Slashdot Mirror


Company Sued, Loses For Not Using Patented Tech

bdcrazy writes "A man was recently awarded $1.5M in a jury trial after his hand was injured by a Ryobi table saw. The saw did not include the patented 'Saw Stop' technology that the plaintiff argued would have prevented all the problems." 60 similar cases have now been filed nationwide. TechDirt makes the argument that this jury decision is completely crazy: "If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology, it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place." If the decision stands, not only will the price of table saws go way up, but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye.

4 of 631 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Saw Stop is great by Qzukk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yeah? So it is less of a burden to replace my fingers?

    If it isn't, then you pay $169 more for a saw that'll save your fingers.

    Otherwise, you do what this guy did: buy the cheap saw, lose your finger, then sue because you bought the cheap saw.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  2. Re:Not "the government" by mi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The jury held that the law required the company to do so.

    The jury found, that saws without such devices are defective. I agree, that this is nonsense, but most people cheered, when an automaker was crucified for not making their gas tank safer. GM did not break any law, but were found responsible for the deaths anyway.

    The saws weren't defective before the device was invented, but they are now — according to the jury...

    There is a much worse example of this problem, one that actually involves the (Executive) Government — I am talking about building codes, which get tightened every year. An unelected government official can force you to rebuild your house "to code" whenever you ask them for a building permit. But we don't read about that outrage in newspapers...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  3. This is ridiculous by MattskEE · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's not a consumer product safety standard and Ryobi shouldn't be held liable for making table saws the same way they've been made for decades. If the customer wanted a more expensive saw with which was safer he should have bought one. Instead he bought a Ryobi saw but apparently he has buyer's remorse since he is suing them for selling exactly what he wanted to buy.

    This system apparently adds ~$150 to the purchase price of the saw, plus $170 every time it triggers (new brake and new blade), so it's hardly a foregone conclusion that all saws should have it, given that most people never injure themselves on their power tools. To be fair a table saw is often regarded as the most dangerous common power tool, but that's why you always treat it very carefully and follow certain safety rules like using a "push stick" instead of putting your hand near the blade. It's a lot like using a vertical bandsaw.

    If you read the article you see that the lawyer who filed this suit was hired by the user's health insurance company. So that's the real story: the health insurance company doesn't want to pay for people injuring themselves with power tools. So the user gets a settlement, the health insurance probably gets a portion of it, and the lawyer definitely gets a portion of it.

  4. Re:he should think this through by QRDeNameland · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And the government is liable for not having whatever relevant regulatory body require all saws to have the patented Saw Stop technology.

    --
    Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.