Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Sued Over Potential Hearing Loss

Posted by Zonk on from the so-turn-it-down dept.

freaktheclown writes "A man is suing Apple, claiming that the iPod can cause hearing loss for those who use it." From the article: "The iPod players are 'inherently defective in design and are not sufficiently adorned with adequate warnings regarding the likelihood of hearing loss,' according to the complaint, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., on behalf of John Kiel Patterson of Louisiana. The suit, which Patterson wants certified as a class-action, seeks compensation for unspecified damages and upgrades that will make iPods safer."

10 of 754 comments (clear)

  1. Sensitivity level of different headphones by jersey_emt · · Score: 5, Informative

    Every single set of headphones/earphones has a different sensitivity level. That is, feed the same amount of power to 2 different sets of phones, and one will be louder than the other because of the efficiency of the speaker drivers which convert electricity into vibrations.

    Basically, at a given volume level on the portable player (say 75% of total) may produce 80 dB of sound output with Brand X headphones and 84 dB of sound output with Brand Y.

    IMO if you damage your hearing it is your own damn fault. It is quite easy to tell if you are listening to something that is too loud. If your ears always ring after you listen to a couple of MP3's on your portable player, turn the freaking volume down, nimwit. Same deal if your ears bleed....

    --
    My spoon is too big.
  2. Re:Louder please! by sebi · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm not taking any responsibility for what happens, but you might want to go and check out this here site. They offer a little program that uncaps the maximum volume restriction on European ipods.

    --
    Hank! White!
  3. Re:No personal accountability anymore. by atomic_toaster · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'll start suing the manufacturers of the various amplifiers, receivers, and speakers I've had over the past ~25 years of brutalizing my ears.

    Common sense isn't; apparently, it isn't a logical conclusion to think that plugging loud music directly into your ears could possibly lead to hearing loss. Who knew?

    Oh, and from page 63 of the Apple user manual for 5th generation iPods:

    "To avoid hearing damage, set your iPod volume to a safe level. If you experience ringing in your ears, reduce volume or discontinue use of your iPod. Warning: Permanent hearing loss may occur if earbuds or headphones are used at high volume. You can adapt over time to a higher volume of sound that may sound normal but can be damaging to your hearing. If you experience ringing in your ears or muffled speech, stop listening and have your hearing checked. The louder the volume, the less time is required before your hearing could be affected. Hearing experts suggest that to protect your hearing..."

    Yadda yadda yadda. Basically, this guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

  4. Re:Playing Devil's Advocate... by damsa · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because you can only sue people that actually did damage.

  5. Re: except with McDonalds by DeadMilkman · · Score: 5, Informative

    #1
    No one, NO ONE else in that town or the surrounding area sold coffee anywhere NEAR that hot.

    #2
    If you spilt coffee on you from a restraunt or that you made yourself you would probably not even manage FIRST DEGREE burns These were THIRD degree burns, the kind your more used to seeing from actual fires and not boiling water.

    #3
    The city AND state had filed health warnings with McDonalds due to the complaints, which McDonalds prompty ignored.

    #4
    The lady inquestion only sued after McDonalds refused to cover her health expenses. (Which they HAD done in the previous two instances in this state.)

    #5
    A company memo existed that flat out said that it would be cheaper and better marketing slogun to be able to say they had the "Hottest Coffee" and pay off any lawsuits that would happen from burn victims then to lower the tempurature and lose the possibility of lording it over their competitors.

    #6
    And finally it was not the defendant who sued for millions, it was the jury who awarded it becuase it was "unspecified" and the jury specifically said 3million was picked because it was the sales for one days worth of coffee at McDonalds and the jury thought that they needed to prove the company memo wrong.

  6. Re:Playing Devil's Advocate... by ergo98 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because Apple pionered the idea of earbuds or at least popularized it of course.

    Are you kidding? And let me guess: Linux invented the command line, Google invented XmlHttp, and BeOS invented the graphical operating system.

    Earbud headphones have been around, and popular, for DECADES. Just because you weren't looking doesn't change reality.

  7. Don't play devil's advocate by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 5, Informative

    Did ANYONE read the article? The guy's hearing wasn't even damaged - it specifically says that in there. He is suing because he thinks his iPod MIGHT damage his hearing if he keeps turning it up so loud.

    Also, he evidently can not control himself to lower the volume because the warning that Apple ALREADY ships with the damn thing is not sufficient to alter his idiotic behavior.

  8. Re:Playing Devil's Advocate... by Jtheletter · · Score: 4, Informative
    I agree with the other responder to your post. Don't believe the "OMFG did you hear about this old lady that poured coffee on herself and ripped off McDonalds?!?!?!" heresay from a friend or the internet. Go read the actual case facts. What it boils down to (pun not intended but enjoyed) is that the McDonalds in question was serving coffee at temps well above established standards and recommended industry guidelines. They had already received multiple complaints that their product was too hot, but had done nothing to change it. I believe the temp they were serving it at was 170 to 180 degrees, somewhere in that range, again, follow the other poster's link and read for yourself. This was 20 degrees above the norm for hot coffee from a restaurant. 20 degrees doesn't sound like much but the fact is that the risk of and severity of burns increases greatly at temps above 160 degrees. If they had served it at accepted industy temps then the woman may have only received minor burns and it would have likely been only a complaint instead of a suit. What happened was she received THIRD DEGREE SCALD BURNS. Hot coffee is expected to be hot. Hot coffee that causes third degree burns is too hot (3rd degree burns require skin grafts and cause permanent nerve damage). I think most people can accept that as a general rule of thumb, especially when you consider that your lips are one of the most sensistive places on your body by nerve density. This court decision was correct because the injury potential was high, McDonalds knew about the potential for harm and did nothing to alter their behavior, and there was sufficient industry evidence that altering their product to conform to accepted standards would not have significanly affected it's sale potential. Don't take our word for it, go read the court findings to validate this for yourself.

    Oh, and as to the "now she's rich" part, that too is bogus. She initially asked for enough to recover her exact medical costs only. McDonalds refused so she sued for a larger amount. That amount was first granted, but then later was significanlty reduced. I forget what the final dollar value was but suffice to say it wasn't enough for her to go off and live a rich millionaire fantasy life.

    --
    -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
  9. Not the coffee hype again... by PoeticExplosion · · Score: 5, Informative
    The facts about the McDonalds suit.

    The McDonalds coffee suit has NOTHING to do with frivolous lawsuits such as TFA. Here are a few important facts about the McDonalds case:

    1. McDonalds coffee was held at temperatures at 180 degrees, 40-50 degrees higher than normal coffee, which is hot enough to produce a 3rd degree burn in as little as two seconds.

    2. The plaintiff, a 79-year old woman, spent eight days in the hospital recieving skin grafts for 3rd degree burns covering 6% of her body.

    3. There were 700 similar incidents, including some as serious as the plaintiff's.

    4. She only asked for a $20,000 settlement; McDonalds refused.

    6. The actual compensatory award was $200,000, the other $2.7 million (2 days of McD coffee sales) was punishment for McDonalds' "reckless, callous and willful" conduct. This was later reduced to only $480,000.

    There are some stupid lawsuits, but most of them don't win. And if you're going to argue the point with anecdotal evidence, at least research your anecdotes.

    --
    Power corrupts. Knowledge is power. Study hard. Be evil.
  10. Re:Playing Devil's Advocate... by speculatrix · · Score: 4, Informative
    That ringing you hear everytime you finish listening to your music? Yeah, that's your ears telling you to turn it down!

    the medical profession now reckon that ANY overload of your hearing causes at least SOME permanent loss of hearing, so if you do regularly get a ringing in your ears, or if peaks of volume make your ears hurt, you're setting yourself up for big trouble later in life. My mother works at a charity for acquired deafness (people go go deaf rather than being born without hearing) and she says that whilst once hearing loss was associated with heavy industrial work with lots of noise, she's seeing younger and younger people develop the problem - it's no longer an elderly "disease"

    So, moral of the story, resist the urge to increase the sound level as you listen - don't let it creep up. If you're listening in a noisy environment, consider noise-cancelling closed-cup phones, so you can listen at a lower level.