Suit filed over Nano scratches


Recommended Posts

Claiming that the iPod Nano has a widespread propensity for scratching easily, lawyers this week filed a class action suit against Apple Computer on behalf of those who have purchased the diminutive music player.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday on behalf of all those who have bought a Nano, alleges that Apple violated state consumer protection statutes, as well as express and implied warranties. The complaint charges that Apple knew that there were design problems with the Nano.

"These Nanos scratch excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen on the Nanos unreadable," according to the complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., by attorneys with Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro in Seattle and Columbus, Ohio-based David P. Meyer & Associates. The suit seeks to have the complaint certified as a class action claim and asks for "damages in the amount of monies paid for Nanos," as well as unspecified actual, statutory and punitive damages.

An Apple representative declined to comment on the suit, but Apple has stated that the Nano is made of the same polycarbonate material that's found in previous iPods and maintained that the scratching problem does not appear to be widespread.

The lawsuit charges, however, that the Nano contains a thinner coating of resin than on previous iPod models.

"The amount and durability of the resin applied as a protective coating during the Nano manufacturing process is clearly defective in that it is not sufficient to adequately protect the face of the Nano from extreme scratching and ultimately irreparable damage," the lawsuit says.

Questions about whether the Nano scratches more easily have been bubbling around Apple message boards since shortly after the product was announced in September.

Apple has confirmed a separate problem affecting less than 1 percent of Nanos, in which devices were shipped with a faulty LCD screen that was prone to cracking.

In its earnings conference call last week, Apple said it sold a million Nanos during the first 17 days the product was on the market and that it has seen significantly more demand than it has been able to meet.

News Source: CNET News.com

If you'd like to make a claim, you can contact either Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro or David P. Meyer & Associates.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/388146-suit-filed-over-nano-scratches/
Share on other sites

I thought that Apple was going to replace Nanos that scratched easily?

586705485[/snapback]

No, they were going to replace the ones that had a problem cracking so easily (which was 1/10 of 1% that was sold). Apple won't even admit that they have a problem with the Nano scratching easily.

Now all you who think this lawsuit is stupid, worthless and for those who think the iPod nano is made exactly the same as previous iPods, you're wrong. I suggest to those who believe this to read the filing that these two law firms filed. It suggests that Apple knowingly made these iPods with thinner materials, making them easier to scratch, to lower manufacturing cost. This is why this lawsuit is not stupid or "bull". A company who makes a bad product knowingly should be held accountable!

I have five iPods; iPod mini, a 20GB iPod, an iPod shuffle, an iPod U2 Edition, & iPod nano. All of them have gone into my hoodie pocket that contains nothing else (no keys, no pens, paper, etc.). All of them are scratch free except the iPod nano. I bought the iPod nano September 15, 2005 at Best Buy and took it home where I laid the box on my desk. It stayed there until Monday morning where I took it out of the box (for the first time) and loaded all the music I wanted onto it. I was leaving for vacation that day by the way. I put the Nano in my hoodie pocket, with nothing else in there, and left for the bus. A few moments into my trip and I took the Nano out of my soft cotton made hoodie pocket and it was scratched badly enough already that it is hard to see what is on the screen.

I feel I, and everyone else who has a scratched iPod nano, am entitled to a new iPod nano from Apple, however, all I really want Apple to do is admit that they have a bad product out there and I want them to fix it for future iPod nanos (which I have no doubt they've already done). Maybe before you commit on a case such as this, you should get off your lazy ass and actually do some reading and research. Not all lawsuits are frivolous!

If you don't understand why this is happening, then you haven't owned a nano.

1) You shouldn't be forced to keep it in a case

2) You shouldn't be afraid to keep your music player in your pocket

It *DOES* get scratched up from everyday use, and not light surface scratches like the larger ones. I own a 20GB and used to own a nano and it really doesn't compare. If you haven't owned one, you don't know what you are talking about, it's that simple.

dumb...

it doesn't matter how easy it scratches, it still does what it was made to do...

thats like going after a car company because when you drive down the road you get rock chips on your car...

it's just what happens...

586705616[/snapback]

Dumb comment... these are two different items we're talking about. Cars are going to get scratches because they're outside in the elements. If you were talking about the inside of a car I could go along with that. But this is an item that shouldn't get scratched just by touching it :crazy: If you car seat started tears in just from sitting on it, you would want it fixed wouldn't you? Of course you would, but would you want to dish out the money? Most logical people wouldn't :rolleyes:

dumb...

it doesn't matter how easy it scratches, it still does what it was made to do...

thats like going after a car company because when you drive down the road you get rock chips on your car...

it's just what happens...

586705616[/snapback]

What if you bought a Mercedes and the paint faded out after a year of owning it? Would that be ok? Cause it still drives right? I don't think the owners of the car would be too happy though. It's not as simple as "it works" you are paying money for a nice looking device and when it doesn't look nice anymore through no fault of your own it's something that needs to be addressed.

scratches come from normal wear and tear, thats how ipods have always been. you can't show me one used ipod that doesn't have scratches on it. even when you put them in cases they still get scratched.

586705728[/snapback]

Yes they do come from normal wear and tear, but the intensity of the scratching can be controlled by the type and amount/thickness of material used in manufacturing. A nano gets scratched more easily and more noticeably than a regular iPod thats what it comes down to. The screen can actually become difficult to read. You are right that all iPods get scratched, I don't argue that but what I am saying is Apple dropped the ball with the nano by making it too delicate. I don't know what it is but it could be that the layer of plastic they used isn't hard enough or isn't applied properly, but either way, this is something that should be fixed/

Dumb comment... these are two different items we're talking about. Cars are going to get scratches because they're outside in the elements. If you were talking about the inside of a car I could go along with that. But this is an item that shouldn't get scratched just by touching it mad.gif If you car seat started tears in just from sitting on it, you would want it fixed wouldn't you? Of course you would, but would you want to dish out the money? Most logical people wouldn't rolleyes.gif

ipods are going to get scratches because you are sliding them in and out of things that aren't made of micro fiber cloth. you can't expect something made out of shiny plastic and chrome to stay mint while handling it all the time, it just doesn't work like that.

What if you bought a Mercedes and the paint faded out after a year of owning it? Would that be ok? Cause it still drives right? I don't think the owners of the car would be too happy though. It's not as simple as "it works" you are paying money for a nice looking device and when it doesn't look nice anymore through no fault of your own it's something that needs to be addressed.

paint fading and chips are two different things...

chips come from normal wear and tear. fading is something that would happen when there is a defect in the material...

scratches come from normal wear and tear, that?s how ipods have always been. you can't show me one used ipod that doesn't have scratches on it. even when you put them in cases they still get scratched.

ahfunk have you ever seen or touched a nano? I have a hard time believe it.

Apple confirms problems with nano:

http://news.designtechnica.com/article8407.html

586705743[/snapback]

they are only confirming problems with the screens. not the scratches.

and its dated 28th sept.

Yes they do come from normal wear and tear, but the intensity of the scratching can be controlled by the type and amount/thickness of material used in manufacturing. A nano gets scratched more easily and more noticeably than a regular iPod thats what it comes down to. The screen can actually become difficult to read. You are right that all iPods get scratched, I don't argue that but what I am saying is Apple dropped the ball with the nano by making it too delicate. I don't know what it is but it could be that the layer of plastic they used isn't hard enough or isn't applied properly, but either way, this is something that should be fixed/

586705749[/snapback]

I agree they do scratch a lot, but I don't think thats something that people should sue over...

I agree they do scratch a lot, but I don't think thats something that people should sue over...

586705962[/snapback]

How else are we going to get it across to Apple that we don't like being screwed? I mean, I see your point, so don't get me wrong. But it seems the only way to get companies to take their heads out of their own asses is to sue them.

the nano has a different surface material compared to the 4th gen and previous models etc. the plastic used gives a better coating but it scratches very easily- on macrumors.com forums someone has a friend who packs/designs the ipods - and even they've said its impossible to get rid of the scratches using special plastic liquids.

the new 5th gen ipod videos seem to be manufactured from the exact same plastic material as the nano !! but i havent heard reports from people who have got these with the same rediculous scratch problems..

What are they expecting Apple to do?

The iPod is working perfectly fine, it's their own fault for now protecting it with a case.

586705441[/snapback]

The point is you shouldnt have to protect it. It shouldn't scratch. Its completly unacceptable of how bad it is. I purposly dropped in on my bed as a joke and said to my friend, ahaha watch this is scratch it. Guess what, it did.

it happens after the fact, and would not happen if it is protected....that is not a manufacturer's defect.

the warranty doesn't cover cosmetics...deal with it.

In the advertising of the iPod Nano, where does it say it has a anti-scratch coating?

it happens after the fact, and would not happen if it is protected....that is not a manufacturer's defect.

the warranty doesn't cover cosmetics...deal with it.

In the advertising of the iPod Nano, where does it say it has a anti-scratch coating?

586706071[/snapback]

Quote from the filed lawsuit (Section II Subsection 4):

"This consumer class action arises from Apple's deceptive and unlawful conduct in designing, manufacturing, distributing and selling defectively designed portable, digital music players. Specifically, Plaintiff brings this class action on behalf of a nationwide class of consumers who purchased Defendant's defective iPod Nano ("Nano") for consumer use. As a result of Defendant's defectively designed product, these Nanos scratch excessively during normal usage, rendering the screen on the Nanos unreadable, and violating state consumer protection statutes, breaching express and implied warranties that accompanied the Nanos, and causing Plaintiff and class members to incur loss of use and monetary damages associated with the repair and/or replacement caused by the defective design. Plaintiff and class members would not have purchased Nanos and/or paid as much for them had they known the truth about the product."

If this one just one or two people having a problem with scratches, you would make a valid point, however, this involves a lot of people so it has to be Apple's product and not the consumer. Also, their warranties do cover cosmetics in case you weren't aware.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Micron reveals AI companies are spending billions to lock up its memory years in advance by Karthik Mudaliar The demand for more memory is far from over, and Micron is turning the AI-driven memory shortage into a much more predictable business. The company has revealed that it has signed 16 strategic supply agreements backed by roughly $22 billion in customer deposits and other financial commitments. The contracts cover DRAM and NAND deliveries over several years, with some running through 2030. With the AI boom, demand for high-bandwidth memory (HBM) has grown so quickly that large customers are now prepared to help finance future production in exchange for a guaranteed supply. According to Micron’s latest financial results, the company received commitments worth about $22 billion across its new agreements. Around $18 billion is expected to arrive as cash deposits, while the rest will come through other financial arrangements. Micron says the agreements could generate approximately $100 billion in future contracted obligations. They cover around 20% of its expected DRAM shipments and one-third of its NAND shipments during their respective terms. It should be noted that although AI infrastructure is the main force behind the current shortage, not all 16 agreements with Micron involve AI companies. Micron said the customers also include consumer electronics and automotive businesses, two sectors that increasingly compete with data centers for the same manufacturing capacity. HBM is consuming an increasing share of that supply. Unlike conventional desktop or server RAM, HBM stacks multiple memory dies vertically and places them close to an AI accelerator. This gives GPUs and other AI chips access to data at much higher speeds, but it also requires more complicated manufacturing and packaging. Micron says its 12-layer HBM4 memory is now shipping in high volume for a lead customer, with samples also supplied to other companies. The chipmaker has already generated more than $1 billion in HBM4 revenue and says the product is ramping twice as quickly as its earlier HBM3E generation. Samsung has similarly warned that the memory shortage could continue into 2027 and beyond. Consumer memory companies have also had to address sharp increases in DDR5 pricing, suggesting the effects are already reaching beyond the data center. For consumers, that could mean the AI memory crunch lasts longer than expected, even as manufacturers invest heavily in new production.
    • XnConvert 1.112 by Razvan Serea  XnConvert is a cross-platform batch image-converter and resizer with a powerful and ease of use experience. All common picture and graphics formats are supported (i.e. JPG, PNG, TIFF, GIF, Camera RAW, JPEG2000, WebP, OpenEXR) as well as supporting over 500 other image formats. Also available within the batch operations include rotating, adding of watermarks, adding of text along with many image-adjustment features such as brightness, shadows and more. Among the features included are: Batch adding of files and folders Support for drag and drop of files Batch rotating, cropping, resizing and more Adding of photo masks Preserving or removing image metadata in conversions Multipage image file support (i.e animated GIF, APNG, TIFF) Command line integration via NConvert Filters - such as 'Blur', 'Gaussian Blur', 'Emboss', "Sharpen' and much more Effects - such as 'Old camera' and much more Download: XnConvert 64-bit | Standalone | ~30.0 MB (Freeware) Download: XnConvert 32-bit | Standalone Links: XnConvert Website | Screenshot | Release Announcement Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Microsoft updates Visual Studio Code with chat cost tracking and multi-agent chats by Paul Hill Microsoft has just launched Visual Studio Code 1.126, its latest weekly release. This time, the company has focused on letting you see the total cost of chat sessions to spot expensive conversations; enabling multiple chats per session that run side-by-side in one agent host Copilot session; and letting you browse new folders safely in restricted mode. We have now reached the stage where free AI in IDEs is coming to an end. To help you keep track of your costs, VS Code now lets you see the entire cost of a chat session, rather than just individual turns. This should give you more transparency about which sessions consume the most credits, so you can better manage your usage over time and spend less. For those of you using the Agents window, you know it is possible to run and manage multiple agent sessions at once. In this update, a Copilot session started from an agent host can hold several chats at once. Explaining how this feature works, Microsoft writes: Finally, from this update forward, Microsoft will remove the pop-up when opening an untrusted folder. When you open a new folder now, it will automatically open in Restricted Mode. You will see a banner that lets you manage the trust level of the folder. Microsoft has made this change so that it’s easier to start inspecting code without giving it trust right away. If you have VS Code, you can check for updates within the app now to get this new version. Otherwise, you can download it from the Visual Studio Code website.
    • Anthropic accuses Alibaba of using 25,000 fake accounts to copy Claude's capabilities by Karthik Mudaliar Anthropic has accused Alibaba of using nearly 25,000 fraudulent accounts to extract capabilities from Claude on a huge scale. According to a report from Reuters, Anthropic told US lawmakers that operators linked to Alibaba and the company’s Qwen AI team generated 28.8 million exchanges with Claude between April 22 and June 5, 2026. That is a lot of Claude conversations, but Anthropic says this was not ordinary chatbot use. The company believes the accounts were part of a coordinated effort to collect answers that could help train or improve rival AI systems. The alleged campaign reportedly focused on some of Claude’s most valuable skills, including software development, multi-step reasoning, and agentic tasks. In practical terms, that means getting an AI model to plan and complete work across several stages rather than simply answering a single question. This is called 'distillation,' where AI companies use outputs from a larger model to train a smaller and cheaper one. The smaller model learns to imitate useful parts of the more capable system without needing the same amount of computing power. The distillation process isn't automatically suspicious, but the problem comes when one company gathers another provider's outputs without permission and at an industrial scale. Also, this does not mean Alibaba obtained Claude’s source code, model weights, or original training data. Instead, Anthropic claims the accounts repeatedly asked Claude carefully designed questions and collected the answers. Those answers could then be used as training material for another model. Anthropic has made similar accusations against DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax earlier this year. As Neowin previously reported, Anthropic said those three companies collectively generated more than 16 million Claude exchanges through roughly 24,000 accounts. Anthropic says the new campaign produced almost twice as many exchanges in a matter of weeks. Anthropic reportedly told lawmakers that the campaign could help Chinese AI developers approach the capabilities of its Mythos Preview model. Mythos is focused on advanced cybersecurity work, including finding and exploiting complex software vulnerabilities. via Reuters | Photo via DepositPhotos.com
    • An Indian manufacturer that assembles roughly one-third of Apple's iPhones and supplies semiconductor components to Tesla confirmed Monday that attackers had stolen and publicly published a 630-gigabyte cache of confidential files — including engineering blueprints stamped "TRADE SECRET," a 52-page quality inspection document for iPhone circuit board components, and cryptographic certificates that security experts say could be weaponized in follow-on attacks. https://www.techtimes.com/articles/319019/20260624/apple-tesla-supplier-tata-electronics-confirms-630-gb-data-theft-iphone-specs-dark-web.htm
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      441
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      176
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      133
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!