@seejay said:
@VGR said:
@stevekj said:Remember that these systems (I'm talking about Windows again now) are being marketed to people whose first instinct is to sue when the coffee they spill in their lap turns out to be too hot.
Apologies for going way off-topic, but I squirm whenever I hear this mentioned. The original lawsuit involving spilled coffee is misunderstood. The woman was over 70 years old, and received third degree burns which required a skin graft. McDonald's encouraged people to transport in a moving vehicle something which can cause these burns. Would any chemist do that with corrosives?It should also be noted a few other things:
1) The coffee was heated to a very unsafe temperature, which was acknowledged by McDs
2) McDs had several lawsuits against them for exceedingly hot coffee which they had paid settlements to and swept under the table.
Lots of information on it here:
Most people would agree that it is an essential right to be able to sue McDonalds or any other corporation/individual for your monetary loss. The thing about these lawsuits is someone takes a painful injury where the medical expenses are lets say $100,000 but they want to sue for 10 million. Why should they be rewarded these ridiculous amounts of money just because they were harmed by a public company that has a lot more money than they do?
In England, if you sue someone and lose, you have to pay for their lawyer fees. As a result people don't sue unless they have a legitimate complaint and can reasonably expect to win. People over here have gone completely crazy with the amount of lawsuits, the types of lawsuits and the amount of money that you can win if you are successful. There are lawyers that will take your case and you pay nothing unless you win. That's why this has become such a big problem.