backtop


Print 106 comment(s) - last by rcc.. on Dec 21 at 5:42 PM

Nintendo must have seen this coming

As was bound to happen, law firm Green Welling LLP filed a nationwide class action lawsuit on behalf of the owners of the Nintendo Wii against Nintendo of America. The class action lawsuit contends that the Nintendo Wii is defective in nature due to the wrist strap for the remote.

The statement from the firm says that Nintendo is in the wrong as owners of the Nintendo Wii who supposedly followed the material that accompanied the Wii console experienced broken wrist strap causing the remote to leave the user’s hand. The lawsuit seeks an injunction that requires Nintendo to correct the defect and to provide a refund to the purchaser or to replace the defective Wii remote.

“Nintendo’s failure to include a remote that is free from defects is in breach of Nintendo’s own product warranty,” the statement reads. “The class action lawsuit seeks to enjoin Nintendo from continuing its unfair or deceptive business practices as it relates to the Nintendo Wii.”

The class action lawsuit now awaits approval from a judge. Nintendo has already responded to wrist strap worries with stronger materials and safety reminders. Last week Nintendo started offering free wrist strap replacements for all Nintendo Wii owners, allowing its users to upgrade to the safer and hopefully less accident-prone equipment.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: bunch of idiots
By blckgrffn on 12/20/2006 10:02:18 AM , Rating: 2
This is still a dumb case when you want to bring up the issue of accountability.

1)McDonalds had been warned that their coffee was too hot by food inspectors. They ignored this, stating that their customers wanted the coffee hotter than the industry standard, and much safer, 160 degrees F.

2)The lady spilled it on herself and got 2nd degree burns and required surgery on her lap. Very pleasant, I bet.

3)McDonalds continued to say they didn't think this was an issue and that is why they lost still more cases. I have no idea if they serve their coffee cooler yet or not. My guess is yes.

This case is a staple of Biz law classes, and it is amazing how many people have no idea what actually happened. If you want to talk about people denying accountability, this is obviously the wrong suit to be talking about.


RE: bunch of idiots
By masher2 (blog) on 12/20/06, Rating: 0
RE: bunch of idiots
By spluurfg on 12/20/2006 11:44:41 AM , Rating: 2
Have to disagree with you there. I think the idea is that she didn't know the risk when she accepted the cup, because it was a lot hotter than normal. Granted if you spill a cup of coffee on your lap it's not going to be pleasant, but I don't think McDonalds should hand out things that can cause injury so easily. It's kind of negligent (though I think the damages awarded were kind of excessive...) However I do agree with the fact that there are plenty of examples of fraudulent or unnecessary litigation.

Back to the topic: While Nintendo is in fact replacing the controllers free of charge, don't forget that there was a period of time in which using the controllers as instructed could cause injury or damage to property. That's a simple fact. Whether Nintendo should be liable... well... that's for a court to decide. But the 'you dropped the coffee/threw the remote it's all your fault' attitude just isn't logical.

This is why we have courts -- to decide what is fair, and dispensing with the process isn't a very nice option. We should instead work towards making the legal process less expensive and less time consuming, and to prevent harassment from utterly frivolous lawsuits. It's the process, not the system that needs work.


RE: bunch of idiots
By rcc on 12/20/2006 1:23:13 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is society wide. So too many parts of that "jury of your peers" will have that same baby sit me attitude these days.

This one is a lot easier than some trials tho. It's much harder to find a jury sized group of "athletes that have murdered their wives".

I know, a bit overboard, and very different processes of law, but some of this stuff just irritates the #$%@ out of me.

Lets just change the 4th grade ciriculum a bit. Thou shalt not loft any piece of electronics, tethered or not, which is moving at a velocity greater than 1" per second, or from a height in excess of 1"



RE: bunch of idiots
By Vanners on 12/20/2006 7:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
Don't you think it's a little naive to assume that justice is served in a court? Courts aren't about justice, they are about the law. These cases are won and lost on technicalities. Common sense is outlawed as it would replace the need for lawyers (at least the way they currently practise). This being the case, law suits where the litigent showed a lack of common sense are perfectly suited to the court environment and therefore succeed more often than not.

Examples of this can be found in cases such as an "alleged" burgler suing a home owner for injury sustained while he was "allegedly" carrying out a robbery. (sorry, I don't have the time right now to find a reference to one of these cases, but there are a stack of them so it shouldn't be hard to find if you are interested)

Anyway, the point is that you can't expect the obvious result in these sort of cases.


RE: bunch of idiots
By redbone75 on 12/21/2006 3:55:34 AM , Rating: 2
OK, exactly when is driving with a hot cup of coffee between your legs not an accepted risk on the customer's part? I've always had a problem with this case as it always seems to point to the wrong circumstances surrounding the issue, being the coffee being spilled while driving! It would seem that we in the U.S. have long since accepted that it is perfectly normal and safe to multitask while driving, forgetting the fact that we are moving an object that weighs at least a ton and a half at high speed! Speeds that our bodies were not meant to move at, no less. That this woman decided to place a liquid between her legs that is at normal temperatures hot enough to cause severe discomfort if spilled was overlooked is beyond me. Yes, McDonalds should have not served coffee that was as hot as it was, but


RE: bunch of idiots
By kasey01 on 12/21/2006 9:10:18 AM , Rating: 2
You are not reciting the correct facts of the case. The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck, was NOT driving. She was a passenger. The car was not moving. See background in Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%2...


RE: bunch of idiots
By masher2 (blog) on 12/21/2006 10:03:29 AM , Rating: 1
> "The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck, was NOT driving. She was a passenger..."

So she didn't even get handed a hot cup by McDonalds staff...but by the driver of the vehicle? Even more reason to have tossed out this frivolous suit.

And let's not forget the reason this woman was burned so badly in the first place. After she spilt her coffee, her infirmity prevented her from getting up and doing anything about it, so the hot liquid sat in her lap for a lengthy period.


RE: bunch of idiots
By MrPickins on 12/21/2006 1:52:31 PM , Rating: 2
Experts in the case testified that it would only take 2-7 seconds for coffee at 180F to cause 3rd degree burns.

Even an able bodied person would have problems undoing their seat belt, opening their door, and stripping of their soaking, scalding clothes in that short time.

You can call this lawsuit frivolous if you like, but an appeals court still felt the woman won her case.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki