Slashdot Mirror


10th Annual Wacky Warning Labels Out

autophile writes "It's official: M-Law's 10th Annual Wacky Warning Label Contest is over. First prize has gone to a washing machine label urging not to put people in washers. Started to promote awareness of excessive litigation, the contest highlights common sense warning labels, such as the one that warns not to dry cellphones in microwave ovens. Companies find it necessary to stick crazy warnings on their products because of previous insane lawsuits: 'A front loader (washing machine) is just at the right height — speaking now as a mother and not a corporate spokeswoman — for a four-year-old,' said Patti Andresen Shew of Alliance Laundry Systems. Personally, I think a four-year-old precocious enough to read and understand all the warning labels hidden all over a product probably doesn't need those labels."

3 of 445 comments (clear)

  1. Lawyers aren't the entire problem by gravesb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The law generally is that the company must warn against unintended uses that a reasonable person would forsee. The problem is the reasonable person standard is determined by a jury. If juries would stop awarding such verdicts, then lawyers would stop suing. As long as juries continue to say a reasonable person would forsee someone putting a wet cell phone in a microwave, lawyers will continue to file suit. Talking to one juror about a malpractice case, they said they really didn't see that the doctor was negligent, but the plaintiff was suffering, the insurance was the only one who was going to pay, the insurance company had money, so why not give the plaintiff $400,000? The thing they didn't see (other than their conduct being against the law) was that everyone pays increased medical costs to cover the increase in malpractice insurance that the doctor must pay. If jurors were more responsible and more intelligent as to the consequences of their actions, the legal culture would have to change. Don't expect the lawyers to change the system, they have too much of a vested interest, and they are legally bound to look after their client's best interests within the law. People need to change the system.

    --
    http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
  2. Re:Well she has a point... by thewils · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The labels are pretty rediculous but they are for the parents


    Well, actually the labels are there for the manufacturers. They don't give a crap what you do with their product, if there's a warning label then your chances of successfully suing them are minimal.
    --
    Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
  3. Re:Well she has a point... by IdleTime · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These warning labels are a social curiosity found in USA.

    When I first moved here I was totally cracking up at all the stupid warnings you have on everything. Why are they there? Because of a horrible justice system and not because you want to warn people about the obvious but to avoid paying millions and millions to idiots.

    Your justice system is long overdue for a total overhaul, it is horrific at best.

    --
    If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!