Settlement Proposed in iPod Class Action Suit

An anonymous reader writes "A court has conditionally approved a settlement in a class action suit brought against Apple Computer by several consumers who claim their iPod batteries did not live up to the company's representation, according to AppleInsider. The tentative approval was handed down by the Superior Court of California for San Mateo County and covers all consumers who purchased a first-, second-, or third-generation iPod model on or before May 31, 2004 and experienced 'battery failure.' According to the published settlement notice, 'battery failure' is when 'the capacity of an iPod's battery to hold an electrical charge has dropped to four hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the Third Generation iPod, or five hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the First Generation iPod and the Second Generation iPod.' The deadline for filing a claim is September 30, 2005."

Comments

What about Nokia!?

[cataclyst]

I agree that the iPod battery life was misrepresented by Apple... but what about cell phones? Aren't their battery lifetimes inflated MUCH more than that of the iPod? And don't they have at least as short of a lifespan?

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Reality Master 101]

You can replace your cell phone battery. The issue with iPods was that the battery was irreplaceable, and Apple told people to buy a new iPod when the battery failed after a year.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Michalson]

Please mod parent up. This is the heart of the issue. As will likely be presented and proven in this case:

• Apple knew its substandard battery would not hold up to its claims for long after purchase in many cases, yet still chose to push the misleading battery life specification.
• Made the battery impossible to legitamately replace, and from dissections they might have even intentionally tried to prevent user replacements (why are so many iPod models pumped full of a sticky paste around the battery area, when other similar electronics need no such adhesive to hold the battery in place)
• As documented by at least one person (the iPod battery secret guy), it seems Apple had a corperate policy in effect from their tech support lines down to their retail stores to tell consumers the only way to service their dead battery was to buy a new iPod from Apple. (as pointed out by parent, this is the real gotcha)

Re:What about Nokia!?

[falcon5768]

owning a 1 gen and not havingthe battery fail for long after it should have and likewise knowing that a lot of people DID research the whole battery claim and found that it was false

I CALL BULLSHIT.

Sometimes companies settle cause they just dont want to spend the money fighting. My 1st gen still works perfectly, had no "sticky paste" and was offered a battery replacement for 50 bucks before the policy was ever stated. I may be one guy, but there are plenty of others who would also agree with my findings.

Where's my check?

[ChePibe]

I'm just mad because my iPod didn't turn me black and vastly improve my dancing skills. I'm still just a fat old clumbsy white boy with no skills... talk about your false advertising.

Where's my check? Huh?

Ridiculous

[Frangible]

I think this is a very baseless legal suit. First of all, you can buy a new replacement battery for the iPod from any number of vendors very cheaply and easily, or even have Apple replace it for you if you want. Secondly, who said things last forever? The battery wears out, the hard drive wears out, the buttons wear out... nothing lasts forever. Do you sue Honda because the battery in your Honda died? Every consumer device that ships with a rechargable battery is going to fail, many of which are even internal like the iPods. So you have to open the case and replace it every few years. So what? How is that any more difficult or expensive than getting a new battery for your car? It's the price you pay for a flashy new lithium polymer battery instead of alkaline AAs.

In Apple's defense

[mattmentecky]

In Apple's defense...even though they lost the court battle their defense was well designed, and their lawyers were pretty slick looking.

Re:Huh?

[rsrsharma]

I'm just guessing here, but the earbuds given with the iPod (and most relatively cheap earbuds) are probably 8 ohm headphones, unlike the 16 ohms of most headphones and the 32 ohms of high-end 'phones. (Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.) That means that the iPod can power the earbuds easier, so you're more likely to turn down the volume to save your ears, and (most likely inadvertenly) save power. This gives them a little more leniancy.

This is great

[MmmmAqua]

I get $50 in Apple credit, and the lawyers get up to $2,768,000. I really don't know who to cheer for here. I wish my iPod's battery would have lasted a bit longer (it's 1G, holds about 3hrs worth of charge), but I also wish the legal system wasn't so screwed up that the only people really profiting from this aren't injured parties.

Only in America...

Not bad engineering, false advertising

[Kiryat Malachi]

The suit isn't about whether or not lithium ion batteries decay; no one is arguing that they don't.

The suit's merit lies solely in the assertion that Apple, in its original product documentation, did not strongly enough explain that fact, and in fact glossed over it to the detriment of the consumer. If you say "Plays 8 hours", the suit argues, it damn well better play 8 hours... now, and later. Car makers don't represent that the car won't require maintenance; the suit argues that Apple represented the iPod as being something that would operate in the same fashion across its usable life.

Whether you think this is a valid suit or not, stop whining that "Batteries decay!", because that isn't the argument.

Re:Huh?

[timeOday]

Omitting "with earbuds attached," Apple could test your iPod with no headphones attached, lowering the requirement for them.

Car and motorcycle makers do the equivalent of this all the time by quoting "dry weight" (where the vehicle is inoperable because it has no coolant, oil, or fuel), or measuring horsepower at the crankshaft (before some of it gets sapped by the powertrain).

And then there's the bogus way CRT screen size is measured.

Re:Huh?

[WonderSnatch]

Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.

Wrong. Lower resistance = more current = HIGHER power:
P=V*I
I=V/R
plug the second into the first:
P=V^2/R.

The output voltage will probably remain roughly constant. Decreasing R will INCREASE the power.

Brett

Re:Huh?

[Mr.Radar]

I don't know where you get your information, but that is wrong. The lowest impedance I've seen in headphones is 16-ohms. Most portable headphones are 32 ohms to 120 ohms. The iPod earbuds are about 80 ohms. Also, not all high end headphones are the same impedance. Some are as high as 600 ohms, though those are mainly older models. Sennheiser's HD-650, their top-of-the-line dynamic headphone, are 300 ohms, Beyerdynamic's flagship DT880 is 250 ohms, Etymotic's flagship model, the ER4S, is 100 ohms. Grado Lab's high-end headphones (including their $700 flagship model, the RS-1) are all 32 ohms. Sennheiser's earbuds (considered by most audiophiles to be some of the best cheap earbuds currently on the market) are 32 ohms (MX-x00 series).

Also, lower resistance does not necessarily equal less power because while it does take less voltage to drive lower impedance headphones, it require more current. Really low impedance headphones start running into problems with portable players not being able to supply enough current, and most moderate to high impedance headphones run into the problem of not getting enough voltage from portable players.

Re:DAMMIT

[halr9000]

Yeah, batteries wear out. Mine wore out in 3 months. Was holding a charge for an hour if I was lucky. Totally different situation there, it's not whining, it's defective. $400 device, non-replaceable battery? It was a long process, but they eventually redeemed themselves.

Re:DAMMIT

[Oculus Habent]

When my equipment was broken, Apple fixed it. As I stated, when my PowerBook 190 had a damaged power connector because of poor design, for which they eventually offered a replacement system at a reduced price, and were required to repair it free for some years - probably by a much more reasonable lawsuit - they repaired it. When it came back the second time with a shattered screen, they replaced the screen.

When the door covering the ports broke on a teacher's - weak hinge design - they sent a bag of 144, free of charge. When the power brick on my 1400cs overheated to the point it discolored the plastic, they replaced it.

All of the times I have had problems with Apple's hardware that were not a) my fault or b) typical wear, I have had a good experiences.

I am not saying that no one recieved defective units. I am not saying that people who did should not have an avenue for recompense. My problem is the implementation of this lawsuit.
--
My first generation iPod is old, now. It has been dropped several times. The Lucite facing is chipped. The chrome back is scratched. The battery doesn't last as long as it used to. Part of that - I'm sure - is it being in heat and cold when it spent time in my parked car. That's my fault.

Apple didn't lie. The iPod I received lived up to the battery specs, or reasonable approximations under non-ideal usage. Over time, the battery degraded. For people who didn't get the promised battery life (or anything reasonable), there should be compensation. For people who are complaining that old batteries don't hold a charge as well, I have no sympathy. I'm one of them.

Did that happen to everyone? No.
Did some people get bad batteries? Most likely.
Will many people who have misused their equipment be elligible for compensation? Yes.

I believe that class action lawsuits were conceived to provide protection to consumers who would otherwise be unaware that they have received poor quality or damaged goods and are entitled to compensation. I think that this lawsuit - while having some merit - overreaches what is reasonable and provides no safeguards against abuse. "Sure, my ipod battery is bad. Gimmegimmegimme!" Now I get $25.

If your first-gen iPod, which could be almost four years old is now experiencing battery problems, you're elligible. How many charge cycles have some of these iPods been through? How long ago did they experience loss? It's too broad.

Also, you'll find it is often the opposite with MS products. Most people simply expect a certain level of failure from Microsoft Software. With my PC hardware, I accept certain failure - when cheap RAM or an inexpensive motherboard fails, it's cheap. When I received a dead processor though, I got a replacement. When equipment fails unreasonably, I look into it. When the old laptop battery doesn't hold a charge, that's the cost of business.