Man Sues Apple Over iPod Hearing Loss


Recommended Posts

A man is taking Apple to court over potential hearing loss because of the Apple iPod

Apple Computer Inc. is being sued by a Louisiana man who claims the Apple iPod can cause hearing loss in people who use the popular MP3 player. The person who filed the suit, John Kiel Patterson, wants the case to be a class-action lawsuit that will force Apple to make upgrades to future models of the MP3 player.

According to part of the complaint, the iPods are "inherently defective in design and are not sufficiently adorned with adequate warnings regarding the likelihood of hearing loss." Each iPod already ships with a warning label declaring that high volume can result in a loss of hearing, but to many that just isn't good enough. In France, for example, all new iPods have limiting software inside the unit to govern the volume below 100 decibels -- the current models in the US can reach upwards of 125 decibels.

Link

"inherently defective in design and are not sufficiently adorned with adequate warnings regarding the likelihood of hearing loss." :rolleyes: What a freakin loser he wants them to make upgrades to the ipods to do what? Not be as loud? :wacko: :blink: Just turn it down you crack pot :p

WTF!!!!

i've never used an ipod but my mp3 player has a setting which you can enable which stops you from going above a certain volume to prevent these things but at the end of the day, ipod never made him listen to it that loud

Yet another example of how idiotic/greedy some people can be. Now, I'm not pointing fingers at any particular country... *cough*

Exactly what I was thinking.

Come on, if he listened to it loud enough for long enough to cause hearing loss, it's his own fault.

This just in: Man sues Staples because pen ran out of ink after 2 years of use: not enough warning, man said.

I more or less find it amusing. Those ear-bud style headphones are the worst kind of headphone for a person's hearing, yet the poser bunch among the iPod users wouldn't be caught dead listening to music any other way. They're the new bling, and they dismiss loss of hearing later in life the same way other posers dismiss health risks from smoking, drinking, junkfood, etc. They just keep telling themselves old age sucks anyway, then they go off doing everything they possibly can to make sure it will.

The issue with the american iPods is they cause INSTANT damage to your ears, say you accidentaly put it at high volume, or are listening to a very low volume song, then suddenly there starts a new loud song. You'll get instant damage to your ears it's that loud.

Gotta love how Apple is always singled out.

Not exclusivly in the MP3 world but Microsoft always gets more "singled out" than Apple so dont act like Apple is the victim. :rolleyes:

Anyways this guy's a dumbass...but there have been worse things in other countries just in case someone starts with the typical american debate...

So why hasn't he sued TV manufactures for having a volume that can go loud? Sony for making the "Walkman" all those years ago. Headphone manufacturers?

Hes a ###### just out for a quick buck.

I sincerely hope that if this ever gets to court, the judge throws it out and lands him with a massive legal bill plus a hefty fine that bankrupts him and puts him out in the gutter with the other low life trash, for wasting peoples time.

Yeah, that sounds good.

Edited by axious

Not exclusivly in the MP3 world but Microsoft always gets more "singled out" than Apple so dont act like Apple is the victim. :rolleyes:

I don't know how you brought MS into this, but wtg.

Apple have been sued for a lot of crazy things, they have been sued for not selling an education machine to the public, sued because the absolute bleeding edge software wont run on really old macs. sued because people scratch their nano's, and now sued because people listen to music too loudly (when your two feet away from a person, and hear their music from their earbud headphones (like my step-dad), sure sign of hearing damage later in life), and they have sued for a lot of other things as well.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My comment was intended to be humorous. Since I believe scientists already knew it since, as scientists, they understand relatively.
    • Surprise Execs are dumb. I hope the rehired engineers said were not coming back until we get 2x our salary.
    • Ford execs say they made a mistake when they replaced human engineers with AI by David Uzondu Ford recently announced that over the last three years, it's had to rehire about 350 "gray beard" engineers to mentor younger staff and reprogram diagnostic systems and AI tools that were failing to meet up to quality expectations. The company's VP of vehicle hardware engineering, Charles **** said that leaders overlooked the deep experience of veterans who survived many product cycles. **** admitted that simply replacing them with AI was a huge mistake, and that while AI is "a fantastic tool," it remains "only as good as the information you use to train it." The rehired engineers now run mandatory meetings to troubleshoot vehicles and reprogram automated engineering software and AI tools to prevent glitches before production. These technical specialists hunt for failure points before parts ever reach the plant floor, helping prevent the massive recalls and defects that previously cost the company billions as it aims to cut one billion dollars in expenses this year. In last year's JD Power Quality Survey, an annual study that measures the quality of a car during the first three months of ownership, Ford finished 10th among mainstream brands and scored below the industry average. But this year, JD Power ranked the automaker as the top mainstream brand, placing it above the likes of Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. Ford attributed this massive improvement directly to the expertise of these returned engineers. Ford's realization that AI cannot magically design and test quality vehicles without senior human oversight is just the tip of the iceberg. When Careerminds looked at companies that conducted AI-driven layoffs, researchers found out that 35.6% of those companies had to rehire more than half of the employees they previously fired. Another 32.7% had to rehire between 25% and 50% of them. In 2024, Sebastian Siemiatkowski, CEO of Klarna, proudly announced that its new chatbot was doing the work of 700 full-time customer service agents. As a result, the fintech company froze hiring and cut hundreds of positions. But by mid 2025, and into 2026, Klarna was scrambling to recruit human agents again because customer satisfaction had plummeted. It turns out, while AI is very good at answering basic questions like how to check an account balance, when faced with complex customer issues that require nuance, the thing usually resorts to the unhelpful, robotic corporate jargon we all know and love.
    • Free AI in IDEs is shifting to paid models Or you know, you could just learn to actually design and code apps, use frameworks to handle the repetitive parts and not use AI at all - and voila... free for life!
    • In a sane world US antitrust laws wouldn't even allow these companies to be in the position to be subjected to EU directives. As you say, better than oligarch nothing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Enthusiast
      Xonos went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      405
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      169
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      129
    4. 4
      neufuse
      69
    5. 5
      Xenon
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!