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.
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?
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....
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"
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.
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.
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.
HUGE payout there...
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.
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
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.
Some revisions had bad power supplies.
Thats reason enough for it to explode
I wish I could find my AUF cd... I seem to have mis-placed it... did you steel it Grey? lol
You mean Sony?
*gets coat*
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..
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.
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 !
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?
I have a Gen2 of the Ipod Touch, it get hotter when charging and when playing video, but music is cold as ice.
Though my Moto RAZR V3r also gets warm (not as warm as the iPhone) when charging :/
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.
My iPhone has never gotten hot to the point of not wanting to hold it :/
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.
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.
Well don't go running those cretin apps. They're stupid y'know
This part from the source:
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.
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.
Scars from burns can be very nasty :/
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.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCWdnjLqVWw
I'm sure you wouldn't be upset or traumatized at all. I mean, having my franks 'n beans near blasted off by a pocket flamethrower is just a common occurrence.
Just because he got lucky doesn't mean it is not actionable.
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.
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!
When companies could release faulty products that killed people and only pay small fines...to the government.
Ahem.
Sorry, couldn't help it. In all seriousness, sad to see what happened to this kid's iPod
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Seriously? The thought wouldn't even cross your mind? What if this wasn't an Apple product, and something from a different manufacturer?
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.
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.
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.
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).
Last edited by gigapixels on 14 Mar 2009 - 12:50
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.
Why are they not? It seems cut and dry that the manufacturer (for intents and purposes) of the product is 100% at fault here?
Not the employees, but the store should be. That is who you have a contract with when you buy something.
In that situation Nokia wasn't at fault cuz you went out and bought a cheap generic cellphone batter that latter exploded on you.
Companies should not be able to cut costs with inferior goods, period.
Quit acting like thousands more need to get hurt or die before it actually becomes a big deal.
LOOL
uDo?
ya iDO!!
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by Calum on 14 Mar 2009 - 08:51
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
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.
Last edited by Calum on 14 Mar 2009 - 08:52
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?
They are asking for $150k plus attorney's fees.
+1.
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.
How anyone continues to see these catch-fire devices as 'superior' is beyond me. This should be an easy win for the victim.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.