limp and was unconscious. At least he wasn't tensing and straining against his own limbs anymore. I called 911 and after a few minutes an ambulance arrived. He woke up as the EMTs got there, but was completely out of it. His speech was slurred, and he had a hard time answering questions like where he was, and the date, things like that. Then they took him to the local hospital, and I didn't see him for a few days.
Apparently he didn't remember anything from the time the seizure started until he woke up in a hospital bed. I felt strange relaying the sequence of events back to him, as if he hadn't been there.
This seizure wasn't entirely unexpected - he'd had one when he was young (we were 20 and 21 when this seizure occurred.). But since he hadn't had a relapse in so long, he had actually been able to get his driver's license the week prior! It turned out that the doctors had phased out his epilepsy medications the month before, because they thought he was out of the danger zone. He went back on the meds, and hasn't had a problem since.
I don't blame the game makers for what happened, or anyone really. His doctor thought he should stop the seizure meds, and in another case that may have been the right thing to do. I'm just trying to convey how frightening and unnerving it is to see your good friend suddenly lose control over his own body; going from being a laughing, playing, joking person to being slumped on the floor in about 45 seconds.
-- Flaw