Fire from iPod Nano to cost Apple $7,425

While the first version of Apple's iPod Nano media player came out in 2005, a number of the units have since been discovered to be faulty. Indeed, Apple issued a recall of the first generation iPod Nano just six months ago, in November 2011, due to a problem with its battery. Now it looks like Apple is going to have to pay a bigger price for the device's hardware issues.

The Japanese media outlet Nikkei (via The Verge) reports that a judge in that country has ordered Apple's Japan division to pay 600,000 yen (about $7,425) to an unidentified married couple in Tokyo. It seems the couple bought their iPod Nano in September 2005. However, in July of 2010, the couple claimed that when they were recharging the device, the iPod Nano started overheating.

The product then caught on fire and unfortunately the iPod Nano was in the hands of the wife at the time. She suffered burns on her hands that the report claims took a month to heal. The judge in the case said that Apple should pay the fine for the couple's medical fees along with general pain and suffering damages. So far, there's no word on if Apple will appeal the ruling.

Image via Apple

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Nekro and Police Warfare Kickstarter campaigns launched

Next Story

Giveaway: McAfee Internet Security 2012 for Mac [Update with winners!]

30 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

rippleman said,
5 years and people still expect a portable device to work as intended? talk about elevated expectations

Seriously? You got to be kidding me.

resol612 said,

Seriously? You got to be kidding me.

Well, I agree with him (rippleman) but only because the battery is not user replaceable.
My GF has an old MP3 player she use sometimes, it's very old but work on an AAA battery, but 5 years for a non replaceable chargeable battery? That's pushing it I think...

FrancoisC said,

Well, I agree with him (rippleman) but only because the battery is not user replaceable.
My GF has an old MP3 player she use sometimes, it's very old but work on an AAA battery, but 5 years for a non replaceable chargeable battery? That's pushing it I think...

I was gonna mention my old ALBA Tape Player which still works but your right, it has changable batteries!

rippleman said,
5 years and people still expect a portable device to work as intended? talk about elevated expectations

Work as intended? Maybe not. Catch on fire? No.

Seems like a low compensation amount compared with stories i hear in other parts of the world. Only $7400? I hope Apple pay it!

On the topic of the recall.... i sent them my old nano and happily accepted a brand new nano as a replacement

Adamb10 said,
If apple appeals this then they are just stupid. $7400 is pennies for apple.

This.
Sounds like a very biased "deal" "offered" by the judge if you ask me.

I sure would like to have more money if that happened to me.

GS:mac

Hardcore Til I Die said,
Seems fair.

Can't edit... although if it can be proven that they ignored a recall notice (ie one that was posted through their door), apple shouldn't have to pay.

Hardcore Til I Die said,

Can't edit... although if it can be proven that they ignored a recall notice (ie one that was posted through their door), apple shouldn't have to pay.

Recall was in 2011. Fire was in 2010

Hardcore Til I Die said,

Can't edit... although if it can be proven that they ignored a recall notice (ie one that was posted through their door), apple shouldn't have to pay.


Hard to prove, very hard, but yeah. I agree.
It would be like:
"Get off that bike! In one mile your brakes will stop working and you sure don't want to be riding up or downhill then!"
*rides downhill and brakes both legs*

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

Hard to prove, very hard, but yeah. I agree.
It would be like:
"Get off that bike! In one mile your brakes will stop working and you sure don't want to be riding up or downhill then!"
*rides downhill and brakes both legs*

GS:mac

If that were the scenario, Apple should still be punched in the face for selling a sorry bike with no brakes.

Enron said,

If that were the scenario, Apple should still be punched in the face for selling a sorry bike with no brakes.


It's not no brakes, it's faulty brakes.
And to be honest, if you ignore a recall, then you're pretty much helping the accident to happen.

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

It's not no brakes, it's faulty brakes.
And to be honest, if you ignore a recall, then you're pretty much helping the accident to happen.

GS:mac

I had a bike with faulty brakes once. I never bought from that brand again.

Enron said,

I had a bike with faulty brakes once. I never bought from that brand again.


Good for you.

The problem is, that not the brand of the bike is at fault, but the brake manufacturer.

Here: the battery manufacturer.
Show me ONE battery manufacturer that has never had exploding or fire catching batteries.
I'll buy you one beer via PP if you can find one and prove it.

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

Good for you.

The problem is, that not the brand of the bike is at fault, but the brake manufacturer.

Here: the battery manufacturer.
Show me ONE battery manufacturer that has never had exploding or fire catching batteries.
I'll buy you one beer via PP if you can find one and prove it.

GS:mac

It's Apple's fault for using lame batteries and taking over 5 years to admit to a problem. Just like it was the bike manufacturer's fault for using lame brakes.

Glassed Silver said,

Good for you.

The problem is, that not the brand of the bike is at fault, but the brake manufacturer.

Here: the battery manufacturer.
Show me ONE battery manufacturer that has never had exploding or fire catching batteries.
I'll buy you one beer via PP if you can find one and prove it.

GS:mac

Apple is at fault, not the battery manufacturer - just like the bike manufacturer (not the brake manufacturer) is at fault.

The battery maker is at fault. NVidia was at fault for bad video cards. Where does it stop? Why not stop passing the buck, and take responsibility? You could claim that Apple is not responsible for anything, since Foxconn makes all their devices. Why not just blame Foxconn and absolve Apple of all responsibility. Or maybe Apple should do some QC and make sure that the devices they design, with the parts they design around, and parts they specify, work properly. Make sure they are using quality, working parts. After all, we hear over and over how Apple is about quality which drives the prices up, but shouldn't they verify the parts are of quality?

A few years ago there was a recall on the original Xbox power supply. There was a fire, and someone was hurt. Microsoft and the seller (I think Gamestop) was sued. While I don't think that the reseller should be responsible, even though MS bought the power supply from a 3rd party, they were held responsible. Why should the same not apply to Apple? Apple is portrayed as the pinnacle of quality, until there is a problem, then it is everyone else's fault.

Brandon said,

Recall was in 2011. Fire was in 2010

Glassed Silver said,

It's not no brakes, it's faulty brakes.
And to be honest, if you ignore a recall, then you're pretty much helping the accident to happen.

GS:mac

... I don't know what to say. So the couple's supposed to time-travel to the future to swap batteries? Meanwhile they can tell me tomorrow's lotto numbers as well.

nohone said,

Apple is at fault, not the battery manufacturer - just like the bike manufacturer (not the brake manufacturer) is at fault.

The battery maker is at fault. NVidia was at fault for bad video cards. Where does it stop? Why not stop passing the buck, and take responsibility? You could claim that Apple is not responsible for anything, since Foxconn makes all their devices. Why not just blame Foxconn and absolve Apple of all responsibility. Or maybe Apple should do some QC and make sure that the devices they design, with the parts they design around, and parts they specify, work properly. Make sure they are using quality, working parts. After all, we hear over and over how Apple is about quality which drives the prices up, but shouldn't they verify the parts are of quality?

A few years ago there was a recall on the original Xbox power supply. There was a fire, and someone was hurt. Microsoft and the seller (I think Gamestop) was sued. While I don't think that the reseller should be responsible, even though MS bought the power supply from a 3rd party, they were held responsible. Why should the same not apply to Apple? Apple is portrayed as the pinnacle of quality, until there is a problem, then it is everyone else's fault.


Well said, but I beg to differ between fault and taking responsibility.

And yes, you CAN pass it on to those who produce, because mostly it's them if I'm not mistaken that do the QC in the factories, too.
It's a contractual thing and if Apple has to spend too much in courts and recalls, I'm sure it will get passed on to Foxconn if it exceeds levels of acceptance.

@Enron: I have no idea what took them so long to realize it or give in, but I can say that Apple usually is quite good in dealing with hardware faults like these out of warranty.
My old Mac is quite old and I only missed the time for a recall by two factors:
I tinkered with it myself to replace an HHD and I waited too long, not knowing there was a out-of-warranty free fixing of the Radeon X1600 in '06 iMacs.

Well, I needed a new Mac either way and the old one is in good enough state to work as spare Mac (testing/double tasking/screen extension/...)

GS:mac

resol612 said,

... I don't know what to say. So the couple's supposed to time-travel to the future to swap batteries? Meanwhile they can tell me tomorrow's lotto numbers as well.


Mixed up numbers, sorry.

In that case I think they should get way more than that.

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

Well said, but I beg to differ between fault and taking responsibility.

And yes, you CAN pass it on to those who produce, because mostly it's them if I'm not mistaken that do the QC in the factories, too.
It's a contractual thing and if Apple has to spend too much in courts and recalls, I'm sure it will get passed on to Foxconn if it exceeds levels of acceptance.

@Enron: I have no idea what took them so long to realize it or give in, but I can say that Apple usually is quite good in dealing with hardware faults like these out of warranty.
My old Mac is quite old and I only missed the time for a recall by two factors:
I tinkered with it myself to replace an HHD and I waited too long, not knowing there was a out-of-warranty free fixing of the Radeon X1600 in '06 iMacs.

Well, I needed a new Mac either way and the old one is in good enough state to work as spare Mac (testing/double tasking/screen extension/...)

GS:mac

I wish they would have done something about the known issue of failing X1900s in the Mac Pro (besides trying to sell me a $149 video card for $399)

Glassed Silver said,

Mixed up numbers, sorry.

In that case I think they should get way more than that.

GS:mac

On what basis should they get more than that? The judge ordered that their medical fees be paid plus extra for pain and suffering. The amount for the pain and suffering was arrived at by a judge who had all of the facts.

We can't possibly argue with the ruling on the limited info we have.

Hardcore Til I Die said,

On what basis should they get more than that? The judge ordered that their medical fees be paid plus extra for pain and suffering. The amount for the pain and suffering was arrived at by a judge who had all of the facts.

We can't possibly argue with the ruling on the limited info we have.


True, but I imagine that usually pain and suffering is "paid" better, no?
Might be very different in Japan though or I just don't have a real sense for what you usually get lol

Enron said,

I wish they would have done something about the known issue of failing X1900s in the Mac Pro (besides trying to sell me a $149 video card for $399)


As of Lion you can install PC video cards and don't have to rely on Mac versions.
I'm glad the heavy milking in that area is over now...

Let's just hope the Mac Pro gets updated again and doesn't die, because I plan to make my next desktop Mac a Mac Pro eventually.

GS:mac