Posted By JEFFREY SMITH Just read an article in the Mirror today about sound levels in iPODS. What does everyone think? This guy is suing over the POSSIBILITY of his hearing being hurt rather than actually being hurt! If this goes through, can't wait for Sony to be taken to the cleaners. Having said that, this should be thrown right out as anything potentially has the possibility of harm. If it does go through, I think the courts will be jammed full of persons making unfounded claims. Opinions and apologies if I jam up the website!!

Posted By Adrian Watson The courts won't wear it; this is the problem with plueral plaques. In most cases they exist but don't cause injury. Without injury there is no claim! Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Fornhelper I appreciate where you're coming from Ron but have you tried to tell a 13 - 16 year old with an i-Pod blasting their hearing to oblivion to be responsible?? Somehow the explanation of long term noise induced hearing loss doesn't wash with them and companies like Sony should be more responsible and take into account their market when developing such products. Surely a 'safe noise limit' could have been incorporated into these devices when they were developed. Re-walkmans: they were less harmful as usually the batteries died by the time you had listened to one side of The Clash on your cassette tape !!! FH

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Neil I think that iPod has become a generic term for personal MP3 players, much like all vacuum cleaners are 'hoovers'. Paul

Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH anything that produces a noise that goes directly into the ear will in the long term cause some damage, so what are we meant to do? how can you as the designer control or even police it, common sence must come into the equasion some time, owner beware. 98% of owners of mp3/4's are for private use. regards

Posted By Fornhelper John, Did you purchase them in France? As I read that the French Govt demanded that Apple (not Sony ...sorry Neil !!!!) reduced their noise output capacity to below 100 dB FH

Posted By Merv Newman The original walkmans could be turned up to about 120 dBa. I remember we refused to employ a 23 year old man becuase whe was already almost stone deaf. HE blamed it on the walkman. Since that time the maximum noise levels were limited to about 110 and health warnings were supplied. Walkmans could not be connected to the internet so there was no such thing as a "hack" Suggest that if you are buying an mp3 as a present you make sure that the only earphones supplied are the "limiters"

Posted By A. L. Ure Over the last 20 years or so I have owned about a dozen personal stereos of different types. The first one was a Binatone about the size and weight of a housebrick. As I write this my iPod Nano is on the desk in front of me. So is my desktop computer, complete with hard drive, CD drive - and headphone socket. In my backpack is my laptop, complete with hard drive, CD drive - and headphone socket. On my laptop is iTunes, with about 20 Gigabytes of music on it. Last week I flew long haul, 17 hours in an aircraft with a seat equipped with In Flight Entertainment, - and a headphone socket. My three hi-fi systems at home are all fitted with headphone sockets, including the Rotel amplifier which I often listen to with a pair of Sennheiser headphones. 1.Dave Wilson is correct. An attempt was made to pursue the same action against Sony when the original Walkman models came out. It didn't go anywhere. 2.I interpret this action as another example of completely cynical misuse of the US legal system for one reason only - money. 3. If the action is taken seriously by the courts (which I am sure it won't be as the claimant, John Kiel Patterson, is not claiming for any actual damage but for the 'potential' for the unit to cause damage - eh?)that means I could then file a class action suit in the US against Compaq, Toshiba, Sony, Aiwa, Denon, Rotel and presumably Sennheiser. Oh and let's throw in Malaysian Airlines. And Emirates and BA as I fly them a lot as well. Pathetic.