Us Appeals Court dismisses lawsuit against iPod collective

Åœ — äº¬æ — ¶é — ' in the early hours of 31 December, according to foreign media reports, the United States yesterday, a federal appeals court Wednesday, dismissed the request for the Apple iPod music player may cause user hearing impaired is responsible for collective action.

San Francisco for the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Wednesday to maintain a local court in the judgment in 2008 remains unchanged, i.e. this collective lawsuit plaintiffs failed to prove that the use of iPod player will cause noise-induced hearing impairment of excessive risk. The Court also noted that the lack of sufficient evidence in the present case, the plaintiff cannot be accused of Apple in violation of California law against unfair competition.

This collective litigation lawyer Jeff · Friedman (Jeff Friedman) and Apple's Counsel David · banica (David Bernick) and Apple spokesman are not yet in this comment.

Since its launch in 2001, Apple iPod player sales have exceeded 2.2 billion. The specification of the iPod, Apple has made a reminder to the user, and urges the user to set the volume, so as to avoid the security level of impaired hearing. But the launch of this collective lawsuit plaintiffs Joseph · Bo de Sang (Joseph Birdsong) and Bruce · Wagner (Bruce Waggoner) were of the view that the iPod headphone design allows the user to be deep in ear canal, thus increasing the risk of hearing impaired users.

The complainant also stated that although the iPod cannot be given a minimum of 115 DB of sound, but because of the lack of volume meter or noise isolation properties, thus giving users the risk of impaired hearing.

The Court of appeal was that the plaintiff give Apple indicated they thought could make iPod becomes more secure way, but cannot prove that the iPod has risk. The High Court Judge David · Thompson (David Thompson) in the decision, says: "the plaintiff does not have sufficient evidence to assert that the iPod could not achieve its purpose of any functional design, and there was insufficient evidence to assert that they or anyone else who uses the iPod and the hearing impaired, or facing a hearing unavoidable damage major possibilities, or other harm," and "from the highest level, plaintiff alleges iPod might cause hearing impaired risk not for their own purposes, but the other unidentified iPod users. ”

This collective lawsuit plaintiffs originally called Apple made material compensation and require Apple to improve the security of the iPod and the information disclosure and provide better headphones, and iPod users for hearing impaired test, etc.