Apple Product Failure Results In A Gagging Order

[engine]

Product Failure Results In A Gagging Order [technology.timesonline.co.uk]

Apple attempted to silence a father and daughter with a gagging order after the child’s iPod music player exploded and the family sought a refund from the company.

The Times has learnt that the company would offer the family a full refund only if they were willing to sign a settlement form. The proposed agreement left them open to legal action if they ever disclosed the terms of the settlement.

[wyweb]

I'd go straight to my attorney's office. Straight to his office.

He'd give Apple something to gag on.

[engine]

In simple terms, if you have a faulty item, a replacement or a refund (depending upon the local laws and local agreements) should suffice. Also, imho, i'm quite within my rights to say that I bought something and it was no good, or it was very good, etc.

I doubt i'd sign such a document, too.

[rocknbil]

...CPSC investigators suggested....lithium ion batteries could be the source of the problem.

Aside: as one heavily involved in RC hobbies (or used to be,) I've always been wary of the use of lipo/lion batteries in consumer products. They're also the cause of cell phones exploding. We in the RC hobby are intensely aware of the potential danger of lipos/lion: one slight mischarge or damaged cell can cause them to go. And when they go, they burn at over 1000 degrees F.

They're the cell of choice because they are as little as 1/8 the weight of nicads or nimh and charge time is significantly less with the correct charger. But they must be handled responsibly, and in general consumers are not aware of the little bombs they are carrying around.

I only raise the point because it's not just iPods.

As you were . . .

[Leosghost]

They also power most wristwatches ..which is why you need to always know that you can get your watch off your wrist real fast if needed ..and only ever wear waterproof ..never "water resistant" if you think they are going to get wet ..
resistant means it wont stop in a 5 minute drizzle rain ..

Doesnt mean it wont short and take your hand with it ( or give you a real bad , maybe disabling burn ) whilst you are fighting the fake rolex or batman wrist band off ..

Always have been amazed that you are allowed on planes with lithium cell equiped devices ( some of these cells dont take kindly to sudden depressurisation either ) ..plus you can short them deliberately to make simple incenduries ..impressive ones at that ..

1000 degrees can take lot of plane down even if it's only the size of a shorted button cell device dropped down a seat ( which isnt designed to be retardant to 1000 degree heat ) by a terrorist ..or just some kid who drops their ipod in their coke and then lets it slide down the side of the seat ..

[edited by: Leosghost at 3:14 pm (utc) on Aug. 3, 2009]

[kaled]

Gagging orders in respect of the settlement of civil actions (such as unfair dismissal) is one thing, but in the case of product safety, they should be outlawed.

Insofar as keeping such information private might hinder others when seeking justice in similar circumstances, I would say such gagging orders are a clear attempt to pervert the course of justice.

Kaled.

[piatkow]

All they had to do was walk in to the Argos store where they bought it with the receipt and the failed product. The retailer is bound by the Sale of Goods Act and can't play silly b*ggers with gagging orders.

[kaled]

The father dropped the iPod then threw it out of the back door after it started to hiss. I think a retailer might have reasonably argued that misuse was to blame.

In this case, to get a refund, it would be necessary to demonstrate that either a design fault or a manufacturing fault meant that a reasonable drop (i.e. one it should have survived) caused unreasonable damage.

Kaled.

[swa66]

Any battery -any kind except perhaps the discharged one- stores an amount of energy, in case on Li-ions it's even a high amount of energy for the weight.

Shorting any battery will cause overheating and potentially serious problems (if you don't believe it: throw a monkey wrench across the terminals of you car's battery (please don't: it's quite dangerous).

So that leaves a lack of the public at large to realize that if you mess with the structural integrity of a product that has a large capacity battery that some serious issues can be the consequence. For any product, any vendor.

Having clauses in a contract forcing the customer to keep a settlement's details "secret" isn't uncommon AFAIK, in fact it's common as far as I know in order to avoid a situation where other customers try to derive rights out of settlements a company made with other customers.

The smart thing for the consumer who wants to go public instead of get a refund is to go to a consumer rights group with the defective product and let them handle it. They have far more power than any individual. In fact it often is enough to get a better deal from a service provider not willing to do the right thing to just keep them in the loop.

[kaled]

Part of the problem is that high-current batteries are being used for low-current devices.

A current-limiting resistor built into the battery might be all that's required in some cases to make devices safe. However, this would effectively reduce the capacity of the battery and cause it to run warmer - two significant disadvantages. Nevertheless, for devices that can run for many hours like an ipod, the performance hit should be small.

Kaled.

[swa66]

Part of the problem is that high-current batteries are being used for low-current devices

That's what a fuse is for :o

A resistor would also seriously hamper charging the battery, make it run even hotter than they already do, and basically revert most of the advantages of getting better batteries.

But regardless of the measure, it helps little if the users mess up the integrity of the system (even unwittingly with moisture, damage to housing etc.)

The easiest solution is to monitor the temperature of the battery and shut it all down when it get's too hot.

[kaled]

The value of resistance would have to be chosen carefully (as would the method of integration) and there would be an impact on charge times, but for something like an iPod, it should be possible to render the battery intrinsically safe for no more than a 10% drop in any performance figure (probably much less). The real problem is that it would add to the cost. Simply soldering something to the outside wouldn't help much in situations where the short-circuit is within the battery itself (due to physical damage).

Laptops and cameras probably draw too much current for this to be useful. I'm not sure about Mobile phones.

Kaled.