Posted on 05/09/2009 9:58:48 AM PDT by SubMareener
If you bought a Bluetooth headset between June 30, 2002 and February 19, 2009, the settlement of a class action lawsuit may affect your rights.
The Settlement resolves claims in a class action lawsuit that Bluetooth headsets manufactured by Motorola, Inc.; Plantronics, Inc.; or GN Netcom, Inc. / "Jabra" (“Defendants”) create a risk of hearing loss. The lawsuit also claims Defendants acted wrongfully when they did not warn consumer of that risk, if it exists. The Defendants deny their Bluetooth headsets are unsafe or that they did anything wrong. Defendants are settling only to avoid the risk and expense of a trial.
If you are a member of the Settlement Class, you may do nothing and remain in the Settlement Class, exclude yourself from this class action lawsuit, object to the terms of the Settlement and/or attend a Fairness Hearing.
For more details on the Settlement, including your options and the procedures for objecting or requesting exclusion, please see the Notice.
Important Deadlines:
| EXCLUDE YOURSELF | Received no later than June 9, 2009 |
| OBJECT | Received no later than June 9, 2009 |
| ATTEND A HEARING | Notice must be received no later than June 9, 2009 |
| FAIRNESS HEARING | Fairness Hearing to be held on July 6, 2009 |
If you have questions, you may call 1-888-952-9087 toll free.
Do not contact Defendants or the Court with questions about this Settlement.
I want to object, but I am not a lawyer and am not sure what to say. Also, if several hundred other members of the "Class" were to object, it might actually have some effect. Can anyone help me on this?
Oh great. My Motorola headset barely produces enough volume for me to hear anywhere except in very quiet spaces.
I’m not sure what litigation has been leveled at headphones, wired ear plugs or other such devices, but I doubt there have been any successful suits or they wouldn’t still exist.
We have people looking for another pay day constantly.
Every time you buy a device these days, there’s some nonsensical warning. I don’t even bother to read them.
I’m a grownup. I buy merchandise knowing what the risks are.
I’ve got a Motorola Bluetooth Earpiece-—what’s supposed to be the problem with it again? This suit sounds like a shakedown.
This is why people hate lawyers. They are not all bad, but some of them are bad. Class action lawsuits, all bad.
Ain't it the truth.
We *accumulated* so many of these "class action" lawsuit settlement checks --the largest for a whopping $1.06-- I assembled 'em on a framed poster board.
It now shamelessly hangs on our Wall of Shame in the rec room right alongside William Jefferson Clinton & all other manner of assorted jackasses of renown.
Guess real Tort Reform would fix this crap, but with lawyers occupying nearly every seat in government?
We can simply pound sand for that while paying higher prices for the products we use to offset what the leeches steal.
Bottom feeders these lawyers. I am here for your RIGHTS I will protect you and see you get what you deserve.( yada yada yada). crawl back in your holes scum.
Actually, there is no indication that the ordinary class members will get anything except advice on how to avoid hearing loss.
Never mind hearing loss, they should be sued because they make people act and look stupid.
For what it is worth, I have 2 of the “offending” headsets, one for my phone, and one for my PC. This makes me a member of the class. I am not a lawyer.
If someone with some degree of legal acumen would be willing to post a reasonable boilerplate objection, I will join with others in sending it in.
I agree that this is a shakedown, and I object to attorneys earning $800,000.00 in my name, without any realistic or reasonable benefit to myself or my family, and without anyone actually having suffered any harm. The claim in this case is that the defendants didn’t properly warn people that sticking radio-operated, amplified speakers in their ears might cause hearing loss.
I further propose that all companies producing products of all kinds start putting something similar to the Surgeon General’s warning on every product of every kind. “This product might kill you or hurt you in ways we cannot imagine, particularly if you use it in ways we cannot imagine, but even if you don’t. Be warned that we did our best to make it safe, but can’t control what you do with it. Please read the owner’s manual and don’t do anything stupid. If you do, you are on your own. If you can’t use our product properly, please buy someone else’s. Good luck.”
Once this statement, or something similar, appears in large print on every single product sold everywhere, the product liability people should have less opportunity to do this sort of shakedown. This still leaves open the opportunity to recover real damages when there are real product flaws that really hurt people.
Let me guess, the same crap they hit Apple with over the ear buds being able to be played loud. Although in that case I do appreciate Apple’s response since I can now set the max volume for my kids’ iPods. But that’s a nice user feature, not something that should have to be there because of a lawsuit.
I got IIRC about $13 over the record label price fixing.
By comparison to what I've bagged, you hit the motherlode. ;^)
Now that I think of it BMG gave me my choice of 1, maybe 2 free CDs over --I think-- the same settlement. It's been a while, had totally forgot about it.
Of course I'd been a very active member of BMG since 1990 or before, usually ordering a minimum of $40 worth per month at a crack.
Both BMG & the shysters came out smelling pretty sweet, while I sold out for mere scintillas on the dollar.
What’s this all about?
As a member of the hard-of-hearing class, I note that the addition of Bluetooth or streaming to the newer hearing aids has been joyously received by a lot of us old deaf types.
If this deters any advancements in this field, I pronounce a pox on these lawyers.
Have no idea if they are making the claim that the devices played at maximum volume will damage your ears or what. But this looks to me as one that ought to be thrown out by the court.
Personal injury law has become a criminal enterprise. It is a classic racket in which a victim is identified, threatened, and then offered “protection” in the form of a “settlement”, the primary benefit of which accrues to the racketeers.
Funny thing is I just signed up on a lark when I got a link to it. I didn’t think of anything and forgot about it. Then I get a call from my mom saying there was a check for me (I was overseas, that was my home of record). The record companies did deserve what they got, and more.
I didn’t sign up for the Apple one though. I thought it was a stupid suit. My wife has a Moto headset, and we won’t be signing up for this one either.
Thanks! There has to be a reformed lawyer on the FreeRepublic. ;-)
Shoot! My Motorola Rockr’s HAVE to be toned down or they WILL hurt your ears.
This lawsuit is for all the people suffering from Borg envy.
What was that? Can you speak up? I can't hear you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.