Nintendo Slapped With Wiimote Strap Lawsuit Once Again 356
GameCyteSean writes "GameCyte is reporting that a new class-action lawsuit has challenged Nintendo's Wiimote straps once more. Interestingly, the suit was filed by the same lawyer who led the original 2006 attempt, and now argues that Nintendo hid records of broken TVs from the Consumer Product Safety Commission. From the article: 'This doesn't seem like a spurious accusation, either. Attached to the court filing (PDF) as a matter of public record is the very evidence Nintendo allegedly tried to hide: actual, internal Nintendo documents (PDF) where customer service reps received complaints of cracked televisions and broken Wiimote straps — and the corresponding Monthly Reports that Nintendo was compelled to file with the CPSC as part of their agreement.'"
Get a life (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, if you break your TV with a remote, its your fault.
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Funny)
This is how I picture the origins of the lawsuit: Some guy is playing a Star Wars game. He wants to make Obi-Wan do the force throw thing with his lightsaber, knowing that Obi-Wan's saber will fly back to him. So, he figures that if you need to swing the Wiimote to swing the lightsaber, logically, you must also throw the Wiimote to throw the lightsaber, and it, like the lightsaber, will return to his hand. Unfortunately, physics rears its ugly head, and he discovers that this is not the case, and decides that Nintendo owes him a new TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Funny)
This is how I picture the origins of the lawsuit: Some guy is playing a Star Wars game. He wants to make Obi-Wan do the force throw thing with his lightsaber, knowing that Obi-Wan's saber will fly back to him. So, he figures that if you need to swing the Wiimote to swing the lightsaber, logically, you must also throw the Wiimote to throw the lightsaber, and it, like the lightsaber, will return to his hand. Unfortunately, physics rears its ugly head, and he discovers that this is not the case, and decides that Nintendo owes him a new TV.
That makes more sense. My first reaction was he was playing a porn game and got too excited.
Posting AC so my wife won't hit me.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Get a life (Score:4, Funny)
He is probably that guy who built the robot wife from the story yesterday.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I don't think posting AC is going to help because you're the only one on slashdot that:
a) Has a wife
b) Has a wife that reads slashdot
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It all started when he was a little kid and he dropped his ice cream. His mommy immediately gave him another one to make him quit crying.
To make him "quit" crying? If didn't assure your child that you would be getting him another ice cream immediately after he dropped his first one, you're a pretty goddamn horrible parent.
Look, I'm all about teaching responsibility and consequences of your actions, but why are you punishing a child for an accident? If the child purposefully dropped it you'd have a point, but if I dropped my ice cream, I'd get my wallet out and buy another one.
If you told your child to go to the person at the counter crying
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Look, I'm all about teaching responsibility and consequences of your actions,
No, you're not.
but why are you punishing a child for an accident?
There's a huge difference between punishing him and not buying him a replacement.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
More simple example: Yes Son, you dropped your ice cream. Take it as a lesson that next time you have an ice cream, you'll stop running around with
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your point is that accidents happen and we will give exemptions for them. In my household, accidents happen and you learn to be more careful so that they don't happen again.
No, my point is teaching that when you have an accident, you need to brush it off and try again. It's important to explain to them that the ice cream isn't free, that you're spending money, and to be careful. If the kid threw the ice cream on the ground, or was running around carrying the ice cream, that's another story, but kids have poor motor coordination. Accidents happen for no fault of their own.
If I'm buying a kid ice cream outside the house, and he accidentally drops it, I make him clean it up an
Re:Get a life (Score:4, Funny)
Good point. You should also make sure they pay you back for that second ice cream and charge them a reasonable interest rate until they do, compounded daily of course. That way if they don't have the required funds in the piggy bank when they get home they will be saddled with debt. I wouldn't recommend prepossessing anything of theirs as collateral, that would be cruel, just string them along with minimal payments and subtle threats until you've made enough money to put them through college. Then they'll understand the American way of easy credit.
Damn, we're gonna be great parents.
Re: (Score:2)
I use a projector on a solid cement wall... maybe that's the answer for these people. At least it will cost Nintendo less to replace controllers than to replace LCD/Plasma TVs.
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps, although it would seem the average /. nerd isn't very susceptible to jokes.
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Interesting)
Say what you will about jocks, but they probably have a better practical grasp on the behavior of bodies in real-world space, and the coordination to avoid tossing a Wiimote into a television set.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Conversely, they may also be more prone to throwing the thing intentionally. I've been to Superbowl parties and seen everything from mini-hotdogs to half-full cans of beer thrown at the TV on a bad play.....
Re:Get a life (Score:5, Funny)
Seriously, if you break your TV with a remote, its your fault.
I disagree. Clearly my inability to hold on to a remote with my greasy cheetos-covered hand is a fundamental online rights issue. Hence the tags for this story.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not that they just whipped the remote at the T.V, it's the fact that they all had it attached to their wrist so even if you let go, it won't go anywhere (ideally). The lawsuit is over the wristband itself being nothing more than a false sense of security.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The lawsuit is over the wristband itself being nothing more than a false sense of security.
And I have to admit, that's always been the most surprising part to me, that the wiimote strap was under-engineered instead of over. Nintendo doesn't usually slouch on the durability of their products. There's tons of videos out there where the wiimote will hit a tv, a wall, the floor, etc, but the wiimote always works just fine even after multiple impacts. I saw one where some frat boy was playing Wii Baseball and
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You can sure as hell do more damage by a golf driver going flying at like 60MPH! I don't think the most uncoordinated humans on the planet should be embarrassing themselves by suing over letting their wiimote go.
When I was 14, my dad thought it would be a good idea to give me some golf lessons. I lived in Alabama at the time, and was practicing with some practice balls. It was really hot, and my hands got really sweaty, and my club slipped out of my hand.
Unbeknownst to me, my dad just so happened to step outside at this time. The club flew over the fence and smacked him in the side of his head. Ouch.
I have *never* had a wiimote do the same thing. In fact, the Wiimote has a pretty good grip, I think.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You probably should have sued the golf club manufacturers for not having a restraining strap and a warning not to let it hit people in the face...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the strap was designed so you wouldn't accidentally drop the thing.
Not so you can hurl it.
An analogy that fits would be something like a climbing rope versus a bungee cord.
One is made for hurling your self from a height, the other is made for saving you from an accidental fall.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Every Wii game displays a caution screen upon loading to warn the player to use the strap in order to avoid the remote slipping from the grip during erratic movements." - wikipedia
I'm guessing the WiiMote wasn't designed to be thrown. If there's games that require throwing, you should look at who the developer was and go after the developers for requiring a WiiMote action that was not within the lines of the specs.
But of course the lawsuit won't go after the developer, they'll go after who has the deepest pockets.
Re:Get a life (Score:4, Insightful)
No, this is stupid.
The wiimote works perfectly well without any strap at all.
The strap is an extra.
The strap shouldn't even be needed.
But someone went "you know what would be a good idea for safety? Adding a little strap, sure if someone puts hundreds of pounds of pressure on it it'll break but that's better than having no strap."
then idiots who think like you come along.
I'm dubious about this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, I've dropped my Wii remote a total of once, maybe twice. And I mean I let go of it while standing idle. None of my family was confused about whether they should throw the remote, and the only ones I've had to deal with were my godchildren who liked to swing the remotes while idle, and not let go while playing.
I don't find the remotes particularly difficult to grasp, and while I have replacement straps, I still have the originals on the remotes. As much as I feel bad for anyone who accidentally threw a remote through a window, lamp, or TV, I just have difficulty believing that somehow Nintendo is to blame for this, or that they should be liable.
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:5, Informative)
Just like the idea of suing McDonald's for spilling hot coffee in your own lap, it sounds silly until you look at the pattern.
* The directions for the Wiimote encourage robust swinging of the control for various games, such as tennis, basketball, and exercise programs.
* Kids, whose coordination is not that good and whose hands are not that strong, are encouraged to play with these things. This makes such accidents far more likely.
* Nintendo had already received a number of complaints about the straps, but continued to sell the flimsy versions.
* Nintendo hid the complaints in the previous lawsuit, which is a violation of the relevant 'discovery' procedures that their own lawyers should have prevented.
* The new strap apparently also fails.
That's more than enough for a reasonable lawsuit holding Nintendo liable for destructions that they knew were not rare, and which they apparently lied about the existence of. It's not like throwing a brick: it's like a hammer with such a slick handle, it's likely to slip from your hands.
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:5, Insightful)
And just like the McDonald's coffee lawsuit, it continues to sound silly even after becoming familiar with all the facts.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hear hear! I'm so sick of the incessant and ludicrous attempts to defend that nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if it was cold enough... it would be valid.
Re: (Score:2)
When I prepare coffee, I do it with boiling water. Hence, I would expect freshly made coffee to be nearly boiling hot. So I handle it carefully until it has cooled sufficiently. That much self-preservation can be expected from anyone.
It's not like they were serving a cup of lava or molten salt...
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, of course. Doh. How do you make coffee? You boil water! Knock knock, anyone home? Fresh coffee is too hot to drink. Learning to uncover it and let it cool slightly before you drink it, and to take care with the first few drinks in particular to notice the temperature and if necessary back off and let it cool another couple degrees isn't rocket science, it's basic common sense.
At the time this occured I was working an early job and it was my habit to get a hot coffee at the drivethrough each day on my way to work. It came in a cup with cover and carrier and I would put it in its place, make sure it was stable, and then continue on my morning commute. By the time I got on down the road to the point where I stopped the car and then opened my coffee, it had cooled to just the perfect temperature to drink. And all was well.
Then this idiotic woman orders hot coffee, pours it down her pants, and sits there for a minute and a half to make sure her skin is seriously damaged, and makes bank on it. As a consequence, I and everyone else in the country suddenly found that, not just the chain that got sued, but every drive-through, would no longer serve fresh hot coffee, but instead could offer only pre-cooled coffee that was drinkable immediately.
If I had time to drink it immediately I wouldnt be in the drive-through.
I've heard all the apologetics that get trotted out everytime this is mentioned, and it's frankly disgusting. The fact is the woman did something really dumb and hurt herself, then sued. She should have been laughed out of court. Instead, she and her lawyer got a huge payday, and each and every one of the rest of us, millions I have no doubt, who day in and day out bought the same coffee and had no problems because we used common sense, got screwed.
CLearly you are unfamiliar with the case (Score:5, Informative)
If you are serving coffee that hot, you are a poor host.
You don't serve coffee at 198 degrees. That's not 'Hot' that's dangerously hot.
She did not get 'millions', she got an undisclosed amount under 500K. Probably well under 500K. She want to sue for hospital expenses. The Jury awarded 7 million, but like all lawsuits, it was appeal several times.
you think 180 degrees is drinkable immediatly? Either you haven't thought about this at all, or you have a callus for a tongue.
FYI You can ask for hotter coffee in most places.
Faux Fox News For Geeks (Score:5, Informative)
The McDonald's lawsuit - as the a Geek tells the story - has all the elements of an urban legend. "Don't bother me with the facts, son. I'm on a roll here." You sell coffee in a cheap foam take-out cup at a temperature that can put someone in the hospital for weeks or months if it spills. There had been incidents before and you know the danger. That is why McD's lost the case.
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:4, Informative)
And just like the McDonald's coffee lawsuit, it continues to sound silly even after becoming familiar with all the facts.
If you were actually familiar with the facts it would not sound silly.
The Actual Facts About The Mcdonalds' Coffee Case [lectlaw.com]
Wiki page on case [wikipedia.org]
It should also be noted that Liebeck (the woman who received the coffee burns) initially sought $20,000 to cover her $11,000 in medical expenses and that McDonald's refused and offered her $800. And also that during discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks.
Corporations are not defenseless little orphans being picked on by frivolous lawsuits. They are soul-sucking goliaths of wealth and power that would willfully break the law and/or harm people if the reward outweighed the projected risk. Granted in the McDonalds coffee case it looks like it was callous indifference that prevented them from reducing the holding temperature of their coffee despite the number of burn incidents over the years until coming to a head in the Liebeck case.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The first thing you do when you fire up a game is get a warning about using the Wiimote. At that point the most you should have done is point it at the screen and press A, not thrown it at the screen in an attempt to get the game started.
So on the one hand we have weak kids causing accidents using the remote so weakly that the weak strap breaks and on the other we have people who are so strong that they break the new strap when they're waving the remote around.
Ah, lawyers...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's INTENDED to leave my hands at a high speed in an outdoor environment.
The Wii remote is not intended to leave your hands at any speed, it is also not intended for use in an outdoor environment.
You might as well complain that the Wii remote can't be used as a kitchen utensil, despite the implied promise made by Cooking Mama.
I don't think Nintendo should be held liable for people who throw their remotes, any more than they should be liable for damages caused by other misuses, like stirring cake batter.
However, if they really have hidden evidence from the court, as they are accused of, then they should be punished for that.
Re:Hidden Evidence (Score:5, Funny)
...However, if they really have hidden evidence from the court, as they are accused of, then they should be punished for that.
Man, I can't wait for that testimonial...
"Your Honor, we do apologize, as we did try to hide evidence. We assumed the Wii was so easy to use, anyone could do it. Apparently, we we're wrong. Here is a list of those far too stupid to hold onto a plastic gaming device. Here is an example of the new version of the Wiimote. As you can see, it has the distinct shape of a beer bottle, which our research has shown..."
Re: (Score:2)
I think a better analogy would be yo-yos. They've got strings and they attach to your hand and, depending on what tricks you do with them, you can be throwing them or swinging them. Common sense says that if the string breaks and the yo-yo hits a TV or a vase, the manufacturer probably isn't liable.
It's not the same, obviously, since a Wiimote is meant to be used near a TV, but the strap is for accidents. It's not meant to protect you from yourself. Throwing the Wiimote like a fastball is just asking fo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:5, Insightful)
My camera came with a strap. If I were dangling my camera by its strap, not holding the actual camera body, and the strap broke and my camera smashed to the pavement, it would never occur to me to sue the camera manufacturer. My thoughts, after the "oh shit" would be, "I shouldn't have been doing that and should have been more careful."
Re:I'm dubious about this. (Score:4, Insightful)
This also got me thinking about guitars. The first thing a lot of guitarists do when they get a guitar is put strap locks on it. Some people feel that certain guitars have too small of strap buttons, or just in general they don't trust the ones that come on any guitar. I personally don't use locks, but have experienced and seen guitars hanging around the player by the strap, no hands, and suddenly the strap comes off and the guitar falls (I've caught mine, whew).
It's a known fact that there is a risk your guitar strap may slip off the guitar, and aftermarket strap locks address that risk. Yet I've never heard of lawsuits trying to get all guitar manufacturers, or strap manufacturers, to include strap locks or otherwise redesign the standard strap buttons on guitars or holes for buttons in the strap. I suppose some people have tried suing or filing a warranty claim for their busted guitar, but were told it was negligence, end of story. Of course, the falling guitar is usually only damaging itself, not a secondary item like the Wii remote smashing a TV, but the dollar amount of damage could be similar.
Since the Wiimote strap is not a safety device and is a convenience feature, I cannot agree that Nintendo is liable.
The way it happens (Score:5, Funny)
One of our friends brought her boyfriend over the other day.. he'd heard of the Wii but never played it, so we fired up WiiSports for him. While playing "Tennis" I watched in amusement as he hit his hand into the wall, then my coffee table, then he tripped over the recliner, then he nearly hit his girlfriend in the head. While playing "Bowling" he hit *himself* in the head with the remote. I *could* have told him that such large movements are unnecessary but that would have took away his fun, and I wouldn't be able to laugh at him beating himself up. Some people just have problems with the whole augmented-sense-of-self thing.
Re:The way it happens (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, but your friend's boyfriend should probably not be trusted with sharp objects, or to be alone in the pool and other things you don't like to see 1 year olds do. I don't care how manly you think you might be, if you can admit you have injured yourself playing a video game, you're not manly.
The Wii might be showing us who should move on to procreate and who should not for the next big step in evolution of mankind.
Re:The way it happens (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The way it happens (Score:5, Funny)
One of our friends brought her boyfriend over the other day.. he'd heard of the Wii but never played it, so we fired up WiiSports for him. While playing "Tennis" I watched in amusement as he hit his hand into the wall, then my coffee table, then he tripped over the recliner, then he nearly hit his girlfriend in the head.
Good Christ, for her sake I hope he's better in bed. Unfortunately, though, I have a feeling that's some fearsome awful sex.
Re:The way it happens (Score:5, Funny)
I put on my wizard hat...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Well, if he can't handle his Wiimote, chances are he can't handle his Weemote.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)
A lawsuit @ Nintendo because someone (or rather, plural someones) was (were) dumb enough to toss a remote hard enough to crack a television set!?...
Seriously.
WTF?
Now, if'n y'all don't mind, I have to go sue the folks who make Red Bull now, since their cans weren't shaped in a way to prevent me from dropping it on the table and accidentally soaking my laptop while absorbing the sheer chutzpah of the ambulance-chaser's commentary in the referenced article.
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm in Australia and some of us refer to the new Wiimotes with the heavily padded 'jacket' and beefy strap as Americanized Wiimotes. Sorry to you Americans who have to live amongst these people.
Re: (Score:2)
I quite like the new padded cover. It's shaped to fit the hands better when holding it like an old NES controller, though it's too big for my fiancee to hold comfortably.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that this lawsuit is stupid.
However, to play devil's advocate, the Red Bull folks don't encourage you to stand directly in front of your TV with a can in your hands, spinning and waving your arms in a rapid a
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)
Heck, but you paid money to buy the device that let's you do these things. You have probably seen friends doing it before. The wii displays a pretty clear warning screen (not skippable iirc) before each game. You have probably encountered at least once before in your life what happens when solid things are thrown into less solid things. In fact, if you seriously consider suing nintendo over this you've probably encountered at least once before what happens when a solid thing is thrown into your less solid head...
Wii Sports still safer than doing real sport (Score:2, Interesting)
The wii allows you to play golf without being hit by other player's balls.
The wii allows you to box with a friend without fracturing his head.
The wii allows you to play baseball without being hit by the bat.
Seriously, even sleeping on a mattress is dangerous. 40% of people die while sleeping. How many while playing the wii?
Re:Wii Sports still safer than doing real sport (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
No wonder American manufacturing is screwed (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies get sued because customers misuse and abuse the product to the point of breaking their own things carelessly.
I wonder what would have happen if Edison were to invent the lightbulb today:
1) The Association of Candle Manufacturers(ACM) and Gas Lamps Association(GLA) would jointly conduct a sit-in strike in front of Edison's home and plants.
2) The ACM would sue Edison for producing a product that's capable of killing someone. The OSHA conducts a raid on Edison's plant, followed by an FCC investigation.
3) The GLA lobbies congress for relief. Congresscritters DeLay and Pelosi go on record stating that Edison's electric light will result in the loss of jobs for 37,300 people directly while affecting the lives of 1.3 Million employers indirectly.
4) Edison approaches SCOTUS for relief. SCOTUS grants Edison relief stating that Progress cannot be stopped.
5) Rep Vern Buchanan and Sen. Ted Stevens together sponsor a resolution calling for a $1.3 billion bailout of the Candle Makers of USA.
5(a) The GLA sues the US Govt for excluding them from the bailout.
5(b) Hillary Clinton includes GLA into the bailout with a silent slip-in into a spending bill.
6) The FCC commissioner rules that Electricity is dangerous to health and that electric lamps are prone to be broken. Forces Edison to include HUGE warnings on each packet.
7) Edison sets up DC stations and powers Congress and Senate with electric lamps to show the congress the progress that can be made. he claims it can be always "Day" for congress.
8) Congress critters not used to working long hours, silently include a bill that forces states to individually certify that 10,000 volts of DC will not kill a man for Edison's lamps to be sold. 43 states refuse. Alaska's Palin approves Edison's lamps and charges oil companies with paying for same. Orders are sealed.
9) The children of GLA makers hold a massive rally in Washington demanding schooling and lunch relief.
10) Bush calls upon Congress to pass a law that outlaws Electric lamps under intense pressure from lobbyists.
11) Obama calls Bush a roadblock to progress and exhorts congress to reject such a law.
12) A GLA dealer in MN holds a BIG rally announcing providing free gas lamps for all who sign Edison is a public enemy.
13) Edison is sued in Alaska by 100 residents who claim that throwing the lamp on the floor caused them injuries. The case is taken up by FOX News and O'reilly states Edison is a pinhead.
14) Edison beats the lawsuit at tremendous cost.
15) AIG Refuses to extend insurance cover to Edison under pressure from congress.
16) Edison renounces US citizenship and migrates to China.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And yet compact fluorescents are moving onto the market with little resistance.
Because the same people who have been making incandescent light bulb are also making compact fluorescent bulbs. That wouldn't have been the case for the candle to light bulb transition.
If you need a car analogy, GM workers do not protest or resist the newest GM models. They, however, do protest Japanese imports, if they can.
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't have to tell people to not throw things (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shouldn't have to tell people to not throw thin (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm surprised we haven't seen any court cases by people who wiped their asses so hard the paper ripped and they got shit on their hands.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I can't pull myself clear of the ground on the bracket - be it for lighting, TVs or aerials (I mount up some pretty big aerials), then it's not strong enough. I haven't come across a plasma TV that weighs more than 100kg yet, although I don't doubt they exist.
Re: (Score:2)
I broke my TV! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Shouldn't have to tell people to not throw thin (Score:5, Insightful)
I am left wondering if there would be any lawsuits if Nintendo had decided not to include the strap in the first place. Imagine a Wiimote with no strap and clear instructions that you not let go when making motions. If somebody tried to sue, Nintendo could say that the customer was duly warned and either a) let go or b) waved too forcefully.
Instead, they included a strap just in case and see where that has got them...
Shouldn't have told them to use the strap (Score:2, Interesting)
Sure a bad strap is worse than no strap at all. It's not that the people are trying to throw it, they are using the strap to hold it in their hand, leaving their fingers free to move more quickly on the buttons. That's what the strap is for. They are using it as designed, then the strap breaks, and it has a consequence that should have been foreseen by Nintendo.
If somebody were selling deep-fry units, and included handles on the side, but the handles occasionally broke off if the unit were lifted while f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Huh? I think you might be using the wiimote wrong, becuase holding onto it properly in no way slows down my playing. I can't even imagine how you would hold it in a way that would:
1) enable you to click a button faster
2) still allow you to utilize the motion capabilities
3) not prevent you access to other buttons
4) make it even remotely likely for the wiimote to go flying out of your hand at all,
Re: (Score:2)
If I were Nintendo, I would settle and offer helmets, elbow pads and bibs to anyone who was part of the suit.
Houston, Wii Have a Problem. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've always loved reading through http://www.wiihaveaproblem.com/ [wiihaveaproblem.com] which is a collection of articles and photos of damage (personal or to TVs/Windows/tables/lights) while playing Wii.
Strapless (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder if this scenario could have existed if Nintendo had decided not to include a strap on the remote in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly what I was about to post. This idiot lawsuit exists because Nintendo "knew about the problem, and didn't take sufficient measures".
If they invented kitchen knives in today's legal eta, they would have a 100kg enclosure (securely bolted to the bench) that allowed only enough room for the insertion of vegetables, and had a system to detect human fingers before allowing actuation of the blade.
COME ON! GIVE IT UP! (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously. Class action suites against ANY company (even microsoft) are horrible!! The person with the "broken tv set" ends up getting $0.02 while the lawyers end up making $2 million+. Attorneys end up looking for smoking guns to make quick bucks. One could argue that the attorneys are fighting for the rights of the people and helping to protect us from further harm. But if this was the honest truth then everyone who had a broken TV or files part of the lawsuit should get a new TV out of it instead of giving all the money to the attorneys and pennies to those who were wrongfully harmed.
Re: (Score:2)
The people with the "broken tv set" shouldn't end up with $.02 they should get a helmet, elbow pads and a bib. Maybe some adult diapers too.
That's not the point of class actions. (Score:3, Insightful)
The point of class actions is to tell companies to stop doing something harmful to the public in the only language they know how: money.
some messages brought to companies through lawsuits:
"don't sell cars that explode at the slightest touch" .. and many, many more.
"don't dump toxic waste on, near, or into waterways servicing residential land"
"make your QA better on safety equipment"
"don't put cameras in bathrooms"
"don't help the government spy on us without a warrant"
Drunks (Score:3, Insightful)
Wii games seem to be played almost exclusively by little kids, old ladies, and drunk college guys who spent too much goddamn money on a giant ass fucking TV instead of paying student loans, and feel constantly entitled.
This is why WiiBeerPong (or whatever it's called now) was brilliant in its identification of a market niche.
You also don't need a lot of people to agree to fault Nintendo for a class action lawsuit. A lawyer just needs a couple of guys and the reasonable belief that he'll get paid, and he can stir up a lawsuit on behalf of everyone who broke something without their consent.
a warning label would have saved them money (Score:3, Interesting)
Isn't the problem that these things slipped out of peoples' hands while they were using it as they were supposed to?
Maybe it's just because I finished up a torts class, but it's not a huge stretch of the imagination to anticipate wiimotes flying all over the place and breaking things.
And as stupid as tort law seems when someone say, throws a wiimote into a television screen and blames Nintendo, there's an easy precaution. Nintendo could have put some clear warnings along with the wiimotes, something like "be careful not to let these fly out of your hands and break the tv, window, mirrors, or your commemorative plate collection."
The two stupid assumptions cancel each other out in tort law. It's assumed that people pay attention to these ridiculously inclusive warnings, and it's assumed that a manufacturer is responsible when people slap themselves in the face with a product (if there weren't instructions not to.)
THAT is why you find things like labels on cans of peanuts that read: "warning: contains peanuts."
Re:a warning label would have saved them money (Score:4, Informative)
And as stupid as tort law seems when someone say, throws a wiimote into a television screen and blames Nintendo, there's an easy precaution. Nintendo could have put some clear warnings along with the wiimotes, something like "be careful not to let these fly out of your hands and break the tv, window, mirrors, or your commemorative plate collection."
You obviously don't own a Wii. Every game I've played has a goofy little screen that comes up when you start the game with a picture of a guy whacking his tv and the person behind him with the wiimote and a warning saying not to let the thing come out of your hand.
Re: (Score:2)
The harder you swing it, the more points you get!!
Huge, "I'll show 'em" size swings are to be encouraged when playing, especially after a couple of beers. If you have to wreck the house while trying, no problem.
Personal responsibility is soooo 1980s.
Get a grip (Score:5, Funny)
Nintendo is being sued because people are too stupid to hold on to a chunk of plastic? These people need to get a grip.
Wii is a great device! (Score:2)
Flying objetcs (Score:3, Funny)
Hey, you all knew it was coming.
All I can think of is (Score:3, Funny)
Bad functional design, if you ask me (Score:2)
I wonder if the problem would have been lessened by giving the Wiimote some texture, a properly curved gripping surface, or rubber sides. Real remote controls tend to get that kind of treatment, and we don't even whip those around in the air [often].
Straight, flat, smooth, glossy plastic is a pretty bad way of designing something that's meant to be moved around a lot. But, hey, it looks really cool in promo shots, and looking cool is half of what sells stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no problem if people hold onto the remote. The problem is when people hurl them.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if the problem would have been lessened by giving the Wiimote some texture, a properly curved gripping surface, or rubber sides. Real remote controls tend to get that kind of treatment, and we don't even whip those around in the air [often].
Straight, flat, smooth, glossy plastic is a pretty bad way of designing something that's meant to be moved around a lot. But, hey, it looks really cool in promo shots, and looking cool is half of what sells stuff.
They thought about that, but realized they would have been sued anyway for infringement of something that resembled a Kung-Fu Grip(TM).
In related news, Mr. Joe (a.k.a. "G.I.") was not available for comment. It was rumored that the only kung-fu grip he has left is the one he's trying to keep on his bowels.
Original strap strength (Score:5, Interesting)
When I got my Wii early on, I ordered the new straps. They arrived, I dutifully installed them, and in the spirit of scientific inquiry, I set about trying to break the old strap.
You know what? Those things are tough. I tried a bunch of different ways to snap it and failed. (I did not resort to scissors.) Anyone who's breaking that accidentally is doing something very, very wrong.
When the padded sleeves were released I got two of those as well, dutifully put them on, and after about half an hour of gaming remembered that I was allergic to silicone. Sleeve is removed now. I wonder if I could sue Nintendo for it.
Hurling Wiimotes (Score:3, Informative)
I've had a Wii since the release date. My whole family has been playing Wii games since then and have NEVER hurled the WiiMote. I think the only way someone could accidentlly hurl the WiiMote is if substantial quantities of alcohol were involved.
skimmed the court filing and internal docs (Score:3, Informative)
Seems if anything at least Nintendo is going to get burned here:
Despite actual knowledge of hundreds of incidents involving broken televisions over time and subsequent to December 27, 2006, Defendant failed to report the existence of even a single "Incident" to the CPSC in its Monthly Reports to the CPSC. Defendant systematically and intentionally was untruthful in its representations to the CPSC, see Exhibit 8 attached hereto.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You would think a person would be almost be too embarrassed to sue over this.
Re: (Score:2)