Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Nintendo Businesses Government The Courts Wii News

Wiimote Straps Result in Class Action Suit 812

Kotaku reports the news that problems with breaking Wiimote straps has resulted in a class action lawsuit against Nintendo. From the press release about the suit: "Green Welling LLP filed a nationwide class action lawsuit on behalf of the owners of the Nintendo Wii against Nintendo of America, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The class action lawsuit arose as result of the defective nature of the Nintendo Wii. In particular, the Nintendo Wii game console includes a remote and a wrist strap for the remote. Owners of the Nintendo Wii reported that when they used the Nintendo remote and wrist strap, as instructed by the material that accompanied the Wii console, the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand. Nintendo's failure to include a remote that is free from defects is in breach of Nintendo's own product warranty."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wiimote Straps Result in Class Action Suit

Comments Filter:
  • by antifoidulus ( 807088 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:43PM (#17301634) Homepage Journal
    then Nintendo would have a valid counterclaim.
  • by CerebusUS ( 21051 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:46PM (#17301680)
    Owners of the Nintendo Wii reported that when they used the Nintendo remote and wrist strap, as instructed by the material that accompanied the Wii console, the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand.

    The owner's manual pretty clearly states not to let go of the thing.

    I hope this lawsuit fails.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:48PM (#17301720)
    A bunch of hyperactive excited morons with too much muscle break their TV, punch their friends in the face or cut themselves with the Wii remote, and they sue Nintendo, because naturally, Nintendo should be blamed for not making hardware solid enough for hyperactive excited morons?

    I'm sorry, but I'm tried a friend's Wii and there's no way I would have dropped or launched the remote across the window, simply because I realize it's only an electronic game, and it doesn't cross my mind to treat a delicate piece of electronic like a jokari paddle. Talk about a lawyer-happy nation... Either that or they're trying to make a cheap buck off of Nintendo's back. Either way, I hope the morons lose.
  • Welcome To America (Score:1, Insightful)

    by HadesX ( 181501 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:48PM (#17301728)
    Sigh, who didn't see this coming, knew it would only be a matter of time.

    ONLY IN AMERICA
  • by CokeBear ( 16811 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:50PM (#17301776) Journal
    the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand

    Impossible. The wrist strap breaking does not cause the remote to leave your hand. Its the other way around - only if you repeatedly let go of the remote with considerable force does the wrist strap break, and even then if you just hold onto the remote you don't have a problem.

    As an aside, I wouldn't be surprised to find xBox or PS3 fanboys at the root of this...

  • Re:Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jarjarthejedi ( 996957 ) <christianpinch@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:51PM (#17301792) Journal
    He's suing a company that's willing to help solve a problem that's not their fault (as the strap is NOT intended to stop the Wiimote if it's thrown but rather intended to keep you from dropping it). Nintendo has, frankly, done everything you could expect of a company in their position. People are using their devices improperly and then blaming Nintendo for damage. It's the same as if you have one of those shake-to-recharge flashlights and you let it go and it broke your T.V., could you blame the company who made those for anything? No, because it's your fault. Nintendo doesn't really need to do anything, the Wii works as advertised as does the Wiimote. It's not their fault that people are being idiots with the thing, and so their offering to replace straps with heavier-duty ones is generous of them.

    And watch, I'm calling it, Nintendo will lose. Because in America, land of the free, home of the brave, you can get money out of McDonalds for spilling coffee on yourself. Some days I love being an American, and then there are days where a company gets sued for doing more than should rationally be expected of them.
  • oh my.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dolson ( 634094 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:51PM (#17301800) Homepage Journal
    Owners of the Nintendo Wii reported that when they used the Nintendo remote and wrist strap, as instructed by the material that accompanied the Wii console, the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand.

    Umm, the wrist strap does not break UNLESS the remote has already left the user's hand...

    Nintendo should counter-sue the parents because they raised defective children.
  • by Pulse_Instance ( 698417 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:51PM (#17301810)
    I don't think stupidity should be illegal, but we should stop protecting stupid people so much. Unless there is a legitimate concern here, I haven't used one so I don't know, then having to replace a TV you broke by being stupid should teach you to not be stupid anymore. The American society seems to encourage people to be stupid.
  • by kinglink ( 195330 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:52PM (#17301818)
    If anyone tries to work with idiotic lawyers like this (no matter for money or for hatred of Nintendo) I'll lose all respect for them. Not that I have much for them in the first place for releasing the controller but that's another story.

    Hell the class action suit makes no sense. "As instructed by the material that accompanied the Wii console" funny the book that says numerous times to use the controller but put on the wrist strap? Or did I miss a page where it says "release the controller, it's fun". Nope guess not. Especially the part of the strap breaking is causing the controller to fly out of your hands. That's pure BS, tasty too.

    Hell Nintendo is replacing the straps for free, not even calling for a mandatory recall, but the court case doesn't even meantion the tvs that are damaged. Personally that's what I'd care about, not the remote that probably still works, but the 3 inch hole in the wall from the impact of the remote.

    Why is it when ever there's some news story about a defect (or retards in this case). There's always a second group of retards (normally called lawyers) who tries to get "rich" off of it? Simple solution. Stop supporting frivilious lawsuits. It'd be one thing if Nintendo told you to release the controller, or Nintendo did something neglegent, but there's no sign of that.
  • it's funny. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AcidLacedPenguiN ( 835552 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:53PM (#17301838)
    . . . that the Nintendo Wii seems to be overly protective of my well being. Every time you go to use the damn thing it'll warn you about seizures, ask you to wear the wrist strap and fasten it securely to your wrist, hell, it even tells you to take a break and go outside after every couple of Wii Sports matches you do. I honestly don't know of any where in the instructions or warranties that asks you politely to "Throw the remote at about 60mph directly at your television, making sure to let go of the remote at the end of your swing."

    If only the photosensitive seizure warnings were accompanied with a "warning: don't be an overly retarded douchebag who doesn't actually read any of the instructions, then blame your retardedness and douchebaggery on those aforementioned instructions." Why, Nintendo? Why?
  • Re:Ummm...No (Score:2, Insightful)

    by $RANDOMLUSER ( 804576 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:56PM (#17301898)
    > Nintendo can't control users throwing the wiimote with enough force to break a strap designed to keep you from inadvertently dropping the thing.

    Nintendo produces games like bowling and baseball where people are making throwing motions with the (motion sensing) remote. Are they really amazed that it could slip from a person's hand and go flying?
  • Re:Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Aadain2001 ( 684036 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @01:58PM (#17301948) Journal
    Personally, I hate references to the old woman who spilled coffee on herself as a stupid lawsuit. If you actually look in deeper, you will find that the coffee was so hot, it scalded and caused horrible burns. I don't care how stupid she was, if you get coffee spilled on you you should only have to worry about having wet clothes, not burns that require hospitalization. So please, stop using that reference. She was injured because McDonalds kept their coffee at an unsafe temperature.
  • Or, in the alternative, you could maybe not let go! I have a Wii and have played it enereggetically and have never even come close to throwing it across. Now has my 13 year old stepson or my wife or any of the half-dozen other kids and adults who ahve come over and played it.

    Don't let go.

  • by ivan256 ( 17499 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:01PM (#17302002)
    Presumably because nothing was damaged other than the unit itself.

    You're comparing apples and oranges.
  • by kannibal_klown ( 531544 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:03PM (#17302026)
    As a Wii user, I'm sorry but that's BS. If you're using them as instructed the things should not be flying like canonballs. I remember watching a video of a guy holding the Wiimote like a baseball, doing a fullstrength pitch, and letting go of the Wiimote (hoping the strap would keep it on his wrist when he let go). Sorry, that is NOT proper usage.

    I've had it since the week it came out and played a lot of Wii Sports during the first week. And even at my strongest throws and such I never let the thing go.
  • by Rotund Prickpull ( 818980 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:03PM (#17302032)
    She was injured because McDonalds kept their coffee at an unsafe temperature.
    Presumably if it had been cooler it wouldn't have had sufficient energy to leap out of the pot and swoop in for the attack?
  • Re:Wait... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nasarius ( 593729 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:07PM (#17302092)
    Third-degree burns, to be specific. It annoys me that this case, in which the woman sued McDonalds only for medical expenses after getting THIRD DEGREES BURNS from a CUP OF COFFEE, is somehow held up as the quintessential frivolous lawsuit. It's not. Stop mentioning it.
  • by Ahnteis ( 746045 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:14PM (#17302214)
    It's to keep me from DROPPING it, not to stop me from THROWING it.
  • Re:Wait... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:21PM (#17302298)
    Coffee is ideally brewed at 180-190 degrees Fahrenheit which is the temperature that McDonald's used. Most customers prefer that coffee be served as hot as possible as it becomes unpleasant once it has cooled too much. As such, most places that serve coffee, serve it at or near brewing temperature. I would consider McDonald's negligent if they served coffee that turned lukewarm soon after it was served, but I doubt I'd be able to sue them for that.

    It's worth noting that after the lawsuit McDonald's lowered the temperature of their coffee but after receiving complaints from customers they returned to the former temperatures.
  • by HappySqurriel ( 1010623 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:22PM (#17302316)
    Or, in the alternative, you could maybe not let go! I have a Wii and have played it enereggetically and have never even come close to throwing it across. Now has my 13 year old stepson or my wife or any of the half-dozen other kids and adults who ahve come over and played it.

    Don't let go.


    If my 8 year old niece can flail her arms for 20 minutes straight while playing Wii Sports Boxing, I think most adults should be able to hold onto it under normal usage. Even if an adult drops the Wiimote under normal usage the strap apears to be able to handle (about) 50lbs of force so the strap should be able to prevent the Wiimote from flying across the room. Even if the strap broke the Wiimote is not heavy enough to break a TV at the speed it would be thrown at under normal use.

    The fact that the Wiimote is flying out of people's hands with enough force to break the strap and a person's TV makes me think that these are not normal use. Now, I think it would have been better for Nintendo to provide a strap that can handle even moronic usage, but companies are not responsible for moronic use of their product.

  • Re:Ummm...No (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SnowZero ( 92219 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:24PM (#17302366)
    So, if you are at a bowling alley, and on your backswing you let go of a bowling ball and hit someone with it, should you sue the bowling ball manufacturer? If you pitch a baseball, and let go of the ball early and break a window, should you sue the baseball manufacturer? No, you shouldn't, because in normal sports there is an expectation that you hold on to the ball until the proper time. Is it unreasonable to expect someone to hold on to a Wii controller?

    Having actually played WiiSports, it states in the directions that extreme motions aren't necessary. You do not need to swing the remote anywhere near what some people are doing, as it offers zero benefit in the game; The controller saturates at a much lower speed. It's like breaking off the analog stick on a gamepad because you were "trying to go faster".
  • Re:Not letting go (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Chibi Merrow ( 226057 ) <mrmerrow AT monkeyinfinity DOT net> on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:24PM (#17302382) Homepage Journal
    So wipe your hands off. Or if you're one of those unlucky people who has very sweaty hands, buy a controller glove. Or better yet DON'T FLAIL AROUND LIKE YOU'VE BEEN EXPOSED TO NERVE GAS. None of the Wii games I've played so far require anything more than a flick of the wrist for interaction. People who are swinging their arms around like idiots are NOT using the Wii in a reasonable manner, ESPECIALLY if they have sweaty hands. It is entirely operator error, the same as idiots who throw their tennis rackets or golf clubs.
  • by Tom ( 822 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:27PM (#17302422) Homepage Journal
    By now I have quite a few hours of playtime down, most of it with friends. Not once has a Wiimote left the hands of its player, even though some of us have played with enthusiasm. If you look at the videos on YouTube, you'll see that in those where the straps broke, there are always two things:

    a) The player's hands were sweaty, and I don't mean a little bit
    b) The Wiimote was literally thrown into a wall at full speed, as in "everything you've got".

    Yeah, you can get into the game, but if you stand in your living room throwing something at the TV with the maximum amount of power you can muster, then anyone with more than 3 brain cells should realize he's doing something potentially dangerous.

    Plus there is no advantage I've noticed to putting that much power into your movements. In all the games I've played so far, timing is more important than raw power.
  • by theckhd ( 953212 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:32PM (#17302514)

    If there was nothing wrong with the first strap then why did they correct it.
    The fact that they started using a newer version of the strap does not imply the old one was defective. Perhaps the old strap was perfectly suitable for normal use, as instructed in the manual (I don't know, I don't own a Wii). If Nintendo found that a larger subset of their users than first expected like swinging their wiimote much more vigorously than instructed, then updating the strap to be a little stronger to accommodate those users is a smart business decision (fewer complaints from users about weak straps is good for the product's image among that demographic).

    It's kind of a shame, from that point of view. The summary could read:
    1)Business releases product.
    2)Customers ask for improvement to product.
    3)Business improves product.
    4)Customers file class-action lawsuit against business, assuming that the improvement implies the original product was defective.
    5)Profit! (for the lawyers, anyhow)
  • Re:Wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Aadain2001 ( 684036 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:39PM (#17302620) Journal
    Ever spilled some Starbucks or other major coffee shop brand coffee on yourself (I have)? Did it result in third degree burns (it didn't on me)? You can easily serve good coffee that will not result in serious injury to a person if spilled.
  • by paeanblack ( 191171 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @02:41PM (#17302646)
    The fact that the Wiimote is flying out of people's hands with enough force to break the strap and a person's TV makes me think that these are not normal use.

    If enough people are having these problems, then it is "normal use", no matter how stupid you may think it is. The Wii is designed engage children in physical activity within a den/bedroom/family room area. While Nintendo should not be held accountable for the outlandish cases, they are certainly culpable when their products fail under usage only a standard deviation or two more vigorous than the median.
  • Re:Wait... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:08PM (#17303096)
    somehow held up as the quintessential frivolous lawsuit. It's not. Stop mentioning it.

    No, but putting a styrofoam cup of even warm coffee between your legs is the quintessential act of stupidity, and she was paid for it. What would have happened had it not been so hot it scalded her? A lawsuit for her dry cleaning expenses?

    It all comes down to responsibility. We've been passing the buck for so long that the person who performs the act is no longer responsible for having performed the act; no, we have to go and hunt down the "enablers" and blame them. Sure, the coffee was excessively hot, but that doesn't change the fact that she dumped it in her own lap.
  • Re:Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RexRhino ( 769423 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:09PM (#17303120)
    It is not the quintessential frivolous lawsuit - That would be the racist woman who sued her employer claiming that her racism was a medical condition, and by the employer forcing her to work with black coworkers, that he was violating the Americans with Disabilities act. (She won several million dollars if I remember correctly.)

    However, the act of drinking a hot beverage is something that everyone has done... so it resonates with all of us. It is so common place and basic, and everyone knows that coffee is hot and can fucking burn you. And people know that something fundamental has changed in our culture when someone else is held responsible when you spill coffee on yourself. It might not be the worse case of tort abuse, but it is the point in time when most of us realized just how stupid the legal system was getting, and just how much this stupidity was costing us as a society.
  • by CokeBear ( 16811 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:14PM (#17303190) Journal
    If they don't have a strong grip, then how could they have thrown the remote hard enough to break the strap? I've tried throwing it (and I can throw a fastball) and I have not been able to break the strap (original; not replacement)
  • Re:Wait... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:21PM (#17303324)
    Third-degree burns, to be specific. It annoys me that this case, in which the woman sued McDonalds only for medical expenses after getting THIRD DEGREES BURNS from a CUP OF COFFEE, is somehow held up as the quintessential frivolous lawsuit. It's not. Stop mentioning it.


    While I don't think this is the quintessential frivolous lawsuit, it *is* frivolous. It is so because coffee is hot, intuitively. The ideal brewing temperature of coffee is 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit, while it takes less than 2 seconds of direct skin exposier to get a severe burn (THIRD DEGREE) when fluid is as little as 150 degrees Fahrenheit.

    I agree the company serving coffee and the customer should exercise care with fluids at this temperature, however it does not rise to the level of negligence on the part of the company if the customer dumps coffee on themselves.

    Now if the company was serving the coffee in a defective cup that caused the spill despite the best attempt at care on the part of the customer, then that rises to the level of negligence, IMHO.
  • Re:Wait... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by William_Lee ( 834197 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:28PM (#17303424)
    Personally, I hate references to the old woman who spilled coffee on herself as a stupid lawsuit. If you actually look in deeper, you will find that the coffee was so hot, it scalded and caused horrible burns. I don't care how stupid she was, if you get coffee spilled on you you should only have to worry about having wet clothes, not burns that require hospitalization. So please, stop using that reference. She was injured because McDonalds kept their coffee at an unsafe temperature.

    How could this parent be modded insightful, especially coming from a line of reasoning that is as retarded and irresponsible as the original lawsuit. The coffee wasn't too hot, it was served at a normal brewing temperature. For all of you out there who are a bit slow, coffee is served HOT. WFT, if you drink coffee, you'd realize it tastes like ass served lukewarm.


    The woman shouldn't have been stupid enough to be putting freshly brewed coffee in her crotch, just like these idiots throwing wiimotes through tv screens should know enough to hold on to the damn thing when they're using it.
  • by nanojath ( 265940 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:30PM (#17303462) Homepage Journal
    It's a shame class action suits are such lawyer bait - there just ain't no cream like the cream you skim off the top of a megacorporation's liability to an honest to goodness population. Of course, with class action suits it's more like they skim off the whole milk and give that long-suffering population the whey

    I think they geniuses responsible for this one will regret it, though. Some will say Nintendo invited this by offering strap replacement (and general advice on not playing like a full-on spaz), but I think they merely observed the inevitable and effectively froze the potential plaintiff pool.

    It looks to me like they're trying to wrangle the notion of some sort of harm being done to people by simply receiving a defective product - whether or not it actually harmed them - but I sincerely doubt (particularly since Nintendo has addressed the problem very early on) that this will fly. Or they may think Nintendo will spook easily and cough up a decent pay-off with little effort... but I think they will find themselves disappointed if so - like all major corporations Nintendo has lawyers just sitting around waiting for stuff like this. Thus only people with some claim to actual harm will be able to apply, and there won't be enough of them to make bringing this suit even remotely (wiimotely?) pay off. Hah hah.

    In short, while my first reaction is that this story was merely about greed, on reflection yes, it's equally about stupidity.

  • by rucs_hack ( 784150 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:34PM (#17303514)
    I've looked at a lot of these images of screwed televisions and so on. It strikes me that the main problem is that people who normally spend their time sat down twiddling with buttons on controllers are so inept at normal exercise that they can't manage a simple thing like not chucking a controller.

    It also occurs to me that some people sit glued to the news 24/7 trying to find another opportunity for a frivolous lawsuit that might net them an easy buck.

  • Re:Wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BinaryOpty ( 736955 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:34PM (#17303522)
    Except you don't drink it while its still boiling: you let it cool down. When being served coffee by an establishment you expect at the very least that the coffee has cooled down to the point you can drink it relatively soon. You do NOT expect for them to hand you a cup of boiling water that would give you third degree burns. Thus the idea of "negligence" comes in for them not telling you "Hey don't spill that, it will burn you so bad it'll kill your nerve endings (third-degree burn)" when the expectation is at the very most served coffee will give you a first-degree burn if that.
  • cause and effect? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by mattcoz ( 856085 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:35PM (#17303532)
    "the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand"

    No, the remote left the user's hand and caused the wrist strap to break.

    Under normal usage, this should never be a problem. The strap itself is not defective, the users are.
  • by stuntpope ( 19736 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:39PM (#17303590)
    The strap failed. But taking that fact to the conclusion:

    "the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand." (from article)

    is bogus. The failure of the strap did not cause the remote to leave the user's hand, unless the breaking strap also pried the user's fingers open. Or if the remote is unusually difficult to maintain a grip on without a strap tying it to the hand.
  • by GeckoX ( 259575 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:40PM (#17303610)
    It's only come to this because Nintendo was trying to be nice by offering a strap for those that have trouble holding on to things.

    Now the lawyers can argue that since Nintendo provided this as part of the product, and since it doesn't hold up in all cases (Regardless of _how_ the damned thing fails, doesn't matter to them), well it's time to sue.

    If Nintendo had not added the strap, this couldn't have happened.

    How completely fucked up is that?
  • Re:Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:43PM (#17303666)
    I wish the woman had gotten more because of the disgusting argument of the McDonalds lawyer: the woman was too old for sex in his opinion so reconstructive surgery to her lap would be purely cosmetic and not necessary. It would has set a precident for all cases of injury through negligence to be dismissed with arguments such as "yeah well he's fat and lazy and didn't like being able to walk anyway".
  • by lordmatthias215 ( 919632 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:44PM (#17303672)
    i find it odd that there are several *videos* of people playing the Wii, whose straps *just happen* to break on camera. I dunno about the rest of the world, but where I live, we don't tend to record ourselves playing video games so we can come back in 6 months and laugh at ourselves... And although the video probably isn't doctored, it wouldn't be hard to snip part of the strap so it would break during a conveniently recorded game session.
  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Orange Crush ( 934731 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @03:54PM (#17303792)
    the coffee was indeed defective as argued.

    The hot coffee suit is one so often pointed to when discussing stupid lawsuits I had no idea it actually had merit. Learn something new every day. Thanks for that.

  • Does not compute (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CODiNE ( 27417 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:01PM (#17303898) Homepage
    Owners of the Nintendo Wii reported that when they used the Nintendo remote and wrist strap, as instructed by the material that accompanied the Wii console, the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand.


    So basically the lawyers are claiming that the remote was firmly IN HAND when the strap somehow magically broke itself, which then caused the holder of the remote to let go of it, further causing expensive property damage.

    This is a new era of legal blame-shifting, no longer is "The devil made me do it" required in court, you can now simply say "The wrist strap made me do it".
  • by MobileTatsu-NJG ( 946591 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:15PM (#17304102)
    "Like driving around bumpy roads with a hot cup of coffee between your legs? "

    Question: Suppose in this hypothetical situation that the lids were really weak, something a little foresight would have cured? They'd work adequately for walking out of Starbucks with them, but were just weak enough that a standard car bump would burst them open. What would the opinion be, then?

    I know it sounds like it, but I'm not setting up an argument against Nintendo. I'm just reading a lot of extreme opinions here where I expected more shades of gray. I think it's great, for example, that Chrstimas Tree lights have fuses in them to minimize problems with putting too many of them in a chain. But from what I'm reading, most here would think they shouldn't have those fuses. I think I'm missing a critical ingredient of the line of thought and was hoping for clarification. (As opposed to getting into a debate about whether Nintendo's responsible or not. I can cut that off right now: I think a class action suit in this context is unfounded and likely fueled by greed.)
  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Laur ( 673497 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:22PM (#17304178)
    Despite the case's standing in popular culture, it really didn't go down like that. Though the woman was found partly responsible, the coffee was indeed defective as argued.
    Try reading Overlawyered [overlawyered.com] for a different take on this. Basically, the popular belief that the suit was ridiculous is pretty much correct. The coffee was not defective, many other restaurants (such as Starbucks) still serve coffee that hot. Besides, McDonald's even had a warning label on the cup.
  • Re:Wait... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cfulmer ( 3166 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:28PM (#17304270) Journal
    I don't expect that. Nearly every time I get coffee, I have to wait for a few minutes before drinking it. In fact, the coffee counsel recommends keeping coffee at around 185 degrees. McDonald's was serving coffee that's just about as hot as Starbuck's, and Caribou's and Dunkin' Donuts' and....

    Many people get coffee from fast-food restaurants because it will be just cool enough for them to drink when they get to where they are going (think construction workers.)

    The coffee itself did not cause immediate 3rd degree burns -- that came from prolonged contact because the coffee was absorbed into her clothes. If you make yourself a cup of coffee at home and then poured it into your lap, you'd have a similar problem. Had she not been using her crotch as a cup holder, the whole thing never would have happened.

  • by AdmiralWeirdbeard ( 832807 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:32PM (#17304316)
    Actually, its more like using a sledgehammer to tap the A button.
    I got a Wii at launch, and the thin cord that attaches the strap to the remote is smaller than the ones being sold now.
    So the fuck what?
    After a couple pretty savage drops onto my hardwood floor (by drunken guests passing the remote between themselves) it became apparent that the remote itself is nearly indestructible. So i decided to test the strap.
    I went over to my bed, held the end of the strap, and whipped it downward at my bed. Hard.
    nothing
    Again, harder.
    nothing
    againagain, as hard as i could muster.
    nothing.
    I was unable to break the strap.
    maybe I'm just a wuss, but i kinda doubt it.

    people need to settle the fuck down and realize that they're playing a fucking video game, not the world fucking series.

    Also, how could the strap breaking possibly *cause* the remote to come out of one's hand? At most, it could fail to *prevent* the remote to go flying across the room... but i dont really understand how, in the physical universe in which we live, the strap could possibly break *before* the remote has left the hand in such a way as to *cause* anything. I guess you could snag the strap on some kind of protruding hook that then ripped the cord while the remote was still in the hand, but causing it to leave the hand? BULLSHIT. and any decent lawyer will pick apart the logic on that in about 5 minutes.
  • by Skater ( 41976 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:37PM (#17304400) Homepage Journal
    Sadly, Nintendo probably would've been better off had they NOT included a strap. After all, you don't see Louisville Slugger being sued because their bat slipped out of someone's hand.
  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KingSkippus ( 799657 ) * on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:42PM (#17304496) Homepage Journal

    You mean the article that keeps referring to those who believe that Stella Liebeck had merit as "the left" and "liberals"?

    It sounds to me like the guy is more interested in pushing some kind of agenda than making an honest evaluation of the case based on its legal merits or lack thereof. Even if the guy is right, he's sure not helping his argument.

    Also, it sounds to me like his main point is that the judge should have thrown the case out instead of letting it go to a jury trial. I'm sorry, but although sometimes juries can be stupid, I'd trust a jury much more than I'd trust a judge any day.

    /had a judge once tell me, "You don't have a right to a jury trial" over a traffic offense, though it's clearly stated in the Georgia state constitution that I did
    /had same judge tell me after finding me guilty, "You know you never had a chance, right?"

  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jedidiah ( 1196 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @04:44PM (#17304532) Homepage
    Most companies will not sell you a cup of coffee hot enough to give you 3rd degree burns under any circumstance. Not only is it dangerous to the customer but it also harms the product. Beyond all of that, McDonalds already had been sued numerous times over the same issue and chose to suppress information on the matter rather than warn their customers or fix the problem.

    Nintendo has actually been doing right by customers effected so far.
  • by drcln ( 98574 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @05:30PM (#17305372)
    Its about "discovery" and "production." When a lawsuit is filed, the plaintiff gets the right to go on a fishing expedition in the defendant's files, emails, factories and to depose personnel. It is a burdensome and ridiculously expensive process for the defendant, who has to "produce" all the discovery material. And who knows what they might find? Even with a bogus claim, if the plaintiff's lawyers can survive long enough to force discovery, the cost and burden alone may make it worth Nintendo's money to just pay the plaintiff lawyers' "fees" to go away and send all Wii owners a $5 coupon for a Wii accessory in a "settlement" that is really a marketing campaign. That is at the heart of this game.

        Of course, the cost of settlement is simply passed along to those poor saps that are represented by these lawyers in the higher cost of Wii games and accessories. Only the lawyers win.
  • by snowwrestler ( 896305 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @05:34PM (#17305428)
    The restaurants that continue to serve overheated coffee do so at their peril, and Starbucks in fact has faced lawsuits about it.

    From a practical perspective there is absolutely no reason to serve coffee at a tissue-destroying temperature. The argument that people like hot coffee makes so sense since no one can drink coffee at that temperature without suffering serious burns. No one! People have to wait before drinking, and time of waiting represents exposure to a hazard, since any spill will scald them.

    The only reason that restaurants continue to keep their coffee so hot is that it is cheaper to use equipment that heats continuously regardless of temperature. This can result in beverages being served that are literally at boiling point. If beverages were simply heated to an appropriate temperature and kept there, a) they could be consumed right away, and b) even if they did spill they would not cause serious injury. This is clearly a better way to do things.
  • Wrong-way-round (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GoRK ( 10018 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @05:43PM (#17305594) Homepage Journal
    I believe the instructions clearly indicate that you should wear the strap *and* not let go.

    I fail to see how the strap could break and CAUSE the remote to leave the users hand. In fact, I don't see how it would even be possible for the strap to break under normal use while the user was holding the remote properly.

    I do see how the remote leaving the user's hand (because it's thrown at full force) could CAUSE the strap to break.
  • Re:Slashdot Bias (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Chibi Merrow ( 226057 ) <mrmerrow AT monkeyinfinity DOT net> on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @06:01PM (#17305864) Homepage Journal
    Here's the difference: In normal use (ie: sitting on a desk without even interacting with it), my laptop battery in the G4 notebook (which I haven't gotten replaced yet) sitting next to me could explode. Right now. Only by flailing around like an idiot and then letting go of my remote can my strap break on my remote. The first one is Sony's fault since the outcome has nothing to do with how the user uses the system. The second one is the user's fault since it has EVERYTHING to do with how a user uses a system.
  • by Laur ( 673497 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @06:34PM (#17306282)
    From a practical perspective there is absolutely no reason to serve coffee at a tissue-destroying temperature.
    From a practical perspective, if you spill something hot on yourself, you probably shouldn't just let it sit there for 90 seconds. Even if the coffee temperature was reduced, the woman would still be seriously burned. Any hot food (or anything hot, really) has the capacity to burn, yet people still manage to eat and drink hot things regularly without serious injury. Did you miss the statistic that only 1 in 24 million people a year complained about the coffee being too hot? The other millions apparently could deal with it just fine.

    The argument that people like hot coffee makes so [sic] sense since no one can drink coffee at that temperature without suffering serious burns. No one! People have to wait before drinking, and time of waiting represents exposure to a hazard, since any spill will scald them.
    So what? Pretty much all heated food or drink is prepared and usually served at temperatures higher than it can be immediately consumed. If McDonald's hands you fresh french fries which just came out of the fryer they will likely burn you too if you try to eat them immediately. Most people are smart enough to let hot food cool down before eating or drinking it, or if they do manage to burn themselves they don't blame others for their own mistakes.
  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Moofie ( 22272 ) <lee AT ringofsaturn DOT com> on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @06:39PM (#17306346) Homepage
    She was trying to take the lid off the cup of coffee. That doesn't strike me as using the coffee in a non-designed manner.
  • by Delirium Tremens ( 214596 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @07:03PM (#17306660) Journal
    The suit is misstating the facts. It inversed cause and effect. The truth is

    the remote left the user's hand and caused the wrist strap to break.

    not

    the wrist strap broke and caused the remote to leave the user's hand (from the article)

    Actually, since the remote has no will of its own, the only actor here is the user. And the real fact is that

    the user let go of the remote and caused the wrist strap to break.

    But then, if it is the user who is the cause of the problem, it is really not Nitendo's fault. There wouldn't be much of a lawsuit.
  • by crvtec ( 921881 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @07:15PM (#17306826) Homepage
    Obligatory bash.org quote:

    The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
  • Re:Wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cfulmer ( 3166 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @07:26PM (#17306960) Journal
    What regulation? I'm unaware of any government agency that regulates the temperature at which restaurants can serve coffee. The National Coffee Ass'n of the USA suggests serving coffee at 180-195 degrees.

    Exactly how hot do you think this coffee was? You can pour boiling water over your arm and it won't cause 3rd degree burns in well under a second. A person can drink 180 degree coffee 'fairly soon' (within about 5-10 minutes) of being served it, as long as they don't put it into a thermos or anything.

    There's an article debunking your view here:

    http://www.overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban_legends_ and_stella_liebe.html [overlawyered.com]

    You've also obviously never burned the roof of your mouth on a pizza.

  • by electrosoccertux ( 874415 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @08:14PM (#17307472)
    When you've just gotten into an accident, and spilled the cofee all over yourself, and it has spilled onto your jeans, what are you supposed to do to remove it?

    Point is McD's coffee was sold ~190F. ALL other resteraunts and fast foods server theirs ~140F. What's more, studies showed most people who buy their coffee like to drink it NOW, not after it's cooled down 50F.

    There's simply no point in serving your coffee 50 degrees hotter than EVERYBODY else does, especially when that 50 degrees means a third degree burn.
  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by h4ck7h3p14n37 ( 926070 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @08:44PM (#17307742) Homepage

    People drink Starbucks because they use quality beans, don't abuse those beans too badly and then don't drastically overuse them.

    I call bullshit; Starbucks coffee tastes terrible! People go to Starbucks because there's one on practically every corner, there's furniture to sit on, wireless Internet access and very good brand awareness.

  • by bakana ( 918482 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @09:56PM (#17308302)
    Your point would be valid if the median were people letting go and tossing their wiimote around the house. I think the reason we hear about these cases is because they aren't the median, they are the exception. You don't hear on the news, people bought this product took it home and it worked okay. You hear 5 people out of the X amount that bought this product so happen to get hurt, etc. etc. Think about it this way, baseball bats are meant to hit baseballs. Everyone once and a while an idiot swings the bat and lets it go. The bat flies into the stands and hits someone, I'm obviously talking about non professional players. Just because there are a lot of morons that might do that, it doesn't make it normal use. Normal use is using a product as instructed. There is no instruction that comes with the Wii that says, let go of the Wiimote. There is a lot of warnings about not letting go of the product. So since when is doing the opposite of what the company instructs you to do considered normal use.
  • Re:Knock it off. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RockModeNick ( 617483 ) on Tuesday December 19, 2006 @10:58PM (#17308648)
    Though I agree with the parent that they use good beans, I have yet to have a cup of coffie from starbucks that was not horribly scortched. Every single cup I've had there was burned, at every starbucks I've been too.
  • by iamhassi ( 659463 ) on Wednesday December 20, 2006 @02:20AM (#17309624) Journal
    "...and since it is a very new console, that relatively few people could get, there were tons of videos coming up from the 'lucky few' and some of them caught this failure."

    How many hours of video did they have to record before catching the 10 seconds of video of the strap breaking? You're telling me they just had a camcorder recording non-stop for 10, 20, 30, etc hours, every time they played the Wii? I don't buy it.

    I think the videos are fake too, I have a Wii and I don't think I could break the strap no matter how hard I flailed my arms around. It's just not going to get full force from a swinging arm within the ~6 inches of the strap length. It'd fly the length of the strap and snap back into my hand.
  • C'mon mods (Score:3, Insightful)

    by snowwrestler ( 896305 ) on Wednesday December 20, 2006 @02:35AM (#17309666)
    I know you think it's dumb that people are suing Nintendo, but I'm certainly not a troll.

    From a practical perspective, if you spill something hot on yourself, you probably shouldn't just let it sit there for 90 seconds.


    Hot liquids are aborbed by clothing and held against the skin. The time to remove the burning agent is the time it would take to remove your wet clothes. How quickly can you get out of soaked jeans in a car seat?

    Real world example: a few months ago my wife scalded herself while making tea when a glass pitcher broke. She was wearing boxer shorts. The front of both thighs received first degree burns that healed in a week, with one small exception: where the tea splashed onto the hem of the shorts. In that small area the burn was second degree, even though she took them off as fast as she could. (no, we did not sue anyone :-))

    Even if the coffee temperature was reduced, the woman would still be seriously burned. Any hot food (or anything hot, really) has the capacity to burn, yet people still manage to eat and drink hot things regularly without serious injury. Did you miss the statistic that only 1 in 24 million people a year complained about the coffee being too hot? The other millions apparently could deal with it just fine.


    This is just not true; temperature makes a difference. In kids for example a second degree burn is caused by 140F water in one second; at 130F it takes 10 seconds; at 120F it takes several minutes. All three temperatures will taste "hot". Furthermore the point is not how often accidents occur--that is affected more by cup/lid design than anything else, probably. The point is the potential severity of any individual accident.

    So what? Pretty much all heated food or drink is prepared and usually served at temperatures higher than it can be immediately consumed. If McDonald's hands you fresh french fries which just came out of the fryer they will likely burn you too if you try to eat them immediately. Most people are smart enough to let hot food cool down before eating or drinking it, or if they do manage to burn themselves they don't blame others for their own mistakes.


    Again, the point is not whether something is hot or not, the point is exactly how hot it is. We're certainly advanced enough as a society to consider situations in terms of actual temperatures.

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Working...