# Apple gets sued for $1M over squeaky-clean doors



## smile72 (Mar 27, 2012)

> An 83-year-old was intimidated enough by Apple's technology to return an iPhone, but it was their newfangled glass doors that floored her, for real. Evelyn Paswall is suing Apple for $1 million after she smashed her face walking into the miraculously smear-and-smudge-free door at its Manhasset, Long Island store. "Apple wants to be cool and modern and have the type of architecture that would appeal to the tech crowd," Paswall's attorney told the New York Post. "But they have to appreciate the danger that this ... poses to some people."​



Source:MSNBC
http://now.msn.com/m...or-lawsuit.aspx

Wow.........


----------



## Krestent (Mar 27, 2012)

It's definitely not Apple's fault that this woman has the eyes of a bird.  Also, I really don't remember that store having a door like that at all?  IIRC it's in a mall and just has a doorway, but no door.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

If she wins Costello has to make me an Admin. That's how positive I am she won't.
@[member='Costello']


----------



## Nathan Drake (Mar 27, 2012)

Considering legal fees, Apple will probably just settle out of court for far less ($1m is pennies to them anyways), if the case doesn't get dismissed.


----------



## yuyuyup (Mar 27, 2012)

Pay up, Crapple

SMUDGY DOORS RULE clean doors are a god damn anti-pc conspiracy, ask my granny


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 27, 2012)

What a waste of a lawsuit. I think someone should just buy her a new set of glasses instead so she doesn't run into anymore doors.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

Stupid bitch should of looked where she was going.


----------



## Jugarina (Mar 27, 2012)

Did the store get a security camera video of this and/or is there any video of this taking place? I would LOVE to see this happening for a good laugh to cheer me up.


----------



## yuyuyup (Mar 27, 2012)

pyromaniac123 said:


> Stupid bitch should of looked where she was going.


I think she totally has a case seriously







dangerous


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 27, 2012)

Stupidity at its best. The case will probably get dismissed anyway I mean really who gives a shit if you walk into a door.


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 27, 2012)

While she IS old as hell and it actually isn't her fault, it certainly isn't apples fault either.
She proves she's stupid by suing apple though. What a joke. Apple isn't going to care if some frail old lady is suing them, they're gonna crush the fuck out of her.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 27, 2012)

As far as this case goes...

*Puts on sunglasses*

The outcome is *clear*...

YEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAHHHH!!!!!!!!


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 27, 2012)

I think she has a case. If people can sue stores for having wet floors, why not this?


pyromaniac123 said:


> Stupid bitch should of looked where she was going.





Krestent said:


> It's definitely not Apple's fault that this woman has the eyes of a bird.  Also, I really don't remember that store having a door like that at all?  IIRC it's in a mall and just has a doorway, but no door.



You guys are retarded. Yes, it's not their fault that she didn't see the door. But it is their fault that they don't have signs or anything on their front door other than a stupid apple sticker.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> I think she has a case. If people can sue stores for having wet floors, why not this?
> 
> 
> pyromaniac123 said:
> ...



Yes doors with magical floating apple stickers. I'm sure the door would of had handles unless they were magical floating handles.

edit:


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 27, 2012)

pyromaniac123 said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > I think she has a case. If people can sue stores for having wet floors, why not this?
> ...



Can't. Comprehend. Level of retardness. Brain. Overloading. Too much. stupidity coming from you.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> pyromaniac123 said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...



Check the post again.

edit: Full sentences too hard for you to string together?


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Can't. Comprehend. Level of retardness. Brain. Overloading. Too much. stupidity coming from you.


Seriously, it's not that hard to miss glass doors. If the reflection of the background doesn't help, the glare from the windows don't help then the door handles probably _would. _


----------



## someonewhodied (Mar 27, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> As far as this case goes...
> 
> *Puts on sunglasses*
> 
> ...


People like her are such a *pane*


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > Can't. Comprehend. Level of retardness. Brain. Overloading. Too much. stupidity coming from you.
> ...



Maybe you should accept the fact that not everybody has 20/20 vision and are able to miss easy things. Like me, I'm 23 years old, when I go to work, I'll miss counting a cow every now and then. How can I miss a 2000 pound cow that has spots all over itself like it's dalmation? Because it's a simple mistake that the human eyes/brain didn't pick up and register it for you.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > Can't. Comprehend. Level of retardness. Brain. Overloading. Too much. stupidity coming from you.
> ...



Exactly.


someonewhodied said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > As far as this case goes...
> ...



-.-


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 27, 2012)

Maybe this old hag should stay home. She's obviously is too stupid to take part in regular society.

@[member='ShadowSoldier']: Can't believe someone gave you a job with your poor eyesight.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...


Are you walking towards the cow with the intent of interacting with it? Nope. Does the cow have various features anyone short of blind could make out? Probably not as much as a glass fucking window... err door.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...



Still her fault then.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Mar 27, 2012)

BREAKING NEWS!


----------



## BORTZ (Mar 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> BREAKING NEWS!


Again, not news.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...


But that doesn't change that if you do walk into a door then its your fault not the company that owns the building. I have wear glasses and sometimes I miss things but thats my problem and I can't expect to be suing every company whose building's door I walked into cause thats just being stupid.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> BREAKING NEWS!


Yeah, I just posted this cause I thought it was funny. And I thought other people would find it funny.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> BREAKING NEWS!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXLDv-fUINM


----------



## Kyary (Mar 27, 2012)

If you don't notice glass, you have to be pretty blind. Did she smash her face hard enough that it's worth 1 million dollars?

I can't imagine 80 year olds with Apple products .


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

Kyary said:


> If you don't notice glass, you have to be pretty blind. Did she smash her face hard enough that it's worth 1 million dollars?
> 
> I can't imagine 80 year olds with Apple products .



It was probably an iphone 2g.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Mar 27, 2012)

sweet i'm off to run into glass doors and get ma some moneyz!! 

BEST SCAM EVA!


----------



## frogboy (Mar 27, 2012)

Did Steve Jobs ever ask for a million dollars if he ran into a door?


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 27, 2012)

frogboy said:


> Did Steve Jobs ever ask for a million dollars if he ran into a door?


I think he can get that million without walking into a door.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...



Yes I am.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...


Than you're an idiot. If you walk towards something _with the intent of using it_ you would know *EXACTLY WHERE IT IS. *


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...



I'm going to guess you don't go near cows much do you.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

Nope, sure don't. But if I were _walking towards it with intent of using it_ I'd still know *EXACTLY WHERE IT IS*.


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 27, 2012)

I'm surprised she was able to get to the store, but how did she see well enough to drive there?


----------



## Jennyfurr (Mar 27, 2012)

If she can take the time to actually start a lawsuit, then she can take the time to look and see if there's a door =/
I mean.. I would feel bad for the old lady but does she need a million dollars for this?  I don't think so..


----------



## Zerosuit connor (Mar 27, 2012)

Had she of died or something, then fine sue them. If she just hurt herself and i saw it I would've laughed, I've done it too, but then again im stupid.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Nope, sure don't. But if I were _walking towards it with intent of using it_ I'd still know *EXACTLY WHERE IT IS*.


Quite.
But what if you didn't know exactly where it was?
You would be walking towards where you think it is, with the intent of using it, and you wouldn't know exactly where it is.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, sure don't. But if I were _walking towards it with intent of using it_ I'd still know *EXACTLY WHERE IT IS*.
> ...


Well, seeing how it's a giant ass door in this case that's in the same spot every single time, if you don't know where it is than you shouldn't be walking anywhere in the first place.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...


But the door is virtually invisible due to being so clean.
The door to my room is in the same spot every single time, but I sometimes bump into it by accident when I want to go to the bathroom at night because I can't see it clearly.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Pingouin7 said:
> ...


Except it wouldn't be virtually invisible. Not only are there handles as pointed out by pyro, but there would also be the glare of the sun and the reflection of the background. Really, it's hard to miss a glass door no matter how you put it.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...


Remember that the woman in question was 83 years old.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 27, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Pingouin7 said:
> ...


So then it's her fault, correct? She can't see well, so she hit the door? That's all I'm trying to say. It's not the stores fault, it's hers. Sure, she can't help that she's old but she can't sue a company over it.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 27, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...


Glad to see we got to the same conclusion.


----------



## gamefan5 (Mar 27, 2012)

I'm sorry... what?


----------



## nando (Mar 27, 2012)

she actually has a case. the doors are supposed to have a graphic at eye level. most places have a line of dots.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 27, 2012)

nando said:


> she actually has a case. the doors are supposed to have a graphic at eye level. most places have a line of dots.



Yeah, because the giant freaking handles weren't enough of a clue that there was a door there.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Mar 27, 2012)

>>OH GOD I GOT MINOR BURNS ON MY HAND BECAUSE I TRIED TO WASH THEM WITH THE COFFEE I JUST BOUGHT.  WHY THE FUCK WOULD MY COFFEE BE HOT.  FUCK YOU MCDONALDS I'M SUING.

>>*Buying bag of peanuts*
>>*Back of bag*
>>"May contain peanuts.  Do not consume if you suffer from peanut allergies."







Edit - (this is what I am gathering from this topic, btw...)


----------



## nando (Mar 27, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> nando said:
> 
> 
> > she actually has a case. the doors are supposed to have a graphic at eye level. most places have a line of dots.
> ...



Giant door handles are not at eye level and do not repeat at the regular intervals set by code. It doesnt matter how stupid the old lady is. There are minimum safety requirements public spaces need to follow wether they are vital or not. For example, it is not necessary for stair rails to have gaps no bigger than 4". But that is the code and if a public building doesnt comply you could push your dog through the rails and sue


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 27, 2012)

nando said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > nando said:
> ...



That's a load of shit. This old hag has no case whatsoever.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Mar 27, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> nando said:
> 
> 
> > TwinRetro said:
> ...



Agreed.  Stupidity and oblivion are no excuse to stop being liable for your own personal safety or wellbeing.

And to make a point - I've walked into doors before.  At home, at work, at other stores.  I've walked into windows, too.  Whether they were opaque doors or completely clear glass ones, whenever I have walked into one my words have always been along the lines of "ouch.  Damn, I feel like a retard now" not "I can't believe this door/window was here and there were no obvious warning signs pointing to it's existance.  I need to sue now because I am so physically injured and emotionally compromised from walking into a window at a leisurely speed of walking."


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 27, 2012)

I know how stupid it sounds but if the door was indeed unmarked then she might win a trial for damages, actually. Doors like this are supposed to have some sticker on them for the braindead people who assume that the store has no doors. Don't ask me - ask the Health and Safety people. She won't get a million, but she might win pocket change and satisfaction if an inspector finds the door to be indeed hardly visible and thus hazardous.


----------



## Veho (Mar 27, 2012)

The tactic in these kind of cases is to ask for an unreasonable amount and then settle for much less (but still a lot) out of court. Even if the court finds in her favour, it doesn't have to grant her the full sum she demands, so it makes sense to ask for much more than you're hoping to get out of the deal, and then haggle.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 27, 2012)

Veho said:


> The tactic in these kind of cases is to ask for an unreasonable amount and then settle for much less (but still a lot) out of court. Even if the court finds in her favour, it doesn't have to grant her the full sum she demands, so it makes sense to ask for much more than you're hoping to get out of the deal, and then haggle.


Correct and indeed very smart, hence I used the term "pocket change" in comparison to one million, although it is quite a euphemism here. Some of the readers don't fully understand the issue and call the claim stupid but from a legal standpoint it is quite valid. It is a legal requirement to make doors visible unless they're inside your own house. We live in an age where everybody whines about equality thus a door to any publically available institution has to be equally visible to an 8 and 88 year old person. If a person can sue and win because nobody marked her coffee as hot then I can't see why another shouldn't for wallking into a door when nobody told her it was there. The legal system has seen more ridiculous cases them this one. Legal requirements, even the stupid ones, have to be followed.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Veho said:
> 
> 
> > The tactic in these kind of cases is to ask for an unreasonable amount and then settle for much less (but still a lot) out of court. Even if the court finds in her favour, it doesn't have to grant her the full sum she demands, so it makes sense to ask for much more than you're hoping to get out of the deal, and then haggle.
> ...



So what you are saying is apple needed to put a sign on the door to say that it was a door?


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 27, 2012)

No, it doesn't have to say door, it has to indicate the presence of a transparent object and mark its full width at the level of eyesight. To show you why, imagine a scenario where I put a glass pane in someone's way with nothing but one white dot on it. For someone with bad eyesight, all that is visible is the white dot. There is no clear indication as to where the pane starts and ends. This is why a line has to be used and this is why a handle is insufficient. It only shows one point - it doesn't indicate the width of the door. In fact, a person with really bad eyesight won't be able to even determine whether the door is open or closed on its basis as handles come in different shapes and positions. I realize the stupidity of the claim but I also acknowledge that it is valid from her perspective.


----------



## frogboy (Mar 27, 2012)

Everyone's arguing about the door being visible/not visible... I think the real question here is: Why does an 83 year old woman own an iPhone?

inb4 "because everyone does". I don't.


----------



## BrunoAlvesMontei (Mar 27, 2012)

frogboy said:


> Everyone's arguing about the door being visible/not visible... I think the real question here is: Why does an 83 year old woman own an iPhone?
> 
> inb4 "because everyone does". I don't.


Because she wants it and can afford?


----------



## FireGrey (Mar 27, 2012)

> Reads thread
> Turns off computer
> Walks into apple store door
> Gets $1M

Problem?


----------



## Depravo (Mar 27, 2012)

frogboy said:


> I think the real question here is: Why does an 83 year old woman own an iPhone?


And could she even see it without an eye-level sticker?


----------



## Narayan (Mar 27, 2012)

if she was indeed afraid of apple's technology, i wouldn't be surprised if she hit a glass door.


----------



## BlueStar (Mar 27, 2012)

plasma dragon007 said:


> >>OH GOD I GOT MINOR BURNS ON MY HAND BECAUSE I TRIED TO WASH THEM WITH THE COFFEE I JUST BOUGHT.  WHY THE FUCK WOULD MY COFFEE BE HOT.  FUCK YOU MCDONALDS I'M SUING.



I knew this would be brought up.  I presume this is a reference to this lawsuit.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

As you can see, it's not just a matter of "Stupid person spills coffee on themselves, and get a bit of a burn, was too stupid to realise coffee is hot."  The coffee wasn't just hot, it was far, far too hot to be safe.  Far hotter than coffee you could make yourself at home or indeed any coffee you would expect to get from any other establishment that didn't have their hot drinks kept super-heated by industrial equipment.  That's why she ended up in hospital for EIGHT DAYS and needed skin grafts.  Have you ever spilled a hot drink on your clothes or skin?  Of course you have.  Did you need a fucking skin graft?  No. McDonald's knew that this was a problem and had failed to rectify it, but because people don't bother to actually read the case it's become the standard go-to 'stupid lawsuit' story.  It's like the difference between someone saying "Careful, the plate is hot" when it's a plate that's been under a heatlamp and "careful, the plate is hot" when it's a solid steel plate that's been in a furnace for two hours and is glowing red.  One is clearly not safe to serve to people at a restaurant, even if people are generally aware of the need to not touch a hot plate.

There are lots of actual frivolous lawsuits which have been brought if you want to use one as an example.


----------



## Dimensional (Mar 27, 2012)

Krestent said:


> It's definitely not Apple's fault that this woman has the eyes of a bird.  Also, I really don't remember that store having a door like that at all?  IIRC it's in a mall and just has a doorway, but no door.


Um, birds have excellent vision. How else can they see bugs from 3 floors high? Eagles even see tiny bugs from very high. So eyes of a bird isn't the right comment. Eyes of a mole or another non-avian animal works. But yeah, this is going to be a funny case. I can see every outcome on this, and they are all hilarious. It's sad, but the woman actually has a chance. Stuff like this has happened and have actually won. Best example is the post above this one about the lawsuit against McDonalds involving piping hot coffee.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 27, 2012)

For no reason whatsoever, I want a mcdonald's apple pie.


----------



## WiiUBricker (Mar 27, 2012)

lol, when I saw this I initially thought that someone sued Apple for just $1


----------



## Veho (Mar 27, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> Far hotter than coffee you could make yourself at home or indeed any coffee you would expect to get from any other establishment that didn't have their hot drinks kept super-heated by industrial equipment.



[nitpicking] The coffee was at between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit, roughly 85°C. That's not super-heated, it doesn't require industrial equipment. You can make 210°F coffee at home if you want. [/nitpick] 

180°F is still seriously hot and can cause severe burns but you're exaggerating a bit.


----------



## BlueStar (Mar 27, 2012)

If you're making coffee at home, as soon as you reach that temperature your kettle will turn off and the water will stop being heated and begin to cool though (especially as it's only a small amount of water with a large surface area compared to its volume, with additional cooling taking place when you pour it into an open topped cup).  In the old McDonalds way of doing things the water wat being constantly heated to keep it at that dangerous level, and it was then placed into an insulated cup with a lid on it to keep it that temperature.  I think you'd struggle under normal circumstances to end up with a cup of something that's still at that level by the time you've taken it to your car.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 27, 2012)

Well, people have won similarly outrageous lawsuits (the woman who claimed that McDonald's coffee was too hot and the woman who stepped on a cup she threw on the ground, broke her ankle, and then sued the restaurant) so a case like this isn't entirely unprecedented.

There's a lot of complaints you can send Apple's way, but really, this is a bit ridiculous.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Mar 27, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> If you're making coffee at home, as soon as you reach that temperature your kettle will turn off and the water will stop being heated and begin to cool though[...]



This is true, provided you're using an electric kettle.  In my house, for up until last year my family and I had been boiling water on the stove in a kettle, not using an electric one.  We heated this until it boiled, then went over and shut it off; the stove doesn't know when to stop.  Only since last year, when I bought my mom a Keurig machine for her birthday have we had a means to heat water to a regulated temperature every time.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Gahars said:


> Well, people have won similarly outrageous lawsuits (the woman who claimed that McDonald's coffee was too hot and the woman who stepped on a cup she threw on the ground, broke her ankle, and then sued the restaurant) so a case like this isn't entirely unprecedented.
> 
> There's a lot of complaints you can send Apple's way, but really, this is a bit ridiculous.


But in all those cases they actually did get what could be classified as an injury but this old woman didn't break her hip or back or anything she just walked into a door, I walked into doors before and I never got injured at all but felt embarrassed and stupid. I can't see this case going anywhere.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> > Well, people have won similarly outrageous lawsuits (the woman who claimed that McDonald's coffee was too hot and the woman who stepped on a cup she threw on the ground, broke her ankle, and then sued the restaurant) so a case like this isn't entirely unprecedented.
> ...


Mental scars, public humiliation and a bruise are an equivalent of a mild burn caused by some spilled coffee to me.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Gahars said:
> ...


Not to me, a mild burn is much more painful and is an actual injury whereas someone walking into a door and feeling embarrassed about it isn't and i'm sure alot of us have walked into a door or window at some point and I bet nothing happened except some mild embarrassment. This case is stupid and as cruel as this sounds but I hope if the case isn't dismissed that the old woman have to pay for wasting the courts time.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Not to me, a mild burn is much more painful and is an actual injury whereas someone walking into a door and feeling embarrassed about it isn't and i'm sure alot of us have walked into a door or window at some point and I bet nothing happened except some mild embarrassment. This case is stupid and as cruel as this sounds but I hope if the case isn't dismissed that the old woman have to pay for wasting the courts time.


I'm pretty sure that you've done at least one thing in your life that made you feel embarrased to the point were it hurt you almost physically. Moreover, if she hit the door then she likely also fell, and a fall like that is potentially dangerous to an old person with brittle bones. A bruise is "enough" to sue even if the case sounds ridiculous.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Not to me, a mild burn is much more painful and is an actual injury whereas someone walking into a door and feeling embarrassed about it isn't and i'm sure alot of us have walked into a door or window at some point and I bet nothing happened except some mild embarrassment. This case is stupid and as cruel as this sounds but I hope if the case isn't dismissed that the old woman have to pay for wasting the courts time.
> ...


Not really. I walked into doors, windows, tripped on the footpath, crashed while riding my bike and fell off my chair and I laughed it off and continued with my day. I'm doubting that she fell cause whenever I walked into a door or window I don't fall backwards except if I was running and I'm gonna say that the old woman wasn't running.


----------



## Narayan (Mar 28, 2012)

we can make speculations all month, you know. and with each unclear detail in a story, the more "maybes" and "what ifs" there'll be. 
so unless we know what _actually_ happened, you both have a point and this could go on forever.

that's why gathering data for a research, survey for a study, and intelligence report for a mission is important.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Mar 28, 2012)

Narayan said:


> we can make speculations all month, you know. and with each unclear detail in a story, the more "maybes" and "what ifs" there'll be.
> so unless we know what _actually_ happened, you both have a point and this could go on forever.
> [...]



Yeah, but it's funny to talk about how stupid this old lady is.


----------



## Zekrom_cool (Mar 28, 2012)

That looks like one greedy lady. $1million for a door. That person must be sued for such a vague case.​


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> I'm doubting that she fell cause whenever I walked into a door or window I don't fall backwards except if I was running and I'm gonna say that the old woman wasn't running.


Were you 83 years old when you walked into a door?


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > I'm doubting that she fell cause whenever I walked into a door or window I don't fall backwards except if I was running and I'm gonna say that the old woman wasn't running.
> ...


No but seriously what are the chances of someone walking normally into a door and then falling backwards, they would have to be walking faster than normal or running for them to hit and fall otherwise its just a tap and embarrassment at best.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


You never were 83 years old, so it's only natural that you wouldn't know.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Pingouin7 said:
> ...


Why don't you try walking towards a door and hit it and then see if you fall backwards or not cause again you either have to be walking fast or running to fall backwards not walking normally or slowly.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


The result would be inaccurate since I'm not 83-years old.


----------



## BlazeV (Mar 28, 2012)

she should've watched where she was walking its not apples fault that some people don't pay attention when walking around


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Pingouin7 said:
> ...


Whatever. Apparently the whole concept of walking into a door and not falling, logic and common sense is lost on you so I won't bother.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


And, apparently, the whole concept of "a 83-year old lady is much more likely to lose balance after walking into a door than a 17-year old" is not something you have ever heard of.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Mar 28, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Pingouin7 said:
> ...


So an 83 year old woman who probably walks with a cane or something walked into a door but not very fast just normally but maybe slower than a 17 year old and loses balance and falls just seem a little illogical to me.


----------



## BlueStar (Mar 28, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Gahars said:
> ...



As if pointed out above, it wasn't a 'mild burn', it was serious, full thickness burns which required a long hospital stay and skin grafts because the coffee being served by McDonalds was dangerously and negligently too hot for human consumption.


----------



## Rob3rr (Mar 28, 2012)

It's an old woman, why do people call her stupid for something like this? I think there should be signs on the doors and she's right to sue the company. It's not like they're short of cash anyway, greedy bastards.


----------



## Dimensional (Mar 28, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


It's still possible. I've seen a man just stand at a curb after getting off a bus, and 10 seconds after standing there just lose balance and fall. I've seen a man walk down some stairs and suddenly fall over, and end up with a large welt on his forehead. Even if they have canes and walkers, they can still lose balance. And when you walk into a door, the force applied to hitting it is also reflected. Newton's Laws of Motion. With every action is an equal and opposite reaction. You walk into the door and just bounce back a little, but because you have excellent balance, you don't fall back because your quick to adjust, quick to react. However, a person of 80+ years can have trouble keeping their balance, and so any external force applied to them, even a little bit, can knock them down because they can't react as quickly.


----------



## gshock (Mar 28, 2012)

Hells Malice said:


> While she IS old as hell and it actually isn't her fault, it certainly isn't apples fault either.
> 
> She proves she's stupid by suing apple though. What a joke. Apple isn't going to care if some frail old lady is suing them, they're gonna crush the fuck out of her.


Unless they decide not to because they think it could increase the appeal of their brand.  ( public relations )

Apple seems to get in too many lawsuits, in recent history.


----------



## triassic911 (Mar 29, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Pingouin7 said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


Dude THIS is a 17-year old:









...and THIS is an 83-year old:






How the FUCK can you compare the two in terms of physical reactions??


----------



## Jugarina (Mar 29, 2012)

This has happened in the past in Canada. I finally found my laugh.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Mar 30, 2012)

The Catboy said:


> What a waste of a lawsuit. I think someone should just buy her a new set of glasses instead so she doesn't run into anymore doors.


Nearly as wasteful as Apple's lawsuits against Android manufacturers.

Oh, ho, I went there.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 30, 2012)

ProtoKun7 said:


> The Catboy said:
> 
> 
> > What a waste of a lawsuit. I think someone should just buy her a new set of glasses instead so she doesn't run into anymore doors.
> ...



Oh snap. He totally just went there.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 30, 2012)

Jugarina said:


> This has happened in the past in Canada. I finally found my laugh.
> 
> [media]http://www.youtube.c...h?v=K662bPafjP4[/media]


That was entertaining AND informative at the same time. No offense Apple but those could really use stickers.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 30, 2012)

Surprised no one said this yet...

AND THEN I WALLED INTO THE APPLE STORE.


----------



## kirbymaster101 (Mar 30, 2012)

the problem is not about walking and hitting the door. The problem is SUEING FOR IT!


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 30, 2012)

I'm going to contract pink eye in both eyes just so I can say my sight was impared and run headlong into an Apple Store door so I can sue for my $1m


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Mar 30, 2012)

I think you guys are retarded,if you've never walked into a glass door then you have never lived.
Seriously this lady deserves some money but not 1 million.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 30, 2012)

ThatDudeWithTheFood said:


> I think you guys are retarded,if you've never walked into a glass door then you have never lived.
> Seriously this lady deserves some money but not 1 million.



Smashing face first into a highly reflective object is the definition of living....yes oh yes, I don't know what I have been missing.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 30, 2012)

kirbymaster101 said:


> the problem is not about walking and hitting the door. The problem is SUEING FOR IT!


She's not "suing for hitting the wall or door", she's suing because Apple failed to correctly mark their transparent glass walls and doors so that they are visible which inevitably lead to her bumping into a door. It's a matter of safety regulations.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Mar 30, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
> 
> 
> > I think you guys are retarded,if you've never walked into a glass door then you have never lived.
> ...


Its still obvious you haven't done it or you just don't understand sarcasm yourself.


----------



## triassic911 (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> kirbymaster101 said:
> 
> 
> > the problem is not about walking and hitting the door. The problem is SUEING FOR IT!
> ...


I don't think she specified those details on why she is suing, but she can use that reason if anything.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

triassic911 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > kirbymaster101 said:
> ...


It's simple action/reaction, really. The suit may be worded differently but at the end of the day, she wouldn't bump into the door were it properly marked. Whether it was or wasn't is to decide for the judge.


----------



## Luigi2012SM64DS (Mar 31, 2012)

so someone is getting sued for having good hygiene?
ok time to be xtra sloppy


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Luigi2012SM64DS said:


> so someone is getting sued for having good hygiene?
> ok time to be xtra sloppy









_Is this really a difficult concept?_ Do you not know of this new trend called "handicapped access" or "elderly access"? Is it THAT hard to stick a strip on the glass to make it visible? C'mon. Arguing that it's her fault that she bumped into it due to her having bad eyesight is like arguing that people on wheelchairs don't *really* need elevators - they should live on the first floor in the first place, why'd they buy appartments on higher floors? Ramps are useless too, afterall, they can always get off the chair and crawl. Bad eyesight? YOUR FAULT, right?


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Luigi2012SM64DS said:
> 
> 
> > so someone is getting sued for having good hygiene?
> ...


Except:




That would be a picture of the same store she walled into. There are marks on the glass.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Luigi2012SM64DS said:
> ...


True, but I've never seen humans who have their eyes at the level of their knees. Shouldn't they be higher? These clearly apply to children or little people - the pic I provided has one strip for adults and one for children. That, and they seem a bit narrow.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> True, but I've never seen humans who have their eyes at the level of their knees. Shouldn't they be higher? These clearly apply to children or little people - the pic I provided has one strip for adults and one for children. That, and they seem a bit narrow.


Agreed, but I believe it's at the bare minimum of what's required...I think.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > True, but I've never seen humans who have their eyes at the level of their knees. Shouldn't they be higher? These clearly apply to children or little people - the pic I provided has one strip for adults and one for children. That, and they seem a bit narrow.
> ...


Yeah, probably. I'm not entirely certain as to whether or not there's a requirement of height and type of stickers, all I know is that they're supposed to have them... and I can't be arsed to check.


----------



## Creqaw (Mar 31, 2012)

Well all you guys ever mentioned was eye height, nobody ever said anything about eye height of adults.


----------



## pubert09 (Mar 31, 2012)

Well, isn't that I-R-O-N-I-C-I-R-O-N-I-R-O-N-I-C.
Trying to appeal to people bites 'em in da booty.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Luigi2012SM64DS said:
> ...



Oh look magical floating door handles.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

pyromaniac123 said:


> Oh look magical floating door handles.


We already touched that subject earlier - a door handle does not in any way signify the width of the door, thus provide little help in not hitting the door.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> pyromaniac123 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh look magical floating door handles.
> ...


While this is true, wouldn't any sane person, oh I don't know, walk towards the door handles to, bear with me as this might sound crazy, open the door?


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > pyromaniac123 said:
> ...


If said person will be able to determine that they're infact handles, yes. Handles come in various shapes and sizes. Besides, the woman clearly didn't know she was walking into the door. Either that or she assumed they'll open automatically like in 99% of big stores today.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxi4 said:
> ...


Haha...so...let me get this straight then. She calls Apple "HIP AND YOUNG HURR" and expects the doors to open the new automatic way? Since when have doors that have to be opened by handle "NEW AND FRESH!"? 

Just sayin'


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Haha...so...let me get this straight then. She calls Apple "HIP AND YOUNG HURR" and expects the doors to open the new automatic way? Since when have doors that have to be opened by handle "NEW AND FRESH!"?
> 
> Just sayin'


That's my assumption, not her words. Also, automatic doors are nothing new, they've been around for years. In fact, I'm suprised Apple doesn't have them.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Haha...so...let me get this straight then. She calls Apple "HIP AND YOUNG HURR" and expects the doors to open the new automatic way? Since when have doors that have to be opened by handle "NEW AND FRESH!"?
> ...





> "Apple wants to be cool and modern and have the type of architecture that would appeal to the tech crowd,"








While they may not be anything new, they generally all look the same...But meh, I'm a little bored of arguing now...heh.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> While they may not be anything new, they generally all look the same...But meh, I'm a little bored of arguing now...heh.


We're arguing...? You haven't seen me arguing, man. This is an exchange of opinions.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > While they may not be anything new, they generally all look the same...But meh, I'm a little bored of arguing now...heh.
> ...


Is that not the same thing?

Arguing - Giving reasons or citing evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Mar 31, 2012)

sounds like her social security fund is running dry and she needs a way to get rocking chair money


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 31, 2012)

Has anyone entertained the fact that she might be a big 'ol faker?


----------



## tbgtbg (Mar 31, 2012)

Is this the same idiot that sued McDonalds when she spilled her coffee all over herself?


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Mar 31, 2012)

tbgtbg said:


> Is this the same idiot that sued McDonalds when she spilled her coffee all over herself?



Read the topic, it's already been said, and that lawsuit was actually valid...well, at least more valid than this one.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...


Arguing implies that I'd have an intention of presenting my point of view and doing what I can to change yours so that you acquire mine, or at least work towards a middle-ground on which we may both agree. An exchange of opinions lacks this element.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxi4 said:
> ...


OK THEN POOP FACE.
Is it an argument now?


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 31, 2012)

Suprgamr232 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Suprgamr232 said:
> ...


NO CRAP MUG.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 31, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Suprgamr232 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxi4 said:
> ...


DIE IN A DITCH, BUDDY.


----------



## triassic911 (Mar 31, 2012)

No matter what, Foxi is right, because there are more ways for the victim to weasel herself into getting SOMETHING from Apple. Not having proper notifications for disabled people doesn't help Apple at all.


----------

