80 réponses à ce sujet

[DukeOfNukes]

Yes, that case. I don't regard intentionally selling a dangerous product as being frivolous, however. As I said, the issue wasn't that it was hot, the issue was that it was so hot as to immediately cause serious bodily harm.

[StingingVelvet]

I've become much more conservative as I have gotten older and I think a lot of that has to do with debates I had on the internet where people pointed out my far-left opinions as anti-freedom.



Not trying to start a debate on that here, just being frank.

[Busomjack]

I think the case reminds me of that case back in 2003 I think when that dude tried to sue McDonald's because he got fat. Even though the case was frivolous and eventually thrown out I think some good points were raised nonetheless about the need for nutrition labels.

Responsibility really needs to go both ways, especially since many of these products sold have trans fat in them which is about as bad for your health as tobacco.

[Fexelea]

The hot coffee case is defenetely McDonald's fault. You can't sell a drink that, had you ingested it upon receiving it, would give you internal burns. And initially McDonalds acted like bstards denying to pay the hospital fees even, which were considerably smaller than what they ended up having to pay.



I'm all for nutrition details in restaurants. You cannot chose if you don't know, and being willfully ignorant should not be upheld as a right.

[Sword For Hire]

SleeplessInSigil wrote...

or a critic on any other medium.

Poll!

We all know the world is full of "X is bad. No it isn't." "Y is better. No it isn't." and so on but has any of those EVER influenced your decision to try a game, read a book, or watch a movie that you were already going to (or not) before you read or heard some other person's comments about it?


If something is getting universal praise, does it make you feel left out of the action, as it were, if you haven't tried it yet?

Or if a lot of people think something is bad, does it make you feel embarrassed or guilty for liking it?


No, this is not sarcasm or a rhetoric question, I'm actually trying to recall if my own plans were ever changed from reading something on the internet or a review in a magazine or on TV or even word-of-mouth from a friend.. I wonder if someone else's have?

tldr j/k

no

[Ponce de Leon]

I decided to play ME1 after hearing that Ashley can be killed. With. A. Nuke. Friggin epic!

And I don't regret buying the second one, given the fact that I am considering them to be on my top 10. Really wonderful games. Second in line as best made from BioWare. Best third person shooter.

[Loerwyn]

Fexelea wrote...

The hot coffee case is defenetely McDonald's fault. You can't sell a drink that, had you ingested it upon receiving it, would give you internal burns. And initially McDonalds acted like bstards denying to pay the hospital fees even, which were considerably smaller than what they ended up having to pay.
 

You can't sell a hot drink? Suppose I best go to the local restaurants and tell them to not sell me hot food as it can burn me. <_<

[Fexelea]

Please don't paraphrase my posts to make a misleading point. I said this:

"You can't sell a drink that, had you ingested it upon receiving it, would give you internal burns."

Just as they can't sell you something that had you ingested it would give you food poisoning. The establishment has a responsibility to ensure the beverages and food they provide are safe for consumption. Coffee that, after several minutes of standing in a cup causes 3rd degree burns is not safe for consumption

Modifié par Fexelea, 25 juin 2010 - 11:23 .

[Loerwyn]

No, it's not, and you don't expect it to be.

It was thrown out of court in the UK for a good reason - Common Sense.

[Druss99]

This very forum has changed my opinion on one subject. I used to think all men were created equal then I started reading Busomjack's posts. I now acknowledge he is the superior being.

[Fexelea]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

No, it's not, and you don't expect it to be.
It was thrown out of court in the UK for a good reason - Common Sense.

So you buy a beverag to consume and you expect it to be 180 degrees hot? No, you expect it to be as hot as it is when you make it at home (likely 120 max) or as hot as other shops make it: 150 degrees

[mousestalker]

What can alter my opinion are facts backed up by clear and cogent reasoning. When I've run into that on the Internet my opinion has changed.



An awful lot of argument on the 'Net boils down to "You're a dirty rotten stinker" vs "Your Mom wears Army boots". That may make me giggle, but will never change my mind.

[Busomjack]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

No, it's not, and you don't expect it to be.
It was thrown out of court in the UK for a good reason - Common Sense.

I don't think something as vague as "common sense" can be legally defined.  I mean if you want to argue this from a strictly common sense point of view then I can just as easily say that it is common sense for a company not to sell a product that isn't fit for human consumption which seems to be the case with this coffee.
A court ruling doesn't end a debate on product safety, courts have made many poor decisions in the past that get revisited.

Modifié par Busomjack, 25 juin 2010 - 11:35 .

[Loerwyn]

Fexelea wrote...

So you buy a beverag to consume and you expect it to be 180 degrees hot? No, you expect it to be as hot as it is when you make it at home (likely 120 max) or as hot as other shops make it: 150 degrees

I expect it to be seriously hot, I don't really care how hot as long as it's not cold. I don't expect to be able to drink it as soon as I take it from the counter, nor within the next few minutes.
I used to go to a coffee shop every week or so when I was in high school, and every time I had to wait maybe 10 minutes before it was "safe" to drink.
People want the drink at different temperatures, and as such each place would use a standard temperature as to satisfy that range. If they make it closer to drinking temperature, it can affect the flavor of the drink and for some people it will cool too quickly. So, to quote the UK case:

Similar lawsuits against McDonald's in the United Kingdom failed. In Bogle v. McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd. Field J rejected
the claim that McDonald's could have avoided injury by serving
not-so-hot coffee.

"If this submission be right, McDonald’s should not have served  drinks at any temperature which would have caused a bad scalding injury. The evidence is that tea or coffee served at a temperature of 65 C will cause a deep thickness burn if it is in contact with the skin for just two seconds. Thus, if McDonald’s were going to avoid the risk of injury by a deep thickness burn they would have had to have served tea and coffee at between 55 C and 60 C. But tea ought to be brewed with boiling water if it is to give its best flavour and coffee ought to be brewed at between 85 C and 95 C. Further, people generally like to allow a hot drink to cool to the temperature they prefer. Accordingly, I have no doubt that tea and coffee served at between 55 C and 60 C would not havebeen acceptable to McDonald's customers. Indeed, on the evidence, I find that the public want to be able to buy tea and coffee served hot, that is to say at a temperature of at least 65 C, even though they know ... that there is a risk of a scalding injury if the drink is spilled."

.

Modifié par OnlyShallow89, 25 juin 2010 - 11:36 .

[Busomjack]

If a company says a product is safe to drink, but then drinking it causes internal burning then that is misleading.

I don't think McDonald's should be forbidden from selling hot beverages but there should be warning labels nonetheless. You can't fault the consumer when the the company doesn't reveal the dangers of their product.

[Loerwyn]

They don't say it's safe to drink.

The cups have bleeding warning labels on them :|

[Busomjack]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

They don't say it's safe to drink.
The cups have bleeding warning labels on them :|

yeah, they do now thanks to lawsuits such as the one we discussed.  I remember when they didn't though.

[Fexelea]

The fact that you don't care how hot is the same as someone who doesn't care how many rats there were in the kitchen. McDonalds had over 700 burn claims because of that coffee and had done nothing about it. As the US (unlike the UK) relies on precedent, this was a good court decision.
Saying that boiling beverages are what people want and what most people do is a measurable factor are offuscating the fact that consumer safety comes first
And as BJ said, those giant warning labels are there because of this woman.

Modifié par Fexelea, 25 juin 2010 - 11:46 .

[Loerwyn]

700 burn claims? How many coffees do you think they sell a day, or even a week? 700 is nothing, especially for a company on the scale of McDonalds.

It's a world of blame - Nothing's ever an accident or your own fault, it's always the fault of someone else. Let them burn, for all I care. If you're too stupid to be careful with a hot drink, then it's your own bleeding fault if you get burnt.

[Fexelea]

... You realize those were *only* the third degree burns claims right? The other claims were in the millions! (Adding: this is not the 700 local claims but the extended investigation results, aka not the documented company reports but the investigation that followed as lawmakers deemed wether it would be necessary to legistale in this regard)

Good to know that you uphold individual responsibility. So if someone who bought a Toyota was stupid enough to assume the car was safe to use, it's their fault right? If they are stupid enough not to realize there is something wrong with the mat and the acceleration... it's obvious isn't it?

Companies have to consider safety, so much as consumers must take responsibility for their actions.

Modifié par Fexelea, 25 juin 2010 - 12:04 .

[Busomjack]

I think if you're eating at McDonald's anyways you've got to be at least a little stupid. Most McDonald's I see are in the ghetto which makes sense since it's often times the only food poor people can afford. I don't know why anyone who can afford to eat better would put their health at risk eating such crap.

[Loerwyn]

Except that's a different situation completely. You buy a hot drink in the knowledge that it'll be hot. It is intended to be hot, whereas when you buy (using your poor example) a Toyota with optional mats, you don't expect it to be faulty.

The Toyota problem was avoidable on Toyota's side, the hot coffee problem is avoidable on the side of the customer. If you put a hot drink betwixt your knees and pull the lid towards your person, then that's your own damned fault.

[Fexelea]

OS you are missing the point here. The toyota buyer assumes safety, so does the coffee buyer. The user of the car could have noticed easily that the mat was stuck in his acceleration. So could the woman have noticed that the coffee was incredibly hot.

She was at fault for spilling the coffee: yes. She was not at fault for having a drink that would scold your innards if you drank it, and she was under no obligation to know that McDonalds coffee was served over 40 degrees hotter than other places. It is likely the coffee was even hotter than that, as it would have cooled on the pouring handover and walk to the car.

Her success in court forced McDonalds to revise its policy and actually warn people, which is a good thing for anyone who is not aware of their absurd temperature rules. (That are still hotter than anywhere else whilst their coffee still tastes worse than anywhere else)

*Dinnertime*

Modifié par Fexelea, 25 juin 2010 - 12:12 .

[SleeplessInSigil]

ROFLMFAO  Not even 2 pages and the very thing I was talking about begins already.


I just realized that it's often been the other way around for me; my opinion only gets reversed if it's shared by people I can't stand. i.e. if I like something already but I see a bunch of idiots liking it too, I start disliking the product itself  yeah, messed up. Does anyone else get like that?


A ready case in point: Dragon Age. I love that game (as apparent from my early posting history) but when I saw most of its fans here hating on other games for reasons that would make DA itself inferior to yet other games, I was a bit appalled and put off from following the franchise for a while, through no fault of the product itself.


and this thread was inspired by Busomjack's recent raging over Daybreakers, a film I'd never heard about but am now going to watch at the earliest opportunity. I mean, for him to dedicate more time of his life to talking about it than it takes anyone to actually watch a movie, it must be something special!

Modifié par SleeplessInSigil, 25 juin 2010 - 12:53 .

[Loerwyn]

Fexelea wrote...

OS you are missing the point here. The toyota buyer assumes safety, so does the coffee buyer. The user of the car could have noticed easily that the mat was stuck in his acceleration. So could the woman have noticed that the coffee was incredibly hot.

Yes, the Toyata buyer assumes safety, but they are also aware of the inherent risks of the car failing (as does happen, whether it's the car mat getting stuck or otherwise). The coffee buyer assumes safety but is still aware that hot liquids burn.

She was at fault for spilling the coffee: yes. She was not at fault for having a drink that would scold your innards if you drank it, and she was under no obligation to know that McDonalds coffee was served over 40 degrees hotter than other places. It is likely the coffee was even hotter than that, as it would have cooled on the pouring handover and walk to the car.

McDonalds are really no hotter than most other places, actually. Sort of source. You'll find burn cases from most, if not all, major places that sell coffee and hot drinks - Burger King, Starbucks, Café Nero (in the UK) and so forth.

Her success in court forced McDonalds to revise its policy and actually warn people, which is a good thing for anyone who is not aware of their absurd temperature rules. (That are still hotter than anywhere else whilst their coffee still tastes worse than anywhere else)

See above.

I'm not missing the point at all. This case was unnecessary, and they're often thrown out of court because of that. You buy a hot drink in the knowledge it will be hot and can burn you if you're not careful. You buy a car in the knowledge that you're invincible in it and if you're not a careful driver that you can kill or injure yourself. It all comes down to common sense and logic, two things that are severely missing in the modern world.