iPod nano class action suit expanded to include UK, Mexico | iLounge News


iPod nano class action suit expanded to include UK, Mexico

Following a similar lawsuit last month, iPod nano owners in the United Kingdom and Mexico have filed a class-action suit against Apple over the nano’s susceptibility to scratches. The consumers of the international suit are being represented by the same two law firms as the U.S. case. The new suit was filed last Friday in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

“Apple’s iPod nano has sold in record numbers around the world, just as it did in the US,” said Steve Berman, lead attorney on both cases. “It seems that wherever the nano is sold, problems with the defective design soon follow.” According to Berman, “The far-reaching response also reveals that this is not just a small problem or a bad batch of Nano’s, but a defect in the overall design that should have been rectified prior to the release.”

« RadioShack becomes authorized iPod reseller

Belkin unveils four new cases for 5G iPods »

Related Stories



How come no one thought to sue the makers of all those OTHER mp3 players that are ugly, lame, unreliable, and hard to use.

“Hey, I’m suing you for making an ugly piece of crap I can’t figure out.”

Now THAT is a crime.

Posted by KWalt on November 8, 2005 at 5:48 PM (CST)


This lawsuit is a bunch of balogne.

However.  I have a 3G iPod, have had it for almost two years and it hardly has a scratch on it - i take very good care of my gadgets.  One week after I got my black nano it had a gnarly scratch on the screen - I have no idea how this scratch happened as my nano was never dropped, chucked around or “thrown” into anything.  I was very very careful with it, stored it in a soft sunglasses case and kept it away from keys and pocket chenge etc.

My point, the black nanos scratch way too easily.

In regard to scratches not stopping the ipod from working properly - nano’s have colour screens with the functionality of being able to view photos.  I now have a huge scratch on my screen and cannot view photos properly.  I would say that this has “stopped” me from using the nano “properly”.  On the issue of “why didn’t you just use a case” - nano cases were not made available in Australia (where I live) until very recently.  I bought my nano the week it was released and was not able to physically buy a case for over a month (in which time the my scratch appeared) - they simply weren’t avaiable.

None of these are reasons to sue a company, but I do think apple has to look at the materials they used in construction and address what is obviously an issue in future manufacuring runs (especially since we are hearing cases of 5G ipod scratching as easily as the nanos).  Hopefully these civil suites will prompt apple to look into the issue (i’m sure they’d fob me off if i called complaining about a scratch).

Posted by iGod on November 8, 2005 at 8:32 PM (CST)


When are you LAMBS going to wake up? Are you Steve Jobs? You act like you’re Apple. This lawsuit does have valid points(thought they should focus on the cracked screens more). Consumers should not let a company get away w/ making a chep product. All those other “ugly lame mp3player” are atleast made out of better material. Apple wants your iPods to be scratched to hell, so you will replace it sooner or run & go buy an overpriced case.

It’s not true that after you buy a product & it get damaged cuz it’s made cheaply it’s your fault. Buying a case won’t help either most times. A number of cases for the Nano & other iPods scratch up too & Apple doesn’t warranty that. If the iPod gets scratched taking it in & out of a case it is crap.

Posted by BENTON on November 8, 2005 at 11:29 PM (CST)


BENTON, so you are one of these lambs that think that anyone defending Apple is a blind lamb?

Why should they sue about the cracked screen? It only affected 0.1% of the first batch of nanos, and Apple will replace anyone returning a nano with a cracked screen without asking question.

Are you aware that in the consumer electronic market it’s an accepted fact that some percentage of the product will fail?

What do you know about other mp3 players? Did you try them all? How do you know they don’t scratch as easily? You deduced that because you don’t read or hear about scratches on the other players? Anything made out of plastic can scratch, and cases could scratch other players too, but ehm… there is no case for them!, and it’s not because they don’t need them… There are very cheap cases for the nano, starting at like $9.99, and they will do the job.

The market for the non-iPod is fragmented into so much different companies and models, owners of individual models simply are too few in numbers to become vocal about problems on their player.

Most people that have problems with their non-iPod DAP, will just say to themselves “I should have bought an iPod”, and more than often proceed to do so. Apple is in the spotlight and many people expect perfection from them, while some people hate them since a long time.

Other players have problems too, we just don’t hear about them, for obvious reasons, if you can’t see that, then YOU are biased.

Posted by Polka on November 9, 2005 at 12:17 AM (CST)


Oh please Jack, you are not helping…

From the look of it, you could be Benton himself trying to show the world that iPod fans can be violent and insensitive about something that in the end of the they is relatively futile (a music player).

Yeah Benton is uninformed and maybe is not very intelligent, but it doesn’t justify this kind of attack…

Posted by Polka on November 9, 2005 at 12:27 AM (CST)


Just take a look at the following link:


The Nano went through a very tough dtress test:-“what does it take to kill a nano?”

Then we know how well build this ipod is. This lawsuit is completely meaningless. Scratch? evrything scratched! I hope my car do not have scratch, dent at all even I drive it carefully on the road, should I file lawsuit to automobile company?

Posted by KW on November 9, 2005 at 12:38 AM (CST)


You are all apple fanatics, and yes, blind lambs.

It is obvious that you must extremely take care about an iPod in order to prevent it from scratching. That is not the case with other DAPs, some of them much cheaper.

“Extremely taking care about” is not equivalent to “normal using” a DAP. Can you realise it?

No comment on the responses to BENTON. It just demonstrates how blind lambs without capability of normaly discussing contrary points of view about an apple product you are.


Posted by AlejandroC on November 9, 2005 at 3:04 AM (CST)


I’m more puzzled as to how the lawyers can win this.  Apple is not liable if the nanos are easily scratched or not.  They did not claim it to be scratch-proof. 

Remember, it is a MUSIC PLAYER, however scratched it may be, it will still PLAY MUSIC hence, what a MUSIC PLAYER is intended to do. This will probably Apple’s best defense.

Now if you want to keep it all nice and pretty, a case should do the trick.

Posted by scott on November 9, 2005 at 5:44 AM (CST)

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

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