Posts Tagged ‘Apple’

December 7 roundup

  • Woman jailed for “camcordering” after recording four minutes of sister’s birthday party in movie theater [BoingBoing]
  • Senate hearing airs trial lawyer gripes against Iqbal [Jackson and earlier, PoL, Wajert, Beck & Herrmann (scroll)] Franken and other Senators sidestep substance, browbeat witness re: “study” terminology [Alison Frankel, AmLaw]
  • Still time to cancel? “2009 is also the first year of global governance” — new EU president [Small Dead Animals]
  • Miller-Jenkins battle: judge orders custody switch to law-abiding spouse [Box Turtle Bulletin, background]
  • Speedy by government standards? 17 years ago DoT proposed Southeast high-speed rail on existing rights of way, ruling on environmental impact statement is expected next year [McArdle]
  • “New York’s New DWI Bill: Compounding Stupidity” [Greenfield; felony to drive intoxicated with passenger 15 or younger]
  • “Apple Told To Pay Patent Troll OPTi $21.7 Million” [Business Insider]
  • This year’s ABA Blawg 100 listing left out some legal blogs that aren’t half bad [Turkewitz]

October 10 roundup

July 21 roundup

  • “Plaintiffs’ Attorneys to Get $800,000 in Preliminary Settlement, Class Members Receive Zero” [Calif. Civil Justice covering Bluetooth settlement in which Ted was objector; earlier here and here]
  • “Lawyer Jailed for Contempt Is Freed After 14 Years” [Lowering the Bar, earlier]
  • Money makes the signals go ’round: another probe of red-light cameras yields few surprises [Chicago Tribune, Chicago Bungalow, Bainbridge on Washington, D.C.]
  • Previously little-known company surfaces in E.D. Tex. to claim Apple, many other companies violate its patent for touchpads [AppleInsider via @JohnLobert]
  • Child endangerment saga of mom who left kids at Montana mall is now a national story [ABC News; earlier post with many comments; Free Range Kids and more]
  • Meet Obama Administration “special adviser on ‘green’ jobs” Van Jones [“Dunphy”, McCarthy at NRO “Corner”]
  • Irrationality of furloughs at University of Wisconsin should provide yet another ground to question New Deal-era Fair Labor Standards Act [Coyote]
  • Australia’s internet blacklist is so secret you can’t even find out what sites are on it [Popehat – language] Oz to block online video games unsuitable for those under 15 [BoingBoing]

“Lawsuit claims Apple, Mafia sent threats via iPod”

Anyone suing over anything dept.: a Florissant, Mo. man proceeding pro se (without a lawyer) “is suing Apple because he says two of the company’s iPods contained illegal receivers that allowed the Mafia to send him threatening messages, according to court documents obtained by CNET. … The alleged motive for the threats was that the Mafia wanted McKenna to work as a fashion model for them at a New York modeling agency.” The suit also names the St. Louis County police department and other defendants. [CNet, The Petition Site, AppleInsider, Gizmodo]

iPod nano scratch settlement: count him out

Massachusetts lawyer and blogger Peter Morin, who has guest-blogged here on more than one occasion, is one of the members of the class entitled to participate in the settlement of class action claims over scratched Apple iPod nano units. He sent the following letter:

February 20, 2009

Apple iPod nano Cases
Claims Administrator
P.O. Box 6104
Novato, CA 94948-6104

Dear Sir:

I have received a Notice of Class Action Settlement For Uncoated First Generation iPod nanos. My control number is xxxxxxxxxxx.

I wish to submit my objection to the terms of settlement.

I have been the recipient of more than a few similar Notices during the past twenty years, but this is the stupidest b—s— I have ever witnessed.

I have owned a first generation nano (“uncoated” ) from the inception of its release. It is one of the most reliable and attractive devices I had ever owned (until the most recent design, which is gorgeous). The fact that a group of class action lawyers would sue Apple on behalf of some “aggrieved” group of nano owners because the device might get a little scratched up without the use of a cover is beyond absurd. It is insanity.

According to the Notice, in order to qualify for a fund payment, I “must have experienced scratching of [my] iPod nano that impaired [my] use or enjoyment of it.”

Impaired my use or enjoyment of it? This must be a joke. Is a federal judge to believe that a bit of scratching on this device is going to reasonably impair someone’s enjoyment of it? What does one do, sit and stare at his nano, beholding its sleekness and polish? Obviously not. It is tucked inside sweaty pockets in gyms, in classes, on subways. It is not an item to display, except to the most insanely vain. It is an item to store and play music. That it does, in a most reliable and effective fashion. How could such a class be certified?

I wish to make one final point.

As asinine as it is to claim that one’s enjoyment of the nano is “impaired” by a few scratches upon it (I for one considered the scratches the equivalent of battle scars), it pales against the idea that some group of lawyers would actually be paid the gargantuan sum of $4.5 million for perpetuating this idiocy.

It would be my preference that every lawyer participating in the group of Plaintiffs’ Counsel be marched into a Shea Stadium full of satisfied iPod owners and pelted with the electronic detritus of their choice. I predict that the “uncoated” iPod nano will not be among them.

Count me out!

Respectfully,
Peter B. Morin

October 22 roundup

  • Bulgarians employ “decoy lawyers” to get around corruption in official bureaus [Cowen, MargRev]
  • Forum-shopping vol. MMMCCXII: Taiwan company claims Apple broke California unfair-practices law so of course it sues in Texarkana [AppleInsider]
  • “U.S. produces far too many lawyers for society to absorb” and one reason is that law schools want warm seats on chairs [Greenfield]
  • Second Circuit: lawyers can’t buy their way out of sanctions for filing meritless lawsuit [Krauss, PoL]
  • Some reasons furor over free speech in Canada is relevant this side of the border [Bernstein @ Volokh]
  • We’re quoted on the subject of those websites that offer “point-and-click access to trial lawyers” [Business First of Columbus]
  • Tight lid kept on study of disposable diapers’ environmental impact since findings were … inconvenient [Times Online (U.K.) via Stuttaford]
  • Judge backs Kentucky’s bid to seize domains of online gambling sites, implications for everyone else [Balko, “Hit and Run”; earlier here and here]

Creatively Challenged

For something like two decades, your computer firm has been known for the cult-like devotion of its followers and its single-button mice, so when it comes time to introduce a two-button mouse, how to placate the hurt feelings of those who’ve spent 20 years arguing that the One Way is One Button? First, it helps if the new device doesn’t actually appear to have two buttons—maybe they won’t notice?—and second, you give it a slightly-deprecating-yet-somehow-still-smug name: “Mighty Mouse” is the all-too-obvious choice and the one that Apple inc., in fact, made.

Don’t assume, just because this is Overlawyered, that Apple is being sued by CBS, which owns the rights to the cartoon superhero—too obvious.

Read On…