12-12-2008, 05:41 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 646
|
[GameCyte] Nintendo Slapped With Strap Lawsuit Once Again
Quote:
Two years ago this month, and a scant two weeks after the Nintendo Wii game console launched in the United States, plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit accused Nintendo of delivering a defective wrist strap that broke even when games were played in the intended manner — and sent Wiimotes flying right into expensive plasma TVs.
Not even Nintendo denied that the straps could use improvement. The day after the lawsuit was filed, president Satoru Iwata told the Associated Press that they were investigating the issue; eight days later, they announced a voluntary replacement program with the Consumer Product Safety Commission that has continued to this day. Problem solved, Nintendo formally denounced the lawsuit on December 20th, and watched happily as the case faded into obscurity, never to make headlines again.
Until now.
According to official court documents obtained by GameCyte, a new class-action lawsuit has challenged Nintendo’s Wiimote straps once more — and the prior 2006 case may hold the key to how it will all play out.
Filed on December 2nd by Colorado resident Molly Elvig, the new class-action suit mostly picks up right where the old left off: Wiimote Strap #3. Introduced mid-2007 by Nintendo in response to complaints that the small, sliding band designed to “lock” the wrist strap was insufficient for the task, Strap #3 is secured by a plastic locking clasp — but attorneys for Elvig allege that at this juncture, all three straps continue to fail.
Argued by the same lawyer who represented plaintiff Jon Leonard in the prior suit, most points in the complaint look remarkably similar — despite Nintendo’s encouragement of players with instructions like “Swing hard to make sure you clear the net!”, the company allegedly didn’t provide a product that could support such effort, etc. — but there is one key difference.
This time, Nintendo is also being accused of covering up evidence from the very Consumer Product Safety Commission with which they created the Wii Strap replacement program.
“Despite actual knowledge of hundreds of incidents involving broken televisions over time and subsequent to December 27, 2006,” reads the complaint, “Defendant failed to report the existence of even a single ‘Incident’ to the CPSC in its Monthly Reports to the CPSC.”
This doesn’t seem like a spurious accusation, either. Attached to the court filing as a matter of public record is the very evidence Nintendo allegedly tried to hide: actual, internal Nintendo documents 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.
You can view both in PDF form at the bottom of this page — and you don’t need to be a lawyer to see that the numbers don’t add up.
Of course, this new evidence raises some questions. If the strap replacement program was voluntary, was Nintendo legally bound to report these incidents? Does the CPSC consider a broken flatscreen to be an “incident” in the first place? Why do the internal Nintendo reports included only include incidents involving Straps #1 and #2?
For now, all parties remain largely silent.
Elvig’s attorney, Robert Kleinman, told GameCyte that “the pleadings speak for themselves.”
Nintendo said that though they were generally aware of a lawsuit, they have yet to be formally contacted regarding this case. “We have not been served with any lawsuit or other action on this matter and therefore have no comment,” a representative told GameCyte.
A CPSC spokesman had no comment at this time.
But one thing is clear: there is something that someone wants to keep quiet. Because on or about October 29th, after a two-year legal battle, Nintendo finally settled with the plaintiffs from the 2006 case.
When former plaintiff Jon Leonard was reached for comment, he told GameCyte, “All I can say legally is that it was resolved amicably.”
Elvig and attorneys are currently seeking immediate damages, corrective action to refund or replace Nintendo’s product, and a “systematic claims process” to compensate those who incurred property damage.
GameCyte is currently contacting other parties involved in the suit and analyzing documents from the 2006 case. We will bring you more on this story as it develops.
|
Source
|
|
|
Linear Mode
