iPod Touch explodes in a child's pocket

Apple's iPod Touch is one of the hottest devices around and unfortunately for one youngster it got so hot that it exploded in his pocket.

The mother of a child living in Cincinnati is suing Apple and ten unnamed retail employees for "gross negligence and recklessness, as they supposedly conducted themselves maliciously and fraudulently when selling the iTouch".

The story goes that a child's "iPod touch was sitting in the 'off' position when it unexpectedly popped and caused the kid to feel a burning sensation. At that time, he stood up and noticed that his pants were, in fact, on fire. 'Plaintiff A.V. immediately ran to the bathroom and took off his burning pants with the assistance of a friend,' reads the complaint. 'On said date and at said time, the Apple iTouch had burned through Plaintiff A.V.'s pants pocket and melted through his nylon/spandex underwear, burning his leg.'"

The mother is asking for $150,000 total plus attorney fees for the child's bills and emotional distress. While it's quite unfortunate that the youngster had to experience this it seems that exploding technology has become more common place as the devices become more complex.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Downadup Win32/Conficker.C worm revving up to spread

Next Story

80+ bug fixes in store for Mac OS X 10.5.7

130 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

New update for the iPod Touch was released to protect Apple on this issue. Effective immediately, Apple is rebranding the iPod Touch to the iPod Stop Drop and Roll.

OMG mine is always in my pocket and to be honest it got rather hot yesterday and it took it out of my trouser (pants) pocket and the back of the iPod was so hot you could have fried something on it, so I turned it off because I was worried something was going to go pop.

Reading this article now confirms there is a major here. I thank neowin for saving me from a serious injury which could have left me scared for life. I'm also taking this up with Apple although not the extent of the mother in this article. I just want to know if these are going to be recalled, because if there is a fault and the device is overheating then there is a serious problem which needs to be addressed.

Again thank you for this article if I wouldn't have gone onto neowin I would never have known there was a problem.

If this was a Microsoft product, people would be already congregating in Redmond with torches.

If this had happened to my grandchild, they would be extremely fortunate to get off with a six-figure settlement. Of course I would never do something as stupid as giving a $300 pocket-sized media player to a child ... and letting him take it to school. THAT is irresponsible and ridiculous.

(I love that the ad served at the bottom of this neowin page was for an Ipod accesory.)

I think that when you purchase something you expect it to be safe and fit for purpose, or warned of any non-obvious risk. You do not expect an electronic device to burst into flames. Does the iPod Touch have warnings that it's battery can overheat and explode under certain conditions? Are they prominent and clear on what those conditions are?

If not, Apple need to get sued for it. This child could have been seriously maimed for life, or even killed.

I believe that this event could have long lasting effects on him, mentally and physically. Burns do not heal overnight and are generally an awful experience. Pain is traumatic in itself, whatever the cause. Further, it doesn't take a hugely serious injury to traumatise you. If it is unexpected and scary, could easily have led to your death, you don't forget it.

Exactly. Some of you guys need to put yourself in this kids place. You've got something in your pocket that is on fire. You can't exactly reach in and grab it out, and the whole while it's burning into you. And you don't know what the hell is going on or why flames are shooting out your pocket. I'd consider that pretty upsetting and traumatic.

Well said, Persephone.

Many products that will either can catch fire or explode generally have a warning on them such as to not store in temperatures higher than X or lower than Y, to puncture it, etc. If the kid was simply sitting there, I don't see that as any reason for it to explode.

Some people are trying to find the circumstances for it to explode, but honestly, I'd really like to see the label that says,"Do not put in back pocket, do not sit on, do not sit down too hard, etc. Product may explode." Of course, Apple wouldn't do that as it would really hurt their marketing. Who wants to carry around an mp3 player as if it's a grenade?

And yes, regardless of what some may believe, it's quite easy to become traumatized by an event in your life, especially as a kid. Hell, I hate traveling long distances on the freeway simply after having witnessed a drunk driver flipping several times in a Camero right in front of me. If anything though, it's made me much more aware of my surroundings while being in a vehicle, but I simply wish the anxiety would go away.

That really sucks for the kid, sorry he had to experience that. Though I hate sue happy people, this doesn't seem too excessive, its not like they were suing for $10 million hoping to get rich quick.

It's about time. How many of Apple's devices have to blow up, explode, overheat, spontaneously combust, or mysteriously catch fire before they are penalized for it? There's been enough burned carpets, clothing and personal injury that Apple should be wallowing in shame.

How anyone continues to see these catch-fire devices as 'superior' is beyond me. This should be an easy win for the victim.

Not complex, just more power hungry. We actually use lithium polymer batteries in consumer devices to get as much battery charge as possible. But if these batteries are shorted, or happen to mailfunction, they cath fire. Old nimh batteries are much more safe, they have higher internal resistance so a short is not as dangderous.

nevann said,
Apples response to the lawsuit should be "What's an iTouch?"


An iTouch is what I do every night around 12:00. I would never do it here on Neowin, though. You guys are like family to me and that would just be too weird.

Couple of things people don't seem to be thinking when they start to blame Apple on this one (as much as I'd like to see someone take a bite out of Apple (sorry, just couldn't resist the pun.)

1) The article says the Touch was in his pocket? Was it the front pocket or back? If the back, doesn't that mean he was sitting on the bloody thing adding undue torsion pressure outside of the intended use? Such could, crack the case, or even the battery. If so, this is not Apple's fault but the kid's fault.

2) The heat/fire was bad enough to melt his underwear... should heat at that level, for the ammount of time it takes to go to the bathroom and get your friend to help you take your pants off have done more than caused a few blisters?

3) I'm probably just cynical but it seems the ammount chosen was for the express purpose of enticing Apple to just settle out of court and avoid an equal ammount in just their own lawyer fees.

[< snipped > - Calum. Please do not insult another member's spelling]

Batteries aren't supposed to explode under normal usage conditions. Period. Or did I miss the disclaimer on my iPod Classic box that says 'Do not place this product in your pocket while in use, or it could explode and result in burns to any exposed skin'. Yeah, pretty sure I didn't read that anywhere.

Oserus99 said,
Couple of things people don't seem to be thinking when they start to blame Apple on this one (as much as I'd like to see someone take a bite out of Apple (sorry, just couldn't resist the pun.)

1) The article says the Touch was in his pocket? Was it the front pocket or back? If the back, doesn't that mean he was sitting on the bloody thing adding undue torsion pressure outside of the intended use? Such could, crack the case, or even the battery. If so, this is not Apple's fault but the kid's fault.

2) The heat/fire was bad enough to melt his underwear... should heat at that level, for the ammount of time it takes to go to the bathroom and get your friend to help you take your pants off have done more than caused a few blisters?

3) I'm probably just cynical but it seems the ammount chosen was for the express purpose of enticing Apple to just settle out of court and avoid an equal ammount in just their own lawyer fees.


Its apples fault that the ipod touch has a sealed enclosed battery. How are yo usupposed to know if say a wire comes loose and causes a short i nthe battery? You cant see it because the battery is non replaceable.

So yes it would be apples fault.

Also the link states he received second degree burns to his leg. $150,000 is not excessive. Probably mainly to cover the doctors bills and the lawyers bills.

Yes I thin kapples at fault considering you cant check on the battery yourself

Dischordiant said,
< snipped > - Calum

Batteries aren't supposed to explode under normal usage conditions. Period. Or did I miss the disclaimer on my iPod Classic box that says 'Do not place this product in your pocket while in use, or it could explode and result in burns to any exposed skin'. Yeah, pretty sure I didn't read that anywhere.

Correct, they are not supposed to explode under normal usage... but that was my point, what was he doing before the thing exploded? Was it being bent in half? Was a nail he stuck in his pocket from the playground stick into it? Had he torn or modded the case previously? My point was simply that there are possibilities that we do not know enough about to declare anything about this case.

And no, I am not a lawyer since I do like to be able to look myself in the mirror. And I apologize for any words I may have mis-spelled, I assumed that I was speaking with a rational adult who could extrapolate from context any words I may have not gotten correct.

Oserus99, this isn't the first time it happened. I understand you're trying to figure out the circumstances here, but something shouldn't explode simply because you have random junk in your pocket. A nail doesn't even make sense for that matter, as it simply couldn't penetrate the iPod in that way. I mean, unless someone was hammering him in the ass with a hammer, I just don't see how that would happen.

Also, iPods are meant for normal wear. Many people like to keep their cellphones / mp3 players in their back pocket. Hell, even the Blackberry commercial from T-Mobile recognizes this. I don't know if you've seen the pockets on women's jeans either, but they don't really have front pockets for that matter. What are they supposed to do?

majortom1981 said,
$150,000 is not excessive. Probably mainly to cover the doctors bills and the lawyers bills.

They are asking for $150k plus attorney's fees.

Julius Caro said,
ooo I want mine to explode too. Who doesnt want 150k?

I can think of multiple times in my life i could have sued going by the logic some people have here.

Wow i mean 150K each time. That's a lot.

You know like the time an hockey stick did break and i got the bottom half of the stick right in my face (lost a teeth). An hockey stick should never ever break.

LaP said,
I can think of multiple times in my life i could have sued going by the logic some people have here.

Wow i mean 150K each time. That's a lot.

You know like the time an hockey stick did break and i got the bottom half of the stick right in my face (lost a teeth). An hockey stick should never ever break.

Should have checked your gear before you went out on the ice. Hockey sticks are meant to be banged around, yeah it broke, yeah that sucks, but it's a piece of sports equipment. This was a perfectly normal iPod in a kids pocket that burst into flames for no easily identified reason. Not exactly the same. If you were driving home after your game and your stick blew up in the trunk of your car, sending flaming shards and fragments like shrapnel all through your car, then yeah, that'd be similar.

Apple is not responsible for a battery randomly failing and catching on fire

Why are they not? It seems cut and dry that the manufacturer (for intents and purposes) of the product is 100% at fault here?

let alone the employees that sold it to the family

Not the employees, but the store should be. That is who you have a contract with when you buy something.

The battery is internal right? You can't change it yourself (well if you crack it open I guess you can). So in this case it's fully Apples fault. Not like the used unlicesned batteries which was what some people did in that old Nokia cellphone fire days.

In that situation Nokia wasn't at fault cuz you went out and bought a cheap generic cellphone batter that latter exploded on you.

How do you know Apple knowingly made a contract for inferior goods? Do you work for them? Do you know what they know? I think not. For all we know, they entered into the contract "knowing" that these batteries are good and safe. It could be one faulty battery. Quit acting like this is happening all over the place and that it's an epidemic.

I doubt it was intentional, but Apple (and any company) should vigorously test a portable device like that. Throw it in a dryer, throw it on the ground, etc.

gigapixels said,
How do you know Apple knowingly made a contract for inferior goods? Do you work for them? Do you know what they know? I think not. For all we know, they entered into the contract "knowing" that these batteries are good and safe. It could be one faulty battery. Quit acting like this is happening all over the place and that it's an epidemic.

Quit acting like thousands more need to get hurt or die before it actually becomes a big deal.

I don't believe anybody should be sued here.

Sure, it's not an excessive amount, but lawsuits are when somebody should be blamed for the incident and held responsible. Apple is not responsible for a battery randomly failing and catching on fire, let alone the employees that sold it to the family. Simple as that.

It was a random, unfortunate incident, but you can't go suing people every time those happen.

i don't know... if you're at McDonalds and you spill hot coffee on you then you definitely shouldn't sue because it's YOUR fault. Coffee is hot- be careful. I hate the whole "suing" thing but if i had something in my pocket that's not supposed to explode and it burns me than I'd at least like some money for new pants/underwear haha.

Anyone...ANYONE, on this site, posting in this thread, would be doing the same damn thing if they were BURNT by their mp3 player. If I was burnt by any device, I don't care if it's an electric drill or an iPod, I'd be suing the manufacturer. Where do you draw the line? Lawsuits are only just if the person has been permanently disfigured? Scarred? Blinded? Killed? What's the acceptable lawsuit policy for crap like this?

gigapixels said,
I don't believe anybody should be sued here.

Sure, it's not an excessive amount, but lawsuits are when somebody should be blamed for the incident and held responsible. Apple is not responsible for a battery randomly failing and catching on fire, let alone the employees that sold it to the family. Simple as that.

It was a random, unfortunate incident, but you can't go suing people every time those happen.

Wrong. Companies choose the parts they want for their products. With that comes (supposedly anyway) thorough testing. Sure, it may have been simply a random, unfortunate incident, but this isn't the first time this has happened. You'd think a company that's seen these issues in the past would work to make sure the parts being used are quality.

This is the first I've heard of an iPod Touch battery having problems. If we start to see a more of these incidents, I might be more inclined to place blame on Apple or the battery manufacturer, but I have yet to see this as an epidemic of any sort nor any need to blame somebody for it.

gigapixels said,
This is the first I've heard of an iPod Touch battery having problems. If we start to see a more of these incidents, I might be more inclined to place blame on Apple or the battery manufacturer, but I have yet to see this as an epidemic of any sort nor any need to blame somebody for it.

But it's certainly not the first time Apple has put out a product with batteries that have failed, burnt or exploded. Maybe the first for specifically the Touch, but not the first Apple-associated battery to do something like this.

gigapixels said,
I don't believe anybody should be sued here.

Sure, it's not an excessive amount, but lawsuits are when somebody should be blamed for the incident and held responsible. Apple is not responsible for a battery randomly failing and catching on fire, let alone the employees that sold it to the family. Simple as that.

It was a random, unfortunate incident, but you can't go suing people every time those happen.

Was not that ramdon.

Once the bettery in my TV remote did break while holding it in my hand. Got the stuff on my hand and on the couch. No fire so no harm. Just to tell that yes batteries do break and it's not that un-common.

But it's certainly not the first time Apple has put out a product with batteries that have failed, burnt or exploded. Maybe the first for specifically the Touch, but not the first Apple-associated battery to do something like this.

That may be, but that fact is simply circumstantial. We have no direct evidence to say they have been negligent in this case.

Either way, I'm simply saying that if it were me in the same circumstances, I wouldn't sue.

Was not that ramdon.

Once the bettery in my TV remote did break while holding it in my hand. Got the stuff on my hand and on the couch. No fire so no harm. Just to tell that yes batteries do break and it's not that un-common.


Randomness has nothing to do with frequency. I know batteries can and have broken down, but the case here is whether or not Apple was being negligent when using these specific batteries in the iPod Touch.

You wouldn't sue if something in your pocket burst into flames and caused you second-degree burns?

Seriously? The thought wouldn't even cross your mind? What if this wasn't an Apple product, and something from a different manufacturer?

gigapixels said,
This is the first I've heard of an iPod Touch battery having problems. If we start to see a more of these incidents, I might be more inclined to place blame on Apple or the battery manufacturer, but I have yet to see this as an epidemic of any sort nor any need to blame somebody for it.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/12/japan-o...ing-ipod-nanos/
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/14271878/detail.html

After Channel 2 sent Apple pictures of the iPod, they called back but they refused to say how common the problem is. In fact, Apple refused to talk about this particular incident at all.

Granted they are both Nano products, but it doesn't change the fact that it's happened to them before, and not too long ago either. Whether or not this is the first you've heard of this is completely irrelevant. Products shouldn't EXPLODE under normal use! Period!

People bitched about Sony and the whole rootkit ordeal, but oh, suddenly another story breaks out where an iPod has exploded and hurt someone, but it's "not a big deal" since the kid survived. Doesn't matter how badly he could've been hurt, does it?

I'm sorry if I'm getting too argumentative here, but I can't sit and listen to you claim that it's okay for Apple or any company for that matter to not be responsible for their actions, simply because the person didn't die, or maybe not enough people died. That is absolutely unacceptable.

dead.cell said,
http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/12/japan-o...ing-ipod-nanos/
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/14271878/detail.html



Granted they are both Nano products, but it doesn't change the fact that it's happened to them before, and not too long ago either. Whether or not this is the first you've heard of this is completely irrelevant. Products shouldn't EXPLODE under normal use! Period!

People bitched about Sony and the whole rootkit ordeal, but oh, suddenly another story breaks out where an iPod has exploded and hurt someone, but it's "not a big deal" since the kid survived. Doesn't matter how badly he could've been hurt, does it?

I'm sorry if I'm getting too argumentative here, but I can't sit and listen to you claim that it's okay for Apple or any company for that matter to not be responsible for their actions, simply because the person didn't die, or maybe not enough people died. That is absolutely unacceptable.


Dude, your post is full of win.

dead.cell said,
Granted they are both Nano products, but it doesn't change the fact that it's happened to them before, and not too long ago either. Whether or not this is the first you've heard of this is completely irrelevant. Products shouldn't EXPLODE under normal use! Period!

People bitched about Sony and the whole rootkit ordeal, but oh, suddenly another story breaks out where an iPod has exploded and hurt someone, but it's "not a big deal" since the kid survived. Doesn't matter how badly he could've been hurt, does it?

I'm sorry if I'm getting too argumentative here, but I can't sit and listen to you claim that it's okay for Apple or any company for that matter to not be responsible for their actions, simply because the person didn't die, or maybe not enough people died. That is absolutely unacceptable.


My point is that it may not have been Apple's actions that led to this. That's all. Everybody's so quick to blame somebody when something bad happens. What if it was just a random faulty battery? What if Apple had no knowledge that something like this could happen with the batteries they decided to use in their iPods? You simply don't know whose fault it is here. And, as far as I see it, perhaps nobody is at fault. It could just have been a random occurrence, with nobody to blame.

And, for the record, the Sony rootkit ordeal is far different, at least given our current knowledge. Sony knowingly did that on purpose. Apple did not hurt this kid on purpose, and we don't even know if they knowingly used faulty batteries. Quite a different situation from my point of view.

Dischordiant said,
You wouldn't sue if something in your pocket burst into flames and caused you second-degree burns?

Seriously? The thought wouldn't even cross your mind? What if this wasn't an Apple product, and something from a different manufacturer?


Yes, seriously. I don't know whose fault it is and neither do you. If, perhaps, I were sure of the reason it exploded and therefore who to blame, I might. But we don't know here, not for sure.

And I don't care who the manufacturer is (I'm as far from being a fanboy as anybody can get).

It doesn't matter who's to blame directly, when you sell a product, you do proper and thorough testing to ensure that it works properly and perhaps doesn't explode. When you sell a product, you are RESPONSIBLE for what's inside.

Apple may be punished for a bad component, but I will assure you that the ball of sh-- will roll downhill, to make sure that the person they're getting their components from sees to doing a better job. I'm sure the person making their batteries would not want to lose Apple's business.

He was probably pretty happy and comfortable in them until his leg got burned. Come on, this is silly to ask about

donBoomy said,
whats a boy doing wearing spandex underwear?

It all makes sense now. The kid's a roadie for Van Halen, and that wasn't an ipod but part of the PA pyro kit he picked up by mistake after rehearsal. Now he's too embarrassed to tell the truth and his mum's concocted this story as a smokescreen. Case closed!

i think $150k is a good #. Hell we've seen crazy lawsuits that payout in the millions (see hot coffee @ mcds - not associated with hot coffee GTA style) my other question is.... why was the kid wearing "nylon/spandex underwear"

...conducted themselves maliciously and fraudulently...

Talk about beefing your claim up. Maliciously and fraudulently? I remember a day when accidents happened and you didn't feel the need to blame someone but took it for what it was, an accident!

Ah those were the days...

When companies could release faulty products that killed people and only pay small fines...to the government.

Ahem.

Sorry, but I hope this gets settled out of court for a lesser sum. Why?

This part from the source:

"He continues to suffer from both physical and mental conditions which will cause him to suffer pain, mental distress, emotional distress, and otherwise for the rest of his life," reads the lawsuit. The plaintiff's mother says that the family was not warned in advance of the potential risk that the "iTouch" would cause serious bodily injury, and Apple's 10 retail employees had a duty to not only test for this, but also warn customers.

As a result, Apple and the retail employees are accused of gross negligence and recklessness, as they supposedly conducted themselves maliciously and fraudulently when selling the iTouch. The mother asking for compensatory damages of more than $75,000 plus punitive damages of more than $75,000 and attorney fees.

First off, it sucks that he got burned. But I wouldn't be traumatized FOR LIFE if I got a giant scrape on my leg from falling because my shoe's laces got tangled. If I got my shoes from Sears, am I going to sue those Sears employees for being "negligent" for not informing me that shoelaces can get tangled?

The fact that they're going after employees who are merely doing their job - selling products - is ridiculous. How are they supposed to know of product defects beforehand? This is a rare case that an iPod touch got too hot that its battery allegedly caught fire.

If and only if Apple refuses to compensate this boy should they go ahead with the lawsuit. But how they're adding it "mental distress" and "trauma" is sickening and another example of some of the sue-happy BS mentality that exists in this society.

yeah, cause your leg being lit on fire and battry acid running down your leg isn't tramatizing.

Trama happens. any long lasting injury causes trama on a mental and physical level. Acid burns (not to mention FIRE burns) cause long lasting injuries. They affect people long term and should be compensated for.

Sorry, if she were asking for millions I'd agree that it was excessive, but she's got a valid point. Her son WILL be affected negatively by this for the rest of his life, maybe not in a HUGE way but it's a valid point. Defiantly not in the millions of dollars way, but it's true.

Also, if she questioned safety of the devices, and the store clerks told her "nothing" then it IS gross negligence, as this isn't the first time something like this has happened. If they had said "It's extremely rare, you're more likely to be struck by lightning but yes, the battery has in rare cases caught fire" then the claim against the employees would be unjustified as well, but we don't know the exchange there.

She shouldn't be sueing the employee's, but I think she has every right to sue apple, depending on how severe the burn scarring is etc...

Scars from burns can be very nasty

Getting scraped isn't the same as getting burned, bud.

I believe they should stick it to Apple as it's their job to thoroughly test their products. I also believe the amount of money being asked for isn't ridiculous either. Companies should be punished for cutting costs just to make a bigger profit when it puts the consumer at risk. Sure, they may have not seen it coming, but that doesn't make them any less responsible.

This isn't the first time this has happened either I believe. I recall seeing stories about iPods exploding before, including a number of Japanese iPod Nanos. It seems people have gotten lucky in not having an entire disaster on their hands. Granted, getting burned (literally) sucks, but it really could have been worse.

What if it had exploded while he was riding his bike down a busy street?

Just because he got lucky doesn't mean it is not actionable.

Yeah, maybe I was being a bit hasty here...

Still, they're suing the wrong party. It's not the Apple Store employees they should be going after, but upper management and whoever manufactured those batteries.

It's quite an obvious flaw in the designs of touch and iphones (atleast first gens from experience) they get very hot to the point this is possible and very easily could happen and is hardly surprising hearing this. should also say it's not first time either but it is for it to escape the enclosure.

Digix said,
It's quite an obvious flaw in the designs of touch and iphones (atleast first gens from experience) they get very hot to the point this is possible and very easily could happen and is hardly surprising hearing this. should also say it's not first time either but it is for it to escape the enclosure.


I have a Gen2 of the Ipod Touch, it get hotter when charging and when playing video, but music is cold as ice.

When I charge my iPhone 3G it gets warm, hell running cretin apps it gets warm.
Though my Moto RAZR V3r also gets warm (not as warm as the iPhone) when charging

FusionOpz said,
When I charge my iPhone 3G it gets warm, hell running cretin apps it gets warm.
Though my Moto RAZR V3r also gets warm (not as warm as the iPhone) when charging :/

My ipod touch gets very warm to the point you don't want to hold it in single hand for very long while charging and also while being used with wifi on and music playing and maybe using an app.

FusionOpz said,
Might want to get it checked then :P
My iPhone has never gotten hot to the point of not wanting to hold it :/

iPhone first gen probably lesser an issue since has thicker/bigger shell on back.

FusionOpz said,
When I charge my iPhone 3G it gets warm, hell running cretin apps it gets warm.
Though my Moto RAZR V3r also gets warm (not as warm as the iPhone) when charging :/

Seriously :|

When i charge my wireless phone they get warm.
When i get my G7 batteries out of the charger they are hot.

I mean every batteries i know get hot when charging them.

FusionOpz said,
When I charge my iPhone 3G it gets warm, hell running cretin apps it gets warm.

Well don't go running those cretin apps. They're stupid y'know :P

He ran to the bathroom and with the aid of a friend removed his burning pants.

I always thought that children's clothing had to be fire proof.

If the kid went up like a Roman candle then the mother should be sued for negligence to a minor.

Why was the kid not rolled up in a carpet or rug to extinguish the flames?

This case smells of (as Judge Judy would say) baloney !

leesmithg said,
He ran to the bathroom and with the aid of a friend removed his burning pants.

I always thought that children's clothing had to be fire proof.

If the kid went up like a Roman candle then the mother should be sued for negligence to a minor.

Why was the kid not rolled up in a carpet or rug to extinguish the flames?

This case smells of (as Judge Judy would say) baloney !

Uhhh, where is it said that kids clothes need to be fireproof?

caustic acid in lithium batterys would be sticking to clothing and burning, while the fire wouldn't spread the acid itself would continue to burn.

what's the medium then? Sorry, my mistake. I am not an expert on batteries, but the battery and the contents of it would continue to burn even if the clothing was not flammable...so I'll stand by my point...

The pockets of trousers are normally just a thin layer of cotton/polyester or whatever. If something is hot enough to cause second degree burns, the pocket isn't going to do anything to protect your leg. I don't think they are mainly sueing about his trousers catching on fire :P, rather the fact that he got burnt.

Wow, Apple has been getting a lot of negative press lately. Has this every happened with the Zune or any other MP3 products?

techbeck said,
Wow, Apple has been getting a lot of negative press lately. Has this every happened with the Zune or any other MP3 products?


Basically any Lithium Battery can do that. Sony had tons of problems with their Lithium Batteries for Portable computer. The battery was surely bad and cracked, when cracked it can take on fire. Since the Ipod touch electronics are crammed in little space, it doesn't suprised me that a faultly battery caused this..

I can't recall any other negative Apple stories recently? (apart from maybe the gift card thing?)

This is news and I'm glad I have been made aware of it as I have an iPod touch. If someone's Zune exploded, we'd report that aswell.

Might be a solution a quick search didn't show any stories about exploding Zunes... I think Microsoft finished their exploding product line with the original Xbox.

Well flames shooting out of them is close enough to exploding for me. Luckily mine has a "good" power supply. I'd hate for my console to 'splode while I was playing Fable...

eew Fable...
Thats reason enough for it to explode :P lol I kid.

I wish I could find my AUF cd... I seem to have mis-placed it... did you steel it Grey? lol

Nope... Not here. And it was Fable: Lost Chapters. Much better than the initial release. The first one made me angry because it was incomplete.

‘Plaintiff A.V. immediately ran to the bathroom and took off his burning pants with the assistance of a friend,'

or

‘Plaintiff A.V's mother immediately ran to the phone and called her lawyer, hopeful for a big payout for a random incontrolable incident.'

Yea, thats more like it.

Let's add the cost of the iPod Touch and the jeans. Hmmm, most likely $300.

Btw, there are so many puns in the article hehe. Also, why must everyone feel the need to sue when something goes wrong? Not everything is perfect you know you can't sue just sue McDonald's for spilling hot coffee on yoursel- oh wait.

Majesticmerc said,
So it's fine for an electronic device to explode in your pocket?

No, but you have to justify or prove there is some warrant to give someone 150K for something that happened to them, if there was little or no physical damage, and it wasn't a SUPER tramatic experience, this they won't get crap.. maybe... a new ipod and 10K

If you recall, nobody wanted to recall the exploding Sonly L-ion laptop batteries at first either, then everyone recalled them.

Has anyone thought that just maybe the mother already approached Apple about the situation, and Apple told her to . . .off. Thank about it, and at the same time ask yourself how much this incident would be worth to you if it had happened to you. It was not funny at the time, nor is funny now.

Pam14160 said,
Has anyone thought that just maybe the mother already approached Apple about the situation, and Apple told her to . . .off. Thank about it, and at the same time ask yourself how much this incident would be worth to you if it had happened to you. It was not funny at the time, nor is funny now.


You get over it, **** happens. Don't be a pansy and expect something for nothing.

Having said that, it would be only right for Apple to replace the device and pay for any medical costs but that's definitely nowhere close to 150k.

Rolith said,
Glad to see she's suing for doctors bills and treatment costs only... makes it far harder for people to scream fanboyism

No way it was even near $150K for doctors bills and treatment.... thats the cost of a kidney transplant. Since when is a bandaid, and cream, plus the cost of a new pair of pants 150K...

xendrome said,
No way it was even near $150K for doctors bills and treatment.... thats the cost of a kidney transplant. Since when is a bandaid, and cream, plus the cost of a new pair of pants 150K...

Ok... Doctor Bills + Legal Bills... Happy?

xendrome said,
No way it was even near $150K for doctors bills and treatment.... thats the cost of a kidney transplant. Since when is a bandaid, and cream, plus the cost of a new pair of pants 150K...


Really? because when I worked in insruance, a kidney transplant could cost up to $1 million in expenses... typically $500,000+ depending on problems that come up....

xendrome said,
There wouldn't be any legal bills if they didn't sue....


Very true, yes, I think that is way too much, but it could be more. They are asking for "$150,000 total plus attorney fees for the child's bills and emotional distress"

xendrome said,
No way it was even near $150K for doctors bills and treatment.... thats the cost of a kidney transplant. Since when is a bandaid, and cream, plus the cost of a new pair of pants 150K...

Just an fyi: I have insurance and had to have 19 stitches put in my foot. It cost me roughly $14,000. Medical bills here in the US are astonishing. My dad recently had a heart attack and had to have surgery. Easily a 600K bill. So don't even go there, pal.

That being said, 150K seems fair.

150k fair? Please, far from it. I seriously doubt some cream and bandages costs anywhere near that even with the astronomical medical prices in this damn country.

She's just doing it to get money from the situation like every other ******* in our sue happy society. I feel for the retail employees.

It would have cost me about $40k for gall bladder surgery and a 7 day stay in the hospital if I hadn't had insurance. It's ridiculous how expensive stuff is. $2k just to go have a CT-scan done. I'm sure that machine has already paid for itself over and over by now. **sigh**

I feel for this kid since it was his pant pocket . He should sue Apple for millions in damage in case he had lost his d*** and lost the opportunity of becoming a father