AfterDawn: News

Japanese couple paid $7400 after their Apple iPod Nano explodes

The Nikkei is reporting that Apple Japan has been ordered to pay restitution to a couple whose iPod Nano exploded.

Apple will pay ¥600,000 (about $7,425) in medical fees and pain and suffering after the 1st-gen device spontaneously caught fire after regular use.



The Nano has well-documented issues, and Apple even started a recall in Korea in 2009 and then in 20 more countries including the U.S. in 2010.

According to the ruling, the couple purchased the device in early 2006, and kept using it regularly. In July, 2010, the couple tried to charge the device causing it to overheat and then catch on fire. The wife suffered burns on her hand that took 1 month to heal.

Apple had no comment.

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 13 Apr 2012 14:03

• Previous article

• 'Pebble' smartwatch raises $2 million

• Next article

• Intel working with 10 tablet vendors

• 13 comments

• LordRuss

  Now see... This is a reasonable settlement. Nothing garish or out of hand. I mean, so long as the thing wasn't being worn on the guys forehead or something equally stupid, but we get the point.
  
  Nobody's claiming their impotent or their cat has insomnia or any other digestible corpse asinine idea. Just pay the medical bills & a little kick in to make the whole ordeal a bit of a warm fuzzy. Not a f*king retirement plan for your 2nd great grandchildren.
  

  http://onlyinrussellsworld.blogspot.com

  13.4.2012 14:36 #1

• xaznboitx

  Apple should get sued for 1million .... I've let alot of device overcharged non stop and none exploded.
  

  14.4.2012 02:22 #2

• LordRuss

  Alright, alright... When they said 'exploded' I really don't think they meant it like the IEDs we see going off on the road sides of Afghanistan. If you stick two 9volt batteries together the inevitable 'pop' is said to be an 'explosion', but it never is the mythical low yield nuclear blast we all seem to envision taking out the family room.
  
  I'm thinking there was some kind of rupture & definitely some form of heat damage. At best, the size of this battery is 6 nickels, doubled up & layered by three. Even by self admission the device was continually used, even after the recall.
  
  The thing eventually got hot enough to burn (not catch flame) & thus hot enough to cause some injury; even though this group was told/encouraged to send the thing back for a new one.
  
  Despite Stupidity still winning here, all was still solved to a fair conclusion in my book.
  

  http://onlyinrussellsworld.blogspot.com

  14.4.2012 15:00 #3

• xboxdvl2

  remind me of the days in primary school science when i use to tape 2 aa batteries together and watch them short curcuit eventually smoke would come out and the teacher would be going nuts.
  

  R.I.P. mr 1990 ford falcon.got myself a 1993 toyota corolla seems to run good.computers still going good.

  15.4.2012 03:40 #4

• nbfreak2

  I agree they got what they deserved.....
  

  15.4.2012 08:52 #5

• drhanaba

  Originally posted by LordRuss: Alright, alright... When they said 'exploded' I really don't think they meant it like the IEDs we see going off on the road sides of Afghanistan. If you stick two 9volt batteries together the inevitable 'pop' is said to be an 'explosion', but it never is the mythical low yield nuclear blast we all seem to envision taking out the family room.
  
  I'm thinking there was some kind of rupture & definitely some form of heat damage. At best, the size of this battery is 6 nickels, doubled up & layered by three. Even by self admission the device was continually used, even after the recall.
  
  The thing eventually got hot enough to burn (not catch flame) & thus hot enough to cause some injury; even though this group was told/encouraged to send the thing back for a new one.
  
  Despite Stupidity still winning here, all was still solved to a fair conclusion in my book. Maybe you want to read the comments new the end of the story. " Causing it to overheat and catch on fire."

  20.4.2012 18:39 #6

• LordRuss

  Originally posted by drhanaba: Maybe you want to read the comments new the end of the story. " Causing it to overheat and catch on fire." Maybe you'll want to read the 'forum comments' as some folks were opining that the devices were indeed 'exploding'.
  
  "I" on the other hand deed indeed 'read'. Thus, the elongated explanation for catching fire as apposed to explosion scenario. It's called being a pompous ass. Kind of like what I'm doing right now...
  

  http://onlyinrussellsworld.blogspot.com

  21.4.2012 08:58 #7

• Mez

  Originally posted by LordRuss: Alright, alright... When they said 'exploded' I really don't think they meant it like the IEDs we see going off on the road sides of Afghanistan. If you stick two 9volt batteries together the inevitable 'pop' is said to be an 'explosion', but it never is the mythical low yield nuclear blast we all seem to envision taking out the family room.
  
  I'm thinking there was some kind of rupture & definitely some form of heat damage. At best, the size of this battery is 6 nickels, doubled up & layered by three. Even by self admission the device was continually used, even after the recall.
  
  The thing eventually got hot enough to burn (not catch flame) & thus hot enough to cause some injury; even though this group was told/encouraged to send the thing back for a new one.
  
  Despite Stupidity still winning here, all was still solved to a fair conclusion in my book. Actually they do explode, or the battery explodes strongly enough to explode both the device and the plastic cases they were in, spewing out corrosives. All the ones that exploded did so in an insulating case. Not 1 exploded that wasn't in a case. That happened years ago. I have seen pictures of the ipod and what it did to the rooms. Now they charge much slower. I am fortunate enough to have one of them since I like the quick charge. The surface doesn't reach 100 degrees F. My case prevents me from charging without removing it first.

  14.8.2012 21:50 #8

• LordRuss

  Originally posted by Mez: Actually they do explode, or the battery explodes strongly enough to explode both the device and the plastic cases they were in, spewing out corrosives. All the ones that exploded did so in an insulating case. Not 1 exploded that wasn't in a case. That happened years ago. I have seen pictures of the ipod and what it did to the rooms. Now they charge much slower. I am fortunate enough to have one of them since I like the quick charge. The surface doesn't reach 100 degrees F. My case prevents me from charging without removing it first. I'm not going to argue your conclusions. I wasn't there, nor did you supply pictorial fact of your findings in any particular case. Actually I haven't seen any to date that definitively 'demonstrate' this happening. They have all been what appears to be someone rubbing their legs a bit 7 then a pretty busted up iPod.
  
  I would like to have had at least one captured event (untainted, of course) of this rupturing happening. Despite, I'm not disputing your evidence or the "known" dangerous behavior of dead shorted batteries. Neither of which is argument worthy of continuing a debate to start a childish argument of y/n, right or wrong.
  
  However, having photographed enough of the most bizarre shit you'll NEVER imagine while in the military, truth be known, yes - anything 'can' happen. Like dynamite, gunpowder is most dangerous when compressed. Why wouldn't it be the same for these batteries encased in an aluminum shell?
  

  http://onlyinrussellsworld.blogspot.com

  15.8.2012 12:23 #9

• Mez

  The picture might have been faked but it was all too crazy to dream up. Sometimes reality is crazier than fiction. I believe they were 3rd gen, possibley 2nd. I think that is what I have. This all happened many years ago, 5 or so. Too long for me to remember clearly other than I was real surprised and I did look into it since I had the ones that were blowing up.
  
  They were relatively new and were the first nano to sell in volume. When I got mine 4g was the biggest they made. The previous generation was 1g so not many persons bought them. When they designed them they had no idea people were going to put them in cases. Mine is leather so it breaths and is not a great insulator. What were blowing up were in plexiglass or some clear plastic.
  
  Well mine hasn't blown up yet! I am about ready to retire it but I really do not like touch screens. As it is, the controls are wearing out. Touch screens probably will not last half as long.

  15.8.2012 19:27 #10

• LordRuss

  Originally posted by Mez: When they designed them they had no idea people were going to put them in cases. Mine is leather so it breaths and is not a great insulator. What were blowing up were in plexiglass or some clear plastic.
  Ahh!!! Insulated! That's something I hadn't taken into consideration. The old Double Wrapped Burrito in the microwave stunt. Starts to make a bit more sense now.
  

  http://onlyinrussellsworld.blogspot.com

  16.8.2012 12:19 #11

• Mez

  Yes, it really wasn't a design flaw. The case must have been tight, water resistant, so it was part of the bomb.
  
  So you know about the burrito bomb? How about the FAX bomb? Back in the days of thermal printers you could fax a ream of black construction to a company you didn't like. If it didn't catch fire or ruin the FAX at least you would use up all their supplies. It still could ruin a laser jet or drain an ink jet.

  16.8.2012 21:18 #12

• LordRuss

  Originally posted by Mez: Yes, it really wasn't a design flaw. The case must have been tight, water resistant, so it was part of the bomb.
  
  So you know about the burrito bomb? How about the FAX bomb? Back in the days of thermal printers you could fax a ream of black construction to a company you didn't like. If it didn't catch fire or ruin the FAX at least you would use up all their supplies. It still could ruin a laser jet or drain an ink jet. I remember the old Xerox laser office set bombs... It was one of the first that you could fax/network straight to the office printer from anywhere. You could basically do the exact same thing you were talking about, but the model I'm talking about had a HUGE toner reservoir & agitator pretty close to the heating element which was obviously in relation to the printing head.
  
  Put a dozen "black out" (used for absolute black in photography) sheets though that bad boy & that reservoir would rupture. But only if the maintenance goon put the lid on too tight. Which was usually 'always', because he hated cleaning up the internals from one of the office 'know it alls' that always tried to fill the toner reservoir themselves.
  
  Obviously, this design has been changed too. I guess there were too many vindictive ass fiends like us out there.
  

  http://onlyinrussellsworld.blogspot.com

  17.8.2012 12:46 #13