The iPod nano lawsuit: fighting is the right marketing strategy
Tags: iPod, iPod nano, Marketing, Apple
There are a surprising number of press releases and articles about the lawsuit gainst Apple Computer regarding the iPod nano screen scratches. Why is it surprising? Because it is a lawsuit brought by a single plaintiff. While the accuser has asked for class action status, it hasn't been granted yet. Yet, we've got news outlets from CNN Money to the BBC writing articles about this single filing.
The irony of this lawsuit is that it is all about esthetics, not functionality. After all, this is the same product that keeps working even if you run over it with a car multiple times. The lawsuit isn't about whether the product works or not -- it's about whether the screen can be scratched by rubbing it on a T-shirt or with paper towels and thereby is "defective" in design.
I'll note here that in the lawsuit, the plaintiff was offered the oppportunity to exchange his scratched iPod for $25. He viewed this charge as unreasonable and wants to be awarded a percentage of iPod profits in exchange for his claims of defects. Clearly, this is just absurd, regardless of what the law says.
Our opinion: this is a silly lawsuit that should just go away. Apple should simply refund the plaintiff's money in full plus interest (for goodwill), apologize that he is disappointed in its products, and call it a day. Should the plaintiff not accept a full money back guarantee, then clearly the plaintiff has another agenda, and Apple should fight him in court. Marketing is about delivering products to consumers that want them. But when consumers want your product only as an excuse to tap into your profits, that's a completely different story, and it's one that shouldn't earn that consumer anything more than what they spent.
Oh, and if you have any of those nasty defective scratches on your iPod nano, you can remove them yourself with a four dollar can of Brasso.
There are a surprising number of press releases and articles about the lawsuit gainst Apple Computer regarding the iPod nano screen scratches. Why is it surprising? Because it is a lawsuit brought by a single plaintiff. While the accuser has asked for class action status, it hasn't been granted yet. Yet, we've got news outlets from CNN Money to the BBC writing articles about this single filing.
The irony of this lawsuit is that it is all about esthetics, not functionality. After all, this is the same product that keeps working even if you run over it with a car multiple times. The lawsuit isn't about whether the product works or not -- it's about whether the screen can be scratched by rubbing it on a T-shirt or with paper towels and thereby is "defective" in design.
I'll note here that in the lawsuit, the plaintiff was offered the oppportunity to exchange his scratched iPod for $25. He viewed this charge as unreasonable and wants to be awarded a percentage of iPod profits in exchange for his claims of defects. Clearly, this is just absurd, regardless of what the law says.
Our opinion: this is a silly lawsuit that should just go away. Apple should simply refund the plaintiff's money in full plus interest (for goodwill), apologize that he is disappointed in its products, and call it a day. Should the plaintiff not accept a full money back guarantee, then clearly the plaintiff has another agenda, and Apple should fight him in court. Marketing is about delivering products to consumers that want them. But when consumers want your product only as an excuse to tap into your profits, that's a completely different story, and it's one that shouldn't earn that consumer anything more than what they spent.
Oh, and if you have any of those nasty defective scratches on your iPod nano, you can remove them yourself with a four dollar can of Brasso.
posted by Carl Howe at
7:17 PM
| View blog reactions
| 
