I'm trying to give both sides fair critiques, as some are being overly critical, but some have very valid arguments. You are correct that they have been put in a bad position by the supplier. It's always awful to see a good company put in this position by someone else.
However, there have now been several people with identical issues who have submitted tickets (and provided proof of such). Generally, 15 out of 500,000 is perfectly fine for a failure rate of a product.
However, this unfortunately has to do with safety, and this brings about an entirely different ball game. As Microsoft, Best Buy, Target, Dell, and Toys'R'Us know very well, 15 identical cases that relate to a safety hazard, no matter how many total sold and didn't cause the problem, is cause for immediate notification to all owners, as well as 'discard', 'recall', or 'replacement programs.' (the latter requiring a newly manufactured item, with a manuf. date after the identified 'recall' product timeframe.) It may only take 10 identical safety issues to warrant a multiple-party suit, when sufficient notice of the issue is not provided in a timely manner. And it only takes 1 confirmed incident to warrant a single party suit. That's why this is crucial to make the correct decision.
My personal opinion as to the wisest move would be to issue a voluntary recall program, with a notice to treat the item as 'for display only', with partial refunds or item exchanges provided. Then if I were LC, I would have a discussion with the supplier to front the costs of any losses suffered as a result of the product's safety inconsistencies. Then, LC is put in a strong position to file suit against the supplier if they refuse to negotiate. It's a bit of a pain, but it provides much better legal protection, and minimal financial strain.