Quote:
Originally Posted by seebs
Could be. It's entirely possible that all the lawyers who have come to conclusions about the restrictions they need to impose, and the pages and pages of disclaimers we see, are all just superstition.
|
You're talking about manufacturer labels and disclaimers?
I've been in product packaging meetings at a couple of different companies, and there's not always even a lawyer in the room, especially at smaller companies. Those warnings and disclaimers are often decided on by rooms full of laypeople, speculating about the potential for litigation based on different urban legends they've heard, just like you see it done on the internet.
So the common belief that warning labels and such are all based on some clear precedent is specious.
And anyway, if every warning and disclaimer were based on solid legal reasoning, that would seem to indicate that those warnings and disclaimers actually serve to protect the company from liability in those cases.
If there were a significant trend of successful lawsuits from people who have been injured because they intentionally modified products, there would be direct evidence of that. I'm just asking that you show me directly what type of cases you're talking about because I'm interested in seeing it.