From: Sean Roach <roach_s@alph.swosu.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:42:32 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: heart
Message-ID: <199708280337.XAA03583@www.video-collage.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 05:49 PM 8/27/97 -0700, Kent Crispinu wrote:
>
>On Wed, Aug 27, 1997 at 12:49:42PM -0400, Sean Roach wrote:
>> At 11:55 PM 8/26/97 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>[...]
>> 
>> Pretty soon every revolver will have a warning label.  "Warning, misuse of
>> this tool can result in injury and death.  By handling this item you consent
>> to bear all legal responsibility reguarding its use."  Never mind that such
>> should be implied.
>
>Product liability issues are more prominent when something doesn't 
>function as it is supposed to -- say you are trying to defend 
>yourself against a thief, and the gun blows up in your face.  This is 
>not the same as assuming legal liability for when you shoot someone.
>
>Arguably, even then you should not be able to sue -- the small 
>aircraft industry has been decimated by product liability issues.  
>And I remember when Chouinard went out of the climbing equipment 
>business because of threat of lawsuits.
>
>My understanding is that warning labels -- even signed liability 
>releases -- are of limited use in these cases, because, while you can 
>sign a binding contract that limits your ability to sue, you cannot 
>so bind your survivors. 

I wasn't referring to when the things work improperly.  I was referring to
cases specifically like the lawsuit brought against the makers of the TEC-9
because some idiot used one on an office building full of people and it had
the odassity to work.