Newsflash - High volume can damage your hearing!

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » February 3, 2006, 1:19 pm

Sorta like hot coffee can burn you...

Apple faces suit over iPod-related hearing loss
By Ina Fried

A Louisiana man has filed a class action suit against Apple Computer, saying the computer maker has failed to take adequate steps to prevent hearing loss among iPod users.

The suit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., charges that the iPod music player can produce sounds of up to 115 decibels even though some studies suggest that listening to music at that level for 28 seconds a day can cause damage over time. The suit, filed on behalf of John Kiel Patterson and all other iPod buyers, seeks monetary damages to compensate for the hearing loss suffered by iPod users, as well as a share of Apple's iPod profits.

The suit also seeks to force Apple to offer a software upgrade to limit the iPod's output to 100 decibels as well as provide headphones designed to block out external noise.

"Millions of consumers have had their hearing put at risk by Apple's conduct," the suit states.

An Apple representative declined to comment. The company has faced other suits over the iPod, including one over complaints that the devices scratch too easily. Apple reached a settlement in another case, related to the battery life of early iPods.

The latest court action follows several news articles quoting hearing experts who warn that prolonged digital music player use at high volumes may put people at risk of hearing loss.

Apple does caution customers in its iPod user manual, with a section labeled "Avoid Hearing Damage."

"Warning: Permanent hearing loss may occur if earphones or headphones are used at high volume," Apple states in the manual. "You can adapt over time to a higher volume of sound, which may sound normal but can be damaging to your hearing. Set your iPod's volume to a safe level before that happens."

The suit charges that the warning from Apple is inadequate because it fails to advise people what constitutes a "high volume" or a "safe level."

Apple was forced to limit the output of iPods to 100 decibels in France, although the suit claims that Apple has not done so in the U.S. and that even that level is "still not safe."

Patterson's suit cites National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health data that sets a safe exposure limit for noise of 85 decibels for eight hours a day. For each 5-decibel increase, the safe exposure time drops by half, the suit says.

The suit was brought by lawyers at Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, one of two firms that filed the iPod scratching suit.

Post by **Sylvus** » February 3, 2006, 1:39 pm

I hate lawsuits like this. Interestingly enough, I am the kind of person who listens to my iPod WAY too loudly and I'll probably suffer hearing loss as a result. That's not Apple's fault. In fact, I appreciate that they created a device that doesn't limit my ability to rock out.

If you sit 5 cm away from a Sony Television or stare at a General Electric lightbulb for several hours a day it might damage your vision. If you eat Kraft Macaroni and Cheese without first removing the boiling water you might suffer damage to your taste buds, mouth, esophagus, etc... If you read posts by Midnyte or Funkmasterr your neurons may permanently stop firing.

In my opinion, the liability shouldn't fall on the providers of said products or services, it should fall on the consumer who chose to consume them.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · February 3, 2006, 1:48 pm

Sylvus wrote:I hate lawsuits like this. Interestingly enough, I am the kind of person who listens to my iPod WAY too loudly and I'll probably suffer hearing loss as a result. That's not Apple's fault. In fact, I appreciate that they created a device that doesn't limit my ability to rock out.

If you sit 5 cm away from a Sony Television or stare at a General Electric lightbulb for several hours a day it might damage your vision. If you eat Kraft Macaroni and Cheese without first removing the boiling water you might suffer damage to your taste buds, mouth, esophagus, etc... If you read posts by Midnyte or Funkmasterr your neurons may permanently stop firing.

In my opinion, the liability shouldn't fall on the providers of said products or services, it should fall on the consumer who chose to consume them.

Wonko Wenusberg · Post by **Wonko Wenusberg** » February 3, 2006, 1:58 pm

Counter-sue him for sheer stupidity and lack of common sense in the field of high volume and it's impact on eardrums.
In fact he's indirectly labeling a big amount of people, the iPod users, as idiots.
What would you chose? Money and at the same time legally confirmed that you can't think for yourself, or some oldfashioned pride! Sadly I think money always wins.

iirc Sony has a nice workaround on its MiniDisc with a max volume button that can be put on and off. I can't see the use of it for a consumer, but for this it's perfect.

Marbus · Post by **Marbus** » February 3, 2006, 2:01 pm

People like this are one of the reasons the country is in the shape it's in... not my fault I (pick one: can't hear, am fat, am depressed, have no job, burned myself with hot coffee, smoke etc...). I think the judge, and remember I'm suppose to be liberal right?, should be able to just stamp a case like this STFU! with a big red ink stamp on it... or better yet, charge this asshat with wasting the rest of our money and make him pay us back for submitting a whiney ass lawsuit.

Marb

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » February 3, 2006, 7:20 pm

This is even more ridiculous than the hot coffee lawsuit. At least with the hot coffee lawsuit, the lady got a cup of coffee that was hotter than cups of coffee at other McDonalds. This is like suing McDonalds for serving coffee, period.

I can't imagine that frivolous bullshit like this will get very far, but we'll see.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » February 3, 2006, 8:18 pm

HOT WATER BURN BABY! HOT WATER BURN BABY!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 3, 2006, 9:55 pm

Sueven wrote:This is even more ridiculous than the hot coffee lawsuit. At least with the hot coffee lawsuit, the lady got a cup of coffee that was hotter than cups of coffee at other McDonalds. This is like suing McDonalds for serving coffee, period.

I can't imagine that frivolous bullshit like this will get very far, but we'll see.

They definitely have a case if they can demonstrate that engineers at Apple were cognizant of the decibel level that can cause hearing loss and not at least warning their customers. I don't think a judge would dare throw out a case of this magnitude as frivilous and I don't see it being too hard to paint a picture of negligence to a jury.

It seems like common sense to a lot of people, but many people probably don't realize that they can damage their ears by cranking up their walkman. I see perfectly intelligent people all the time with their headphones on so fucking loud that I can hear what song is playing in a reasonably open and crowded area.

people need to take some responsibility for their actions though. this is like suing ford for making cars that travel over 55 mph if you lose your legs in a high speed car accident that you caused.

it seems like frivilous lawsuits are making a comeback this year. more than likely everyone who has purchased an iPod will get a coupon for a free iTune, and the law firm representing the complainants will bank eight or nine million dollars in cash.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » February 3, 2006, 10:00 pm

Apple does caution customers in its iPod user manual, with a section labeled "Avoid Hearing Damage."

"Warning: Permanent hearing loss may occur if earphones or headphones are used at high volume," Apple states in the manual. "You can adapt over time to a higher volume of sound, which may sound normal but can be damaging to your hearing. Set your iPod's volume to a safe level before that happens."

Seems like a fairly straightforward warning. I don't see a case here!

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » February 3, 2006, 10:02 pm

I seem to recall that they are packaged with a warning, as Aslanna noted.

Regardless, what piece of audio equipment isn't 'ridiculously too loud' at it's highest setting? I wouldn't consider playing music on my computer speakers at full volume, or my stereo, or my car stereo, or my ipod.

I mean, I know headphones magnify the problem, but it's not difficult to damage your hearing with any number of products.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » February 3, 2006, 11:41 pm

Wasn't part of the complaint that the actual product has no warning? I understand that it's in the manual, but I thought the suit claims no warning ON the iPod.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » February 4, 2006, 12:37 am

I mean, isn't it logical to expect that consumers will read the instructions that you package with your product?

As a consumer, isn't it logical to expect that if you don't read the fucking instructions, you might miss something?

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » February 4, 2006, 1:33 am

If the iPod falls from the sky and hits your head, it could kill you. Clearly that label needs to be on the iPod as well.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » February 4, 2006, 1:39 am

Voiceover: Warning: tickets should not be taken internally.
Homer: "See, because of me they have a warning."

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » February 4, 2006, 3:04 am

Boogahz wrote:Wasn't part of the complaint that the actual product has no warning? I understand that it's in the manual, but I thought the suit claims no warning ON the iPod.

Sorta like the warning on the cigarette packaging isn't sufficient? They need to print it on every cigarette!

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 4, 2006, 7:49 pm

iPods are almost as dangerous as WalkMans!!!!!!!!!!