I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Topic: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but... (Read 5094 times) previous topic - next topic

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

March 28, 2007, 11:06:22 PM

...Some of the disclaimers you see on products and advertisp00gets are crazy. I know there was an email circulating with some of the more foolish ones a while ago, but seeing two commercials tonight made me realize that sometimes it gets a little crazy.

Commercial #1: An older commercial in which the Energizer bunny gives a space ship a "boost" in order to show off how powerful Energizer batteries are. Not a bad idea as commercials go, but I just tonight noticed a bit of fine print at the bottom of the screen. It said "Dramatization. Do not attempt."

Commercial #2: A new pen 15e commercial shows a complete cartoonish fantasy land in which pen 15e is produced by what appears to be small, cute aliens and incredible, but imaginary, machines, in the vein of Charlie & the Chocolate Factory. Again, it said "Dramatization".

So are these two companies so afraid of lawyers that they're afraid we'll sue if we ever come across a stalled space ship and can't get it started by hooking jumper cables to a plush rabbit, or if we ever come across the pen 15e factory and are disappointed that it's produced here on earth by people and big, ugly machines?

When that stupid Lexus that parks itself came out the commercials said "Professional Driver. Closed Course" as it showed the car park itself. Not on a race track, not in a silly place like on a rooftop or anything, but a normal parallel parking situation in a normal city scene. They're selling a technology with a disclaimer that you shouldn't use it.

The Ford Edge commercial that shows the car driving on two wheels along the "edge" of building rooftops has the disclaimer "Dramatization, real cars can't do this". The AWD Fusion commercial that shows the car driving on the side of the building has a similar disclaimer.

Many new cars with NAV systems are designed so that you have to go through several lawyer screens warning you of your imminent and certain death if you so much as even consider using the NAV system while the vehicle is moving. Every single time you start the car. And some prevent you from doing so entirely. And since most NAV systems assimilate the audio and HVAC controls, a simple task like turning up the radio or changing the fan speed is like a trip to the courtroom.

When I lived in an apartment that had a fireplace I used to burn those artificial fire logs because real ones would have been too messy in an apartment. The instructions on how to place the log in the fireplace (with wrapper still on it, with seam facing you) and how to light it on fire (light seam in middle and on both ends), and immediately after the instructions on how to light this FIRE log on FIRE was the ominous warning, in bold letters: CAUTION: RISK OF FIRE

Have lawyers really made society so stupid that a fire warning must be printed on something designed, manufactured and marketed for the sole purpose of burning???

Why is it that a drug company must prove its products are 110% safe, and if somebody so much as catches a cold as a side effect the lawsuits start flying, but cigarette companies are allowed to make and sell products that kill a high percentage of their customers? If a drug saves a million lives it will be taken off the market if one tenth of one percent of the users have a reaction to it.

I think I'm gonna go to law school. There's money to be made off stupidity.

[/rant]

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #1 – March 28, 2007, 11:12:38 PM

This my friend is today as we know it. Watch the movie Idiocracy. That is what I see this world coming too. While at work in the Body Shop, the customer has no problem telling me that a problem that has no relevance to what I fixed, was caused by something that I had to have done. Even some dare to come in months later complaining that squeaky brakes or a service light on are the causes of me FIXING there damaged vehicle.

Stupidity at its finest. Im here to back you up man. And please do share your wealth, hmm? lol

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #2 – March 28, 2007, 11:31:04 PM

And it all started when some woman burned herself on McDonald's coffee...

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #3 – March 28, 2007, 11:54:02 PM

No it started when I saw the warning on a lawn mower that said "DO NOT USE AS HEDGE TRIMMERS"

Who the hell in there right mind said HEY lets pick this thing up and use it to cut the hedges.

And they only keep getting dumber.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #4 – March 29, 2007, 12:47:10 AM

Bill Engval said it best. "I hate stupid people, they should were a sign that says ""I'm Stupid"" that way you wouldn't rely on em." This country is so involved with Political Correctness and being nice to other people because you will be sued if your not. I think lawyers need to only be allowed to do murder and higher such crimes, and the only suing that should be going on is Malpractice and other similar stuff. No because you stuck a AA up your nose!! Sheesh people no longer use common sense.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #5 – March 29, 2007, 02:04:36 AM

Quote from: cougrrr302;136992

This my friend is today as we know it. Watch the movie Idiocracy. That is what I see this world coming too. While at work in the Body Shop, the customer has no problem telling me that a problem that has no relevance to what I fixed, was caused by something that I had to have done. Even some dare to come in months later complaining that squeaky brakes or a service light on are the causes of me FIXING there damaged vehicle.

Stupidity at its finest. Im here to back you up man. And please do share your wealth, hmm? lol

I just watched that movie tonight. It made me laugh a lot, but it also scared the hell out of me...............

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #6 – March 29, 2007, 02:45:14 AM

tv sucks.

And you are right, there is a lot of money to be made off stupid people - that is until they run out of money.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #7 – March 29, 2007, 07:30:01 AM

"And God said let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me.
And God said let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan."

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #8 – March 29, 2007, 10:10:29 AM

Yup, Id say find a job where you can make money off peoples stupidity. You want job security? There you have it! Its not getting any better, so you might as well take it for all its worth.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #9 – March 29, 2007, 10:32:33 AM

Hell, how about this...my girlfriend IS A LAWYER and even she thinks the disclaimers on commercials and products are idiotic.

But unfortunately, thanks to all the frivolous lawsuits, these companies are all walking on eggshells.

I personally like the Scion commercials where they show the animated car and it says "Graphic representation, not actual car."

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #10 – March 29, 2007, 10:37:38 AM

I had almost forgotten about the McDonalds coffee case that Brian mentioned. Another oldie-but-goodie: The person that sued Suzuki over the alleged Samurai rollover problem (notice how I said "alleged" - don't want to get sued by Suzuki, y'know). Several people sued Suzuki over this, but the one that sticks out in my mind was the guy that sued even though he had never sat his ass in a Samurai. He was traveling behind a Samurai, and that Samurai "allegedly" rolled over. He stopped to assist, and when he stepped out of his own car he was promptly run over by another vehicle, which then fled he scene. He sued Suzuki, claiming that if the Samurai hadn't rolled over he wouldn't have had to stop to assist, so he never would have been run over. Never mind the fact that had he bothered making sure it was safe before stepping into the street he wouldn't have been hit, either...

A big one in the news recently is the tainted pet food affair. As soon as this recall was announced the first thought in my head (and likely the first thought in just about everybody's head) was "That'll be a lawsuit". Society has actually conditioned us to expect lawsuits every time a mistake has been made. Sure enough, within days of the recall announcement, a class action lawsuit was launched.

Class action lawsuits are usually launched when it is not worth the time (and lawyers' fees) to launch an individual suit. A person losing a $500 yellow lab dog to poison food isn't worth the thousands in lawyers fees. So the lawyers get as many people on the gravy train (dog food related pun intended) as they can. Multiple plaintiffs mean multiple awards and BIG lawyers fees. Funny thing about class action suits: The only ones that make any money are the lawyers. The actual plaintiffs might end up with a $10 gift certificate good for pet food. In the best case scenario the person might be eligible for the cost of the dog pllus his vet expenses, IF he can provide receipts proving that he had been feeding the dog this tainted food, and IF he can prove the dog actually fell ill because of the food and not from something else. Of course, getting that money could prove difficult, if not impossible - Who the hell keeps dog food receipts???

I see this kind of thing all the time, usually with something like faulty computer hardware. A problem with a particular piece of equipment arises, the lawyers get wind of it, and a class action suit is filed. A multi-million dollar settlement is reached. The average Joe that had their equipment fail gets a $10 discount on their next piece of equipment. This person actually lost something (in addition to the cost of the failed equipment they may have lost productivity and/or valuable data). For their losses they are offered a pittance. The company that manufactured the equipment loses millions of dollars, not just in the lawsuit award and their own legal fees, but in lost sales due to a tarnished image. And the lawyers roll about in the money.

Even if the plaintiffs lose the case, lawyers make money. If you sue somebody and your lawyer is working on contingency (no pay if no award), the person or entity that you're suing has to pay their lawyers. It's almost as though the lawyers get together and say "You sue me this week, I'll sue you the next".

I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that in a society run by lawyers (most politicians and their advisors are lawyers), the lawyers are the ones that come out on top...

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #11 – March 29, 2007, 11:59:36 AM

But wouldn't it be more appropriate to blame the judges and juries? I mean they are the ones that deal out the rulings.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #12 – March 29, 2007, 12:48:37 PM

I remember hearing about a lawsuit where a guy driving an RV decided to put the cruise control on, then went to the back for some coffee. Needless to say, it got wrecked, and he sued the company....

...and won.

It's not as much the companies' fault for this, but more so for the dumbass people we have living in this world.

EDIT: While we're on the subject of dumb court cases, here's a good one:

A family was away on vacation. A burglar tried breaking in through the garage and somehow got himself locked in the garage. He had to live off of dog food and Pepsi for a week, then turned around and sued the family for malnutrition...and won.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #13 – March 29, 2007, 12:56:21 PM

I work in a public building so I've come to a conclusion: people are dumb :hick:.

I swear I'm smarter than 60% of the people I see on a daily basis. I'm not even that smart I'm just a *B* student.

I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...

Reply #14 – March 29, 2007, 12:58:59 PM

Quote from: stuntmannick;137044

But wouldn't it be more appropriate to blame the judges and juries? I mean they are the ones that deal out the rulings.

They are just following the law. I would blame the lawyers before them.