iPod court case may be tossed due to lack of device

When you launch a lawsuit against a device manufacturer like Apple, it's important that you actually own the device you're complaining about. Attorneys for Apple have contended this week that the two women named as plaintiffs in the iPod court case this week did not own iPods in the time frame the case is covering. This case concerns iPods purchased between September of 2006 and March of 2009, while the iPods these plaintiffs owned were purchased after that time – July of 2009, in one case.

Apple attorneys checked the serial numbers of the iPods owned by the plaintiffs, and both fell outside the time frame of the case. Without iPods purchased inside this span of years, there is no case. That's what Apple's attorneys are arguing, anyway.

"I am concerned," said Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, "that I don't have a plaintiff. That's a problem."

Lawyer for the plaintiffs, Bonny Sweeny, suggested that while one or both of her plaintiffs' iPods might not be covered by the case, there are plenty of others to be tapped. According to the BBC, Sweeny suggested that the estimated eight million consumers that purchased iPods in the time frame on trial should still be accounted for. Fought for in this case, that is to say.

This case suggests that Apple's methods of placating record labels between 2007 and 2009 were not up to snuff. Connecting an iPod to a desktop computer and iTunes at that time with music from digital stores other than iTunes resulted in an error message which suggested the owner of the device wipe it out and start fresh – with only iTunes music aboard.

Have a peek at the timeline below for more insight into the iPod universe – the trial here, the recent past, and the indicators that suggest the iPod is on its way out. With the Apple Watch on its way and the iPhone long since replacing the need for a stand-alone music box, it may be time to say goodbye to the biggest-name MP3 player of all time.