Mikey Campbell
Consumers who purchased a Nike+ FuelBand between 2012 and 2015 might be eligible for a small payment from Nike after the sports brand, alongside co-defendant Apple, agreed to settle a class action suit alleging the companies falsely advertised the device's health tracking capabilities.
Disclosure: The author of this report is potentially eligible for payment as a member of the class.
Under agreed upon terms reached in June, Nike will dish out up to $2.4 million to customers who purchased a FuelBand product anytime between Jan. 19, 2012 and June 17, 2015 to settle a class action suit first leveled against itself and Apple in 2013. Although it was named as a defendant, Apple bears no responsibility or liability for attorneys' fees or costs.
Plaintiffs, led by class representative Carolyn Levin, allege Nike's erstwhile FuelBand is unable to live up to advertisements touting the ability to accurately track calorie burn, steps and overall activity represented a conceptual "NikeFuel" readings. The suit claims both Nike and Apple knew of these deficiencies yet continued to sell the device to an unsuspecting public.
According to attorneys representing the class, the companies misled consumers by promoting FuelBand in stores, television, online and elsewhere. Apple, for example, sold various FuelBand models in its stores and only stopped sales in March. Since FuelBand was allegedly never capable of performing advertised tracking functions, Nike is also in breach of warranty, the suit asserts.
Notices were sent out to potential class members on Friday via email, providing instructions on how to file settlement claims for either a $15 payment or $25 gift card redeemable at Nike retail and online stores. Those notified also have the option to object or exclude themselves from the settlement.
A fairness hearing is scheduled for Nov. 4 to discuss settlement terms, attorneys' fees and expenses and an award for the class representative. More information can be found through the settlement's website.
Related to the case is Apple's stable of engineers and other employees previously attached to Nike. Fitness guru Jay Blahnik, who consulted on the creation of FuelBand, came on board in 2013 and was later revealed to be a key player in the development of Apple Watch's health tracking functions. Other recent hires include two engineers from Nike's now defunct FuelBand team.
Apple and Nike share a close working relationship after partnering on multiple health related hardware and software solutions dating back to the Nike+iPod sensor kit from 2006. Apple CEO Tim Cook is a known early adopter and even touted FuelBand's capabilities prior to Apple Watch's debut.
AppleInsider Staff
Malcolm Owen
Oliver Haslam
Andrew O'Hara
Wesley Hilliard
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
27 Comments
What were the claims that it failed to meet and how/why? Why was Apple involved as a denfendent (versus someone like Walmart who presumably also marketed the band)? Aren't these questions that'd be an important component and chance for elaboration in this article? If anything, I'm way curious now
What were the claims that it failed to meet and how/why? Why was Apple involved as a denfendent (versus someone like Walmart who presumably also marketed the band)? Aren't these questions that'd be an important component and chance for elaboration in this article?
If anything, I'm way curious now
Trying to answer your first question, according to the article and the link in the article:
"The lawsuit claims that Nike and Apple engaged in violations of consumer protection laws in connection with the Nike+ FuelBand. More specifically, the lawsuit alleges, among other things, that false and/or misleading statements were made regarding the Nike+ FuelBand’s ability to accurately track calories, steps, and NikeFuel, and that there were breaches of the warranty terms of the Nike+ FuelBand. Nike and Apple deny the claims in the lawsuit and maintain that they did nothing wrong or illegal."
So it was not accurate enough to live up to its marketed claims. According to the filing.
Trying to answer your second question maybe it is because there was a closer relationship between Apple and Nike than say Walmart?
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1672688/apple-s-tim-cook-on-why-the-nike-fuelband-works-and-google-glass-doesn-t
Also some of the folks that worked on the Nike Fuel Band went on to work at Apple, perhaps on the Apple Watch. Not that it has anything to do with this law suit in particular:
http://************/2013/09/27/apple-hires-one-of-nikes-top-fuel-band-designers-to-work-on-wearable-devices/
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/08/apple-nike-fuelband-hires/
EDIT: for some reason it won't let me post the 9to5mac article properly, so just replace the stars with 9to5mac
EDIT #2: both those above links were also mentioned in the article at appleinsider. My fault.
[quote name="TechLover" url="/t/187359/nike-apple-agree-to-2-4m-settlement-in-suit-over-false-fuelband-claims-apple-to-pay-nothing#post_2752581"]Trying to answer your first question, according to the article and the link in the article: [COLOR=333333]"The lawsuit claims that Nike and Apple engaged in violations of consumer protection laws in connection with the Nike+ FuelBand. More specifically, the lawsuit alleges, among other things, that false and/or misleading statements were made regarding the Nike+ FuelBand’s ability to accurately track calories, steps, and NikeFuel, and that there were breaches of the warranty terms of the Nike+ FuelBand. Nike and Apple deny the claims in the lawsuit and maintain that they did nothing wrong or illegal."[/COLOR] [COLOR=333333]So it was not accurate enough to live up to its marketed claims. According to the filing.[/COLOR] [COLOR=333333]Trying to answer your second question m[/COLOR][COLOR=333333]aybe it is because there was a closer relationship between Apple and Nike than say Walmart?[/COLOR] [URL=http://www.fastcodesign.com/1672688/apple-s-tim-cook-on-why-the-nike-fuelband-works-and-google-glass-doesn-t]http://www.fastcodesign.com/1672688/apple-s-tim-cook-on-why-the-nike-fuelband-works-and-google-glass-doesn-t[/URL] Also some of the folks that worked on the Nike Fuel Band went on to work at Apple, perhaps on the Apple Watch. Not that it has anything to do with this law suit in particular: [URL=http:/2013/09/27/apple-hires-one-of-nikes-top-fuel-band-designers-to-work-on-wearable-devices/]http://************/2013/09/27/apple-hires-one-of-nikes-top-fuel-band-designers-to-work-on-wearable-devices/[/URL] [URL=http://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/08/apple-nike-fuelband-hires/]http://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/08/apple-nike-fuelband-hires/[/URL] EDIT: for some reason it won't let me post the 9to5mac article properly, so just replace the stars with 9to5mac EDIT #2: both those above links were also mentioned in the article at appleinsider. My fault. [COLOR=333333] [/COLOR] [/quote] So? Tim Cook said he liked the FuelBand and maybe in his capacity as a Nike board member it's relevant, but nothing done at Apple has any consequence on Nike's FuelBand design and performance. Apple was merely a retailer for this device and they did nothing wrong in that capacity. That's like trying to sue the Apple Store because Microsoft Office is a steaming puddle of yesterday dogfood gravy. Besides Tim Cook's quote is clearly paving the way for the Apple Watch, and not an endorsement of the FuelBand. The only reason Apple's included, was the plaintiff's hope they could somehow convince a weak minded judge or jury to ignore simple logic, and multiply their cash. What they should have been doing is suing their delivery doctor for incorrectly identifying the birth defects that later caused them to buy a FuelBand, + any wealthy person with the last name Brown for not inventing a time Delorean capable of preventing their parents from making the criminal mistake of mixing their shoddy DNA, resulting in this future, tragic FuelBand purchase. [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/61243/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
I might be very wrong, but from my understanding you're wrong on two things here.
1- Apple cooperated with Nike on the creation of that device
2- Apple communicated on that, giving the general public the idea that it was better than it really was
In any case, I don't care. I did not get a fuelband, this thing felt like a gimmick, and I had already been burned by the Apple Nike+ sensor which blowed. I'm much more happy with my ?Watch.
Fair disclosure: I have no legal expertise. I am an Apple shareholder. Although there are no monetary penalties suffered by Apple, there appears to be sufficient circumstantial evidence of Tim Cook's involvement with Nike's FuelBand to merit his dismissal as Apple CEO. This case involves exceedingly poor judgement by Tim Cook.