Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Aug 2009 08:47 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Apple I think we just found out why we aren't hearing more stories of exploding and burning iPods. Ken Stanborough had to throw his daughter Ellie's iPod Touch outside, because it got too hot to hold, and he could see vapour. Within 30 seconds, he could see smoke, he heard a pop, and the Touch went 10ft into the air. After contacting Apple, the company denied liability, but offered a refund. However, Apple said that in accepting the money, Stanborough was not allowed to talk about the existence of the agreement - or else Apple would sue him. Update: Apple told Sky News Online that the letter with the gagging order is standard practice.

Thread beginning with comment 376720
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Throwing the device?
by christian on Mon 3rd Aug 2009 10:34 UTC
christian
Member since:
2005-07-06

The actions of Apple are indefensible, but it has to be said that throwing the device might have contributed significantly to the subsequent explosion. Lithium ion cells don't take too kindly to impacts. Apple would try and show that the device would not have exploded had it not been thrown.

Doesn't the US have any consumer laws to protect people's rights in this sort of situation? In the UK, the "Sales of Goods and Services Act" would cover issues like this, and makes the retailer liable for refunds if the product is not fit for purpose. Getting a refund would not be a problem in a case like this, with no conditions attached.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Throwing the device?
by Sparrowhawk on Mon 3rd Aug 2009 12:40 in reply to "Throwing the device?"
Sparrowhawk Member since:
2005-07-11

This case was from the UK, Liverpool to be precise.

I agree with you that we do not know the full facts of the case and as such we ought not jump to conclusions regarding the iPod itself. However be that as it may, Apple's subsequent bahaviour is truly lamentable. I've been a big Apple fan for many years now, but their behaviour in recent months towards consumers has been shoddy at best.

I think the Big Cheese himself needs to kick a few execs in the derriere and remind them (and himself) just how Apple got popular in the first place. It certainly was not by behaving like this.

Anyone know whether this sort of 'binding' agreement is actually legally binding in English and Welsh law?

Edited 2009-08-03 12:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Throwing the device?
by DrillSgt on Mon 3rd Aug 2009 16:10 in reply to "Throwing the device?"
DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

The actions of Apple are indefensible, but it has to be said that throwing the device might have contributed significantly to the subsequent explosion. Lithium ion cells don't take too kindly to impacts. Apple would try and show that the device would not have exploded had it not been thrown.


That would indicate faulty design. The iPod, as with the old Walkman tape players, are supposed to be designed to handle being dropped and impacts. The major purpose of devices like this is so you can work out, run/jog, play sports, etc while listening to your music. In other words, it should be able to withstand being dropped or tossed into the grass.

Reply Parent Score: 5