Wed May 24, 2006 5:05 pm

Let's say that the following is completely speculative and happens in fantasy-land. (I don't wan't to get sued!)

One day in autumn 2005, Bill Gates is playing golf with his friend Steve Berman.

Steve: Did you see the new iPod nano?

Bill: Yeah yeah I did...nice little player but you know my position about iPods... We had big plans with the RIAA to impose WMA as the audio standard, by this year we were supposed to drop Red-Book audio from all CD sold in the US, replacing the content with DRMed WMA. You can imagine how the iPod and iTMS screws up our plans badly.

Steve: I guess many big-players are pissed-off by the iPod success.

Bill: Yes they are, but the iPod seems unstoppable... Even with dozens of our ghost-writers publishing negative articles about the iPod, it keeps dominating the market.

Steve: I've read that the iPod nano scratches very easily, and that some of the early batches had screens that spontaneously break.

Bill: I know about it, our ghost-writers are already trying to spread the word... but we need something bigger, we don't have a choice.

Steve: There's a guy that build a website to complain about his iPod nano screen problems and he's very vocal about it.

Bill: What if your law firm gave him a hand to help him build a class-action suit against Apple?

Steve: Yeah we could do that, but what if he doesn't want to be part of the lawsuit?

Bill: I'm %100 sure your great firm will be able to "convince" him... And by the way, you owe me that, remember that "thing" I sent you last month?

Steve: Oh right, that "thing" was very enjoyable... I guess I owe you that one...Let me see what I can do!

Thu May 25, 2006 2:32 am

Well.

Theyd have to make the 'pod out of sapphire sheets or dangerous glass to make it really scratch resistant.

On the other hand I've had an iPod video for some time and I carry it all around, it's a little scuffed, but not really having any kind of problems or anything...

But viral marketing (and anti marketing) BS is everywhere these days, isn't it?

Tue Jun 06, 2006 2:24 pm

Attorneys Representing Consumer Law Firm Address Former iPod Prospective Class Representative’s Charges

SEATTLE - (May 26, 2006) – Mike McCarthy of Nemecek & Cole, counsel for Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, LLP, one of the firms representing plaintiffs in proposed class-action suits against Apple over the excessive scratching of iPod Nanos – today responded to statements made by Jason Tomczak regarding the Apple iPod Nano litigation.

In a Web site posting earlier this week, Tomczak – who has also gone by the names Jason Ellenburg and Jason Swartzer prior to 2004 – claimed that his name was listed as the named plaintiff in the suit without his permission.

"We categorically deny that the firm purposely involved Mr. Tomczak in the Apple iPod Nano litigation without his consent," said McCarthy. "Mr. Tomczak spoke directly and exclusively with the law firm of David P. Meyer & Associates, after he posted harsh criticisms about the scratching problems with his Nano on the Internet."

According to McCarthy, after his client was notified that Mr. Tomczak did not wish to be a party to the suit after all, the firm took immediate steps to replace him as the lead plaintiff with one of the hundreds of consumers that contacted them, wanting to join the suit.

Tomczak was listed on the suit for less than a week before an amended complaint was filed, he added.

McCarthy noted that he does not know why Mr. Tomczak is making these allegations, but he finds many of Mr. Tomczak’s actions curious, including:

- On April 20, 2006, Mr. Tomczak claimed under oath that he did not know the attorneys representing consumers were planning a lawsuit when he agreed to provide his assistance, stating he thought they were authoring a report of some sort. Yet, on October 7, 2005 Mr. Tomczak sent an e-mail to an Apple Computer attorney, warning the company that the law firm was trying to "…build a class action suit against Apple…"

- Within 15 minutes of being told his name was included on the suit, Mr. Tomczak was in contact with an out-of-state attorney friend to begin a process that culminated in his pre-lawsuit demand for $750,000 to agree not to sue Hagens Berman and others. When the demand was rejected, Mr. Tomczak filed suit.

- Mr. Tomczak states in his open letter posted throughout the Internet that the attorneys brought on to defend against Mr. Tomczak’s lawsuit delved into his personal life, objecting that the questions have nothing to do with the lawsuit. The deposition transcript shows, though, that these questions focused on why Mr. Tomczak changed his name twice, and he "willing[ly]" answered over his own attorney’s objection.

- Mr. Tomczak claims that the consumer firms are threatening "that [he] be held financially responsible for their attorney’s fees and costs." That is inaccurate. Mr. Tomczak filed suit against the consumer firms and the issue of whether a prevailing party can recover attorney’s fees and costs is simply a matter of well-established legal rules and procedures. Mr. Tomczak’s legal counsel should have informed him of this.

"We have no idea why Mr. Tomczak has acted as he has, but we believe the evidence will show that Mr. Tomczak was fully aware of the consumer suit against Apple and played a willing role in its development," McCarthy said. "It seems as if he is attempting to reinvent reality, but we certainly hope that the issue will be resolved without having a negative effect on the hundreds of consumers that wish to be part of the suit."

Media Contact

Mark Firmani

Firmani + Associates

(206) 443-9357

mark@firmani.com