Apple sued over iPod nano scratches | iLounge News


Apple sued over iPod nano scratches

A class-action lawsuit has been filed against Apple over the iPod nano’s tendency to get scratched easily. The complaint was filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California in San Jose on behalf of nano owner Jason Tomczak and others who have purchased the device.
The lawsuit alleges that nano screens “scratch excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen on the nanos unreadable, and violating state consumer protection statutes… and causing Plaintiff class members to incur loss of use and monetary damages.

« Tunewear offers Prie shuffle case

Report: 30GB iPod costs Apple $151 to build »

Related Stories



It’s not that people are speaking up for Apple, it would seem most disagree with idiotic, greedy, and pointless lawsuits that do nothing but waste time and money. If these guys win, what’s next? A lawsuit against McDonald’s because the burger doesn’t look like the picture? Or Nike because their shoes didn’t make you run any faster? If you don’t think Apple is qaulity, don’t buy it. I had a sony minidisc player before I bought my iPod, and that thing was a piece of crap, but I didn’t try to sue Sony. These people are just “bell ringers”

Posted by Ray on October 22, 2005 at 11:44 AM (CDT)


I think it may not scratch easier than the last generation however it’s a simple fact that the last gen iPod didn’t come in black - the scratches just show up far too easily on the new black iPods (my 5G scratched now after just two days of sitting in the cup holder of my Infiniti).

I also don’t like Apple’s coy statement about the cases as there are no cases available for me today, right now, at my local Apple store and purchase that protect the entire front surface of the 5G iPod.

So I love the products but I’ll never recommend to anyone to buy a black nano or 5g.  My white nano has the same hairline scratches but they are less noticeable as it is white rather than black.

Posted by xyvyx on October 22, 2005 at 1:37 PM (CDT)


That’s one of em reasons we europeans think americans are idiots.

Posted by Orbulon on October 22, 2005 at 1:41 PM (CDT)


Yeah they scratch easy, how else can they shift that scratch remover paste! Come on admit it iPod owner love shelling out extra cash for any iPod extras.. they cannot get enought of it! And Apple takes a nice cut in any extra’s sold.. cuz they love that fast buck! But hey the worlds not flat, there are other mp3 players, opps sorry to offend anyone here.

Posted by yrellag on October 22, 2005 at 3:07 PM (CDT)


Anyone putting their iPod nano in their pockets without a case or a sock is an idiot.

I keep my mini in a sock, and aside from dropping it and denting the sharp corners at the bottom a bit, its pratically brand new. And I got it a month before nano came out.

Posted by minty on October 22, 2005 at 3:10 PM (CDT)


Don’t know how many of you have ever brought a lawsuit. It very time & cash consuming. As for any of you prejudging the merits of a suit, that sounds like Saddam. The legal system decides. If the suit is deemed frivolous, the one bringing the suit will pay court costs, the lawyer could get fined. As for many of you, who “accept” scratching, go ahead, keep accepting it. I, for one, am stoked!!! that someone has the initiative to put a bowtorch under Apples butt, they’ve gotten too fat, and, arrogant. So, you all, stop palying judge and jury; it isn’t an y of YOUR business, nor, concern, that someone opts to resort to the legal system, that’s what makes America GREAT: the little guy has access to adjudication. I LOVE it. The junk pedders ought to pay attention. Over, & out.
PS. For those of you, who love having crap shoved under your nose, I respect YOUR American right an imbecile; enjoy.

Posted by Amelia on October 22, 2005 at 5:46 PM (CDT)


I think its about dang time that apple makes an iPod design that doest scratch from normal everyday use.

I could imagine expecting a scratch if I droped or rougly handled my nano, but not from keeping in my pocket or even in a case. If a single flek of dust gets between the case and the nano, it looks like someone ran a needle along it.

I am rooting for the lawsute to be a success.

Posted by Rascal_King on October 22, 2005 at 5:54 PM (CDT)


From what I’ve seen, the nano has a thin clear layer of something on the front, similar to the thick lucite layer of the original ipod (obviously not lucite if it is getting scratched so easily).  The 4g ipod doesn’t have such a clear overlay, so Apple isn’t really lying when they say the nano uses the same polycarbonate shell, the 4g just doesn’t have this easily scratchable clear layer.  The back of my nano got scratched when I removed the plastic wrapping (so I could use the dock connector, headphone port, and hold switch).  I left the clear plastic sticker on the face until I received my InvisibleShield.  I have seen a nano get badly scratched from a microfiber cloth.

Apple isn’t forcing you to buy a case, but when I bought a Creative Jukebox Zen, iRiver ifp-890, and an iRiver H10, all three came with a case, even though they are less prone to scratching.

I don’t agree with seeking a share of profits, but how about a case/cover at least?

Posted by kevin on October 22, 2005 at 11:50 PM (CDT)



You’re forgetting the black 4G-based U2 iPod. By most accounts, the U2 iPod doesn’t scratch nearly as easy as the black nano. And for that matter, even when compared to the WHITE nano.  The final finish of the nano is simply done way too soft, period; Apple dropped the ball on this aspect of the nano’s design and execution.

Posted by flatline response on October 23, 2005 at 3:22 AM (CDT)


This lawsuit is a sad comment on both the unmitigated greed and complete lack of ethics of the law firm and the spoiled, selfish nature of the plaintiffs.  Unfortunately, it falls right in line with the all-to-frequent threads I read here about dishonest users trying to scam Apple into getting new iPods either because they broke them or just because they feel like getting a new iPod. 

Just what sort of claims did Apple make on the Nano being “scratchproof”?  What sort of reasonable expectations include the idea of a piece of plastic not being prone to scratches?

Class action suits exist for a good reason—to seek remedies when companies are liable for problems with a product or problems caused by a product.  But this lawsuit is just shameful.

Posted by Scientist on October 23, 2005 at 10:28 AM (CDT)


Those of you who in he camp that Apple shouldn’t be sued all adhere to the “unmitigated greed and complete lack of ethics” position. ALL of you would be VERY comfortable in North Korea, Syria, or, Sudan. Clearly, Democracy of the free market has you jumpy. LAWsuits are only possible in a society of LAWS: I suggest a reading of the Bill Of Rights & the CONSTITUTION. What you education, or, lack of it, seems to haave skipped, is the fact that Apple has perfect freedom to (manipulatively) peddle crap. Repeat: that is Apple’s RIGHT. Freedom is a wonderful thing. And, if anybody is LESS than enthused with Apple’s tactics, they, too, have the RIGHT, to sue the living bejesus out of Apple. 1) Do NOT step on their RIGHT. And, YOUR “opinion” of teir exercise of THEIR right, is as meaningful as a horse-dropping, actually, LESS so. This is AMERICA, not North Korea.

Oh, one other thing. Apple’s decsion, a STUPID ONE, is ALREADY costing them WAAAYYYmore than the bucks they are trying to generate via accelerated obsolescence, and/or “potective"case sales. The FREE MARKET RULES.

Posted by Caesar on October 23, 2005 at 9:43 PM (CDT)


Apple got it wrong.
Apple is not infallible, and neither are their vendors.
With normal wear any plastic object will begin to show scratches, but the scratches that show up on the Nano are excessive because either Apple omitted the Hard-coat that should cover the front, or used an inferior product to save money.

The Cell phone in your pocket is hard-coated to prevent scratches, and the product works - (as a mechanical designer who used to design cell phones I know), is your phones screen as scratched as your Nano would be if you didn’t go out and buy some over-priced protective cover ?

All of this is in the text of the lawsuit, which you would know if any of you actually bothered to read it before posting your ill informed comments.

As for the law suit, think of it as way of forcing Apple to make good on the product. Nobody but the lawyers will make a penny out of it, but if it gets Apple to produce a better product, and maintain that quality then it has served its purpose. Don’t you want a better quality product ? or do you like to spend money on over priced band aids that you need because Apple messed up.

Posted by Crucial on October 24, 2005 at 1:09 AM (CDT)


No one’s disputing the *right* of anyone to file a lawsuit, just as I wouldn’t dispute people’s rights to make insufferable fools of themselves.  Maybe if you actually lived in North Korea for a few years, the scratches on your Nano might not seem like such an earthshaking issue.  So you both think the courts are the appropriate venue to get a manufacturer to make a better product?  Do I think it’s crappy that Apple no longer includes a wall outlet adapter for iPods—yes!  Is a class action suit the right remedy for getting the adapter back?  I just think it’s ridiculous to think you can sue your way to better product quality.  This trivilizes the legal system and adds fuel to the cause of torte reform which has the potential to hurt the people that *really* need legal remedies.

Posted by Scientist on October 24, 2005 at 2:04 AM (CDT)


I am completely uninterested in suing Apple, however I am extremely disappointed in the iPod nano. I purchased it three weeks ago, and within the first week, it was scratched to the point that I can barely read the screen. I always believed that Apple was synonymous with great design, however great design doesn’t just mean “looks cool”. I have been putting a cell phone in my pocket for years with out any scratches. I purchase eyeglasses with a scratch resistant coating that works. If Apple really wants to be at the forefront of design it must overcome this “form over function” mentality.

Posted by David Morgan on October 24, 2005 at 4:07 PM (CDT)


I certainly don’t agree with the decision to sue Apple for ipod profits, but I will say that I am disappointed with the integrity of the Nano.  I have had my nano for about 2 wks, and it has started to accumulate a significant number of scratches.  I keep it out of my pocket as much as possible and even have an armband case that I use at the gym, etc.  As a sort of experiment, I just cleaned the face of the nano with a bausch & lomb moistened lens cleaner.  Doing this resulted in a noticeable increase in scratch density.  Apple should be testing their products for this sort of vulnerability.  While all plastic will scratch over time under the right conditions, I have never owned an electronic product that was this susceptible to surface damage.  What a P.O.S.

Posted by Dan on October 24, 2005 at 5:05 PM (CDT)


oh man i love apple stuff!  anything they make is just awesome!  oh yeah, windows sux!!!  NOTHING CAN TOUCH THE MIGHTY APPLE!!!!!!!!

Posted by apple fanboy on October 24, 2005 at 7:27 PM (CDT)


Small=Fragile. Get with it, people. These lawyers who take these cases and those who file them should be hit by a bus (and so should these f a g g o t moderators who delete people’s posts).

Posted by Jack on October 25, 2005 at 12:30 AM (CDT)


Orbulon, we Americans share the same thoughts on you idiotic Eurotrash.

Posted by BENTON on October 25, 2005 at 7:56 AM (CDT)


i got a nano a few weeks back, took extreme caution not to get it scratched, i solo in the pocket (no keys), never dropped or placed anywhere the common items that would scratch it would be. And guess what, its scratched to shit. Like others i dont know what punative damages are sought, not sure that an inferior product has much legal recourse but i do think that apple should acknowledge that they did rush the nano to market. Apple i recall released info a while back on the matter suggesting to get cases for the nano, but in their haste to market none-such had yet been released. Now there are a few options, but it may be too late. As for the comment about mc’ds and coffee note that it was coffee at mc’ds not two seperate stories, anyway that case is still under litigation. Dont pretend like this is the first frivilous law suit. And dont discount lawyers, big shot lawyers dont waste their time for nothing.

Posted by lee on October 25, 2005 at 8:27 PM (CDT)


hey, I read somewhere that they fixed that whole scratchy problem with the NEW ipods, can i get a confirmation on that?

    just post your reply, i know people who have the same question.

Posted by janedoe on December 26, 2005 at 6:38 PM (CST)

Page 3 of 4 pages  < 1 2 3 4 > 

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy