Anyhow, I could go on all day long, but I've got better things to do than argue with a naive kid with out practical experience or legal training. No amount of words will change your mind, you'll just have to learn the hard way
A sign that someone has run out of ammunition to support his argument becomes evident when you try to dismiss me by painting me as "a naive kid". I don't know if you mean that literaly (you would be wrong...I am long removed from being a kid), or if you mean it figuratively. Either way it serves no bearing in our discussion. I would be willing to debate this issue with a 6 year old who came prepared with facts rather than opinions and urban legend.
You point out a lot of ills of our litigious society. I agree with you that people are more aware (cautious you call it) of their responsibilities with regard to their neighbors. Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing that our local jungle gyms are being torn down is once again something that you have attempted to marginalize as a simple by-product of over-litigiousness society without actually exploring the merits of the issue.
I have seen the old 1950's era play areas torn down and replaced by much safer play areas that are intended to reduce child injuries. Has that come about because of lawsuits from parents of injured kids? Possibly. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. Neither do the parents of kids who play ing in the safer play areas today.
Why do you assume that criminal cases are simpler and easier for jurors to handle as opposed to tort cases? Criminal cases call upon jurors to listen to information from DNA experts, toxicologists, medical examiners, etc. Am I to understand that you feel jurors can handle these overly complex issues but they can't make a decision on the Toshiba case? That is what lawyers are there to do; to make their point. If highly paid corporate lawyers fail in their job they have no one else to blame.
I am not an advocate of filing frivilous lawsuits. That issue has to be addressed. There have been some calls to require the plaintiffs to pay all court costs if they lose or have their lawsuits thrown out. I don't know if that is the answer. That would have the disastrous effect of removing legal recourse as a viable option for redress from many people; Corporate defenses can be overly extravagant and would be an onerous burden for plaintiffs to handle. I'm open to discussion to address this problem in a fair and equitable manner.
You don't understand my ire because I didn't express any ire.
To use your analogy of the printing press, the invention itself can be compared to the internet in that it changed the way information was forever created and shared. But, do you think that the printing press spurred people to suddenly start thinking new thoughts all of a sudden? No. Change would have occured, albeit at a much slower pace.
Yes, the internet has brought about change, and will continue to do so. Let us not become deluded into thinking that the internet is "it". The internet has not obviated the use or need for printing presses. Books will continue to be printed. Once the next thing that surpasses the internet comes along it more than likely will not bring about the end of the internet. It will just be the next great thing.
If you had asked Guttenberg whether he could have conceived of anything that would surpass the printing press he more than likely would have said no. We are at the same place in the internet revloution. We can't fathom anything better. But there will be. Mankind will conceive it and create it. Not the internet.
You are right. Some bright people actually use the internet as a tool to get their real work done. Can you imagine that?
I think Roblimo's use of the term Internet is a bit broad for the point he's trying to make anyway, especially when he points to companies (Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, 3Com) who are not soley internet companies. Rather, they were innovating long before they embraced the internet. I think Roblimo should have went with omputer related techonology as opposed to internet, but then that wouldn't be quite as sexy, would it?
Listen, the internet is not some distinct entity that lives off on its own. It is part of society. The internet alone can't change society. Rather, it is the people behind the internet who feel empowered by the ability to create virtual soap boxes who will instill change.
Remember, the internet is a medium . Granted, it is a powerful medium, but give credit to people.
This has got to be the biggest bunch of malarkey I've heard in quite some time. I can't believe that someone who appears to be quite normal would foist this nonsensical garbage upon us.
Let me list some of Roblimo's pearls:
1) Internet is spurring latest economic golden era.
This is true. It can be compared to the junk-bond era of the '80s where a lot of paper wealth was created but not a whole lot of good came out of all those companies getting bought out and leveraged. I mean slashdot is cool and all, but exactly how has created anything economically? Glad to see Roblimo at least ackowledge that much.
2) Internet boom-era has siphoned talent away from other fields, stagnating those fields.
This is a comical assertion. First, Roblimo assumes that the development in the computer fields is somehow remarkable. What evidence does Roblimo present? There are a bunch of people smarter than Roblimo who have actually presented proofs to suggest that the explosive growth in technology is not extraordinary. To then suggest that the automotive and space fields have been slowed by this brain drain is meer suppostion. It'll take more than the two case studies Roblimo has presented here.
I'm always amused by the articles that Roblimo and Hemos toss out there. They seem intent on mimicing John Katz by putting out articles that are gauranteed to generate debate, but the underlying issues are usually shallow and not thought out clearly.
You're peddling pure garbage. You've obviously have never been on a jury in your life. People take that responsibility very seriously. Instead of watching Matlock, go out in the real world. You might find it interesting.
Does a good company deserve this? And perhaps more importantly, can our country survive this behavior?
As far as I can tell, using the latest economic indicators, I think our country is not only surviving this "behavior", it is thriving. Unlike you and the Republican legislators who are willing to give big business carte blanche to do anything they want without any of the requisite responibility, I don't look at big business as the victim.
You mention the McDonald's case,which is a popular rallying cry for people on your side of the issue. At face value the case does sound like a crock. But when the case when to court, it was determined that McDonald's was serving coffee at some absurdly high temperature (50 degrees higher than what other establishments served coffee) that people were scalding their tongues left and right all over the place. McDonald's was aware of this problem because several employees had complained, yet they refused to address their concerns.
The fact of the matter is that neither you nor I have a complete picture of the Toshiba case. One thing I do know, however, is that NO ONE claimed to have been hurt by it. One million computers sold, and not one complaint. That gives you some idea of just how minor a problem it is.
Toshiba may have decided to settle to ensure that no one stepped forward who had been damaged by this problem. They made a legal decision and I have no problem with it.
The legal system isn't perfect but it's better than anything else in the world. A fine balance has to be leveraged to ensure that the rights of the consumers are not trampled to protect the interests of big business. Capping punitive damages and substituting arbitration for jury trials goes away from that.
Billion dollar awards against billion dollar companies do not prove that the law system is out of control. You've listed several companies but you have not given any evidence that would indicate they were the victims of unjust lawsuits. Corning, Ford and GM have all put out products that have caused the death and disfigurement of people at one time or another. I don't know about you, but I don'think billions of dollars are enough to teach them a lesson.
You then go on to state that you parents and friends have been unjustly sued. Says who? What are the facts of the cases?
You also suggest that Toshiba may not have been liable because they are an OEM and bought the part and that they may have made "an innocent mistake". That is false because they knew about the defect for 10 years. NEC fixed the fault. Why didn't Toshiba?
For a long time, certain ranks of professional people were excused from jury duty. That is not the case any longer. Jurors go through the peremptory challenge phase conducted by both sides. There is no inequity in that.
Our lay system is fine. Trial Judges always have the option of lowering judgements, which they often do. Appeal courts are also an option too.
Once again, the law firm's take is less than 10% of the total judgement. That is fair compensation.
Bravo !! Excellent points! I once had a #2 post moderated as redundant. It didn't garner any extra points so it stuck at the bottom of the pile of comments if they were retrieved sorted by highest score. I have a problem with anything being marked as redundant. Aren't these forums we're participating in? If someone wants to voice his opinion, let him! Who cares if it sounds like someone else's comment.
The lawyers got a percentage of the total judgement. The percentage comes up to less than 10%. Not unusual in these kinds of cases, and actually lower than normal.
Toshiba settled to cut costs in the event that there was someone out there who had been harmed by this bug. If they thought it was a good idea, who am I to question them.
hey know that if they do something pretty stupid, they usually have the ability to save face and sue somebody else.
Yeah, imagine people stupidly trying to save data on a floppy disk. I mean, what would possess them to do that?
I don't know about you buddy, but I like the judicial system the way it is. When you think of a better system be sure to let me know. I'll do everything in my power to help you get elected president.
It's amusing to see people sum up in 2 sentences what lawyers do for a living.
Heh, if I was a lawyer, I could easily make the comparison that M$ violates all the fundamental rights given to American citizens and thus must be annihilated.
Couldn't disagree more. Lawsuits provide a valuable tool with which people can try to right a wrong. If punishment is applicable, punitive damamages can be assessed also.
Civil lawsuits are out of control in the US
Outside of cute anecdotes, give me some facts to back up your assertion.
If Toshiba had done the right thing in the first place they wouldn't have been placed in this situation.
The lawyers got less than 10% of the total award. I personally have no problem with tobacco companies, gun companies or any company that knowlingly peddles unsafe or defective products being sued. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for them.
car companies aren't immune. Their products kill more people than guns and smokes combined.
This may be a precedent setting lawsuit. Hopefully it will portend a dark and gloomy future for companies like Microsoft who continually shirk their duties when it comes to giving us quality software and/or hardware.
The bug is worth a billion dollars. You know why? Because Toshiba said so. I trust their opinion more than yours.
How do you know whether anyone was hurt by this bug or not? First of all most Toshiba laptop owners are probably not aware of this lawsuit. I also doubt whether they are technically inclined to debug their floppy controller micro-code when they encounter missing data on their floppy disks either.
Toshiba got what it deserved. Glad to see the Young Republican clubs are still churning them out.
Now if only the greedy lawyers would send some over there as well rather than spending it on 30 cars, 10 houses, etc...
It's amazing that all you can get out of this article is how much the lawyers are making out like bandits. The lawyers per centage of the take is less than 10% of the take, which is extremely low for a class-action suit. The law firm put up the expense to prosecute the case and are being compensated justly.
Toshiba abused its relationship with its customers by not providing a fix for a problem that it was aware of for 10 years. Corporations that don't view there customers as partners don't get my sympathy. If they look at us like cash cows, then the hell with them.
Toshiba sold a lot of laptops, it's that simple. If you read the article you would see that the personal awards are very small. Toshiba will probably not have to pay the majority of the decision anyway.
If Toshiba pays out against all claims, the lawyers per centage of the take amounts to less than 10%. That is a fair fee.
It's simply amazing to see people defend Toshiba. Let me ask you a question. Would you feel differently is there was a manufacturer whose faulty materials was causing planes to self-destruct and blow up in mid flight? You probably wouldn't object to a legal "award" in that case. Now what would you say if the design for the piece was incorrectly saved on a laptop because of a faulty floppy disk controller?
Toshiba knowingly and negligently put out a faulty product. Just because you personally weren't damaged and can't concieve its serious is your problem. You can blame the attorneys all you want since that's the easy thing to do.
Is there anything inherrently different about keeping data on a hard drive as opposed to a floppy disk? People are advised to keep floppy disks away from magnets and the sun. If they were similarly advised that the floppy controller possibly will miss writing data every now and then, and the user still used the floppy drive, then the user would be at fault. Since Toshiba knew this could happen, for 10 years no less, but did not do anything to correct the situation or inform users, they are liable for any data loss.
I don't feel sorry for Toshiba at all. Lawyers are always getting knocked but they performed a valuable service here. Only in a society where we have become accustomed to shoddy quality and bug laden software and hardware can we blame lawyers for Toshiba's screwups.
Actually all you need to do is find a company who was aware of a flaw in their system for 10 years and did nothing to fix it. Then you deservedly will reap a windfall lawsuit.
Your post is amusing but it's nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to lawsuits in general. There is a general antagonism to lawyers and legal recourse. Much of this has been fostered by republican legislators who have attempted to protect corporations from these such lawsuits. When corporations put as much as effort into their products as they do in making profits, they won't be put in these situations.
More power to the plaintiffs in this case. Toshiba got what it deserved.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyhow, I could go on all day long, but I've got better things to do than argue with a naive kid with out practical experience or legal training. No amount of words will change your mind, you'll just have to learn the hard way
A sign that someone has run out of ammunition to support his argument becomes evident when you try to dismiss me by painting me as "a naive kid". I don't know if you mean that literaly (you would be wrong...I am long removed from being a kid), or if you mean it figuratively. Either way it serves no bearing in our discussion. I would be willing to debate this issue with a 6 year old who came prepared with facts rather than opinions and urban legend.
You point out a lot of ills of our litigious society. I agree with you that people are more aware (cautious you call it) of their responsibilities with regard to their neighbors. Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing that our local jungle gyms are being torn down is once again something that you have attempted to marginalize as a simple by-product of over-litigiousness society without actually exploring the merits of the issue.
I have seen the old 1950's era play areas torn down and replaced by much safer play areas that are intended to reduce child injuries. Has that come about because of lawsuits from parents of injured kids? Possibly. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. Neither do the parents of kids who play ing in the safer play areas today.
Why do you assume that criminal cases are simpler and easier for jurors to handle as opposed to tort cases? Criminal cases call upon jurors to listen to information from DNA experts, toxicologists, medical examiners, etc. Am I to understand that you feel jurors can handle these overly complex issues but they can't make a decision on the Toshiba case? That is what lawyers are there to do; to make their point. If highly paid corporate lawyers fail in their job they have no one else to blame.
I am not an advocate of filing frivilous lawsuits. That issue has to be addressed. There have been some calls to require the plaintiffs to pay all court costs if they lose or have their lawsuits thrown out. I don't know if that is the answer. That would have the disastrous effect of removing legal recourse as a viable option for redress from many people; Corporate defenses can be overly extravagant and would be an onerous burden for plaintiffs to handle. I'm open to discussion to address this problem in a fair and equitable manner.
You don't understand my ire because I didn't express any ire.
To use your analogy of the printing press, the invention itself can be compared to the internet in that it changed the way information was forever created and shared. But, do you think that the printing press spurred people to suddenly start thinking new thoughts all of a sudden? No. Change would have occured, albeit at a much slower pace.
Yes, the internet has brought about change, and will continue to do so. Let us not become deluded into thinking that the internet is "it". The internet has not obviated the use or need for printing presses. Books will continue to be printed. Once the next thing that surpasses the internet comes along it more than likely will not bring about the end of the internet. It will just be the next great thing.
If you had asked Guttenberg whether he could have conceived of anything that would surpass the printing press he more than likely would have said no. We are at the same place in the internet revloution. We can't fathom anything better. But there will be. Mankind will conceive it and create it. Not the internet.
You are right. Some bright people actually use the internet as a tool to get their real work done. Can you imagine that?
I think Roblimo's use of the term Internet is a bit broad for the point he's trying to make anyway, especially when he points to companies (Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, 3Com) who are not soley internet companies. Rather, they were innovating long before they embraced the internet. I think Roblimo should have went with omputer related techonology as opposed to internet, but then that wouldn't be quite as sexy, would it?
I agree with you 100%. Roblimo's article was juvenile and, I think, put forth to create debate, regardless of whether it is meaningful.
Listen, the internet is not some distinct entity that lives off on its own. It is part of society. The internet alone can't change society. Rather, it is the people behind the internet who feel empowered by the ability to create virtual soap boxes who will instill change.
Remember, the internet is a medium . Granted, it is a powerful medium, but give credit to people.
This has got to be the biggest bunch of malarkey I've heard in quite some time. I can't believe that someone who appears to be quite normal would foist this nonsensical garbage upon us.
Let me list some of Roblimo's pearls:
1) Internet is spurring latest economic golden era.
This is true. It can be compared to the junk-bond era of the '80s where a lot of paper wealth was created but not a whole lot of good came out of all those companies getting bought out and leveraged. I mean slashdot is cool and all, but exactly how has created anything economically? Glad to see Roblimo at least ackowledge that much.
2) Internet boom-era has siphoned talent away from other fields, stagnating those fields.
This is a comical assertion. First, Roblimo assumes that the development in the computer fields is somehow remarkable. What evidence does Roblimo present? There are a bunch of people smarter than Roblimo who have actually presented proofs to suggest that the explosive growth in technology is not extraordinary. To then suggest that the automotive and space fields have been slowed by this brain drain is meer suppostion. It'll take more than the two case studies Roblimo has presented here.
I'm always amused by the articles that Roblimo and Hemos toss out there. They seem intent on mimicing John Katz by putting out articles that are gauranteed to generate debate, but the underlying issues are usually shallow and not thought out clearly.
You're peddling pure garbage. You've obviously have never been on a jury in your life. People take that responsibility very seriously. Instead of watching Matlock, go out in the real world. You might find it interesting.
Does a good company deserve this? And perhaps more importantly, can our country survive this behavior?
As far as I can tell, using the latest economic indicators, I think our country is not only surviving this "behavior", it is thriving. Unlike you and the Republican legislators who are willing to give big business carte blanche to do anything they want without any of the requisite responibility, I don't look at big business as the victim.
You mention the McDonald's case,which is a popular rallying cry for people on your side of the issue. At face value the case does sound like a crock. But when the case when to court, it was determined that McDonald's was serving coffee at some absurdly high temperature (50 degrees higher than what other establishments served coffee) that people were scalding their tongues left and right all over the place. McDonald's was aware of this problem because several employees had complained, yet they refused to address their concerns.
The fact of the matter is that neither you nor I have a complete picture of the Toshiba case. One thing I do know, however, is that NO ONE claimed to have been hurt by it. One million computers sold, and not one complaint. That gives you some idea of just how minor a problem it is.
Toshiba may have decided to settle to ensure that no one stepped forward who had been damaged by this problem. They made a legal decision and I have no problem with it.
The legal system isn't perfect but it's better than anything else in the world. A fine balance has to be leveraged to ensure that the rights of the consumers are not trampled to protect the interests of big business. Capping punitive damages and substituting arbitration for jury trials goes away from that.
Billion dollar awards against billion dollar companies do not prove that the law system is out of control. You've listed several companies but you have not given any evidence that would indicate they were the victims of unjust lawsuits. Corning, Ford and GM have all put out products that have caused the death and disfigurement of people at one time or another. I don't know about you, but I don'think billions of dollars are enough to teach them a lesson.
You then go on to state that you parents and friends have been unjustly sued. Says who? What are the facts of the cases?
You also suggest that Toshiba may not have been liable because they are an OEM and bought the part and that they may have made "an innocent mistake". That is false because they knew about the defect for 10 years. NEC fixed the fault. Why didn't Toshiba?
For a long time, certain ranks of professional people were excused from jury duty. That is not the case any longer. Jurors go through the peremptory challenge phase conducted by both sides. There is no inequity in that.
Our lay system is fine. Trial Judges always have the option of lowering judgements, which they often do. Appeal courts are also an option too.
Once again, the law firm's take is less than 10% of the total judgement. That is fair compensation.
Bravo !! Excellent points! I once had a #2 post moderated as redundant. It didn't garner any extra points so it stuck at the bottom of the pile of comments if they were retrieved sorted by highest score. I have a problem with anything being marked as redundant. Aren't these forums we're participating in? If someone wants to voice his opinion, let him! Who cares if it sounds like someone else's comment.
Toshiba should have fixed the bug. They only had 10 years to do so.
The lawyers got a percentage of the total judgement. The percentage comes up to less than 10%. Not unusual in these kinds of cases, and actually lower than normal.
Toshiba settled to cut costs in the event that there was someone out there who had been harmed by this bug. If they thought it was a good idea, who am I to question them.
hey know that if they do something pretty stupid, they usually have the ability to save face and sue somebody else.
Yeah, imagine people stupidly trying to save data on a floppy disk. I mean, what would possess them to do that?
I don't know about you buddy, but I like the judicial system the way it is. When you think of a better system be sure to let me know. I'll do everything in my power to help you get elected president.
I'm getting sick of all these trivial lawsuits.
Then retire to a little island where you'll never have to be bothered again.
These lawsuits are increasing my costs of living for silly reasons.
How does this lawsuit increase your cost of living? Are you planning on buying another Toshiba laptop? Then you get what you deserve.
It's amusing to see people sum up in 2 sentences what lawyers do for a living.
Heh, if I was a lawyer, I could easily make the comparison that M$ violates all the fundamental rights given to American citizens and thus must be annihilated.
Don't quit your day job as an anonymous coward.
Couldn't disagree more. Lawsuits provide a valuable tool with which people can try to right a wrong. If punishment is applicable, punitive damamages can be assessed also.
Civil lawsuits are out of control in the US
Outside of cute anecdotes, give me some facts to back up your assertion.
If Toshiba had done the right thing in the first place they wouldn't have been placed in this situation.
The lawyers got less than 10% of the total award. I personally have no problem with tobacco companies, gun companies or any company that knowlingly peddles unsafe or defective products being sued. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for them.
car companies aren't immune. Their products kill more people than guns and smokes combined.
Yeah, ok. Do you have a bridge to sell us too?
This may be a precedent setting lawsuit. Hopefully it will portend a dark and gloomy future for companies like Microsoft who continually shirk their duties when it comes to giving us quality software and/or hardware.
The bug is worth a billion dollars. You know why? Because Toshiba said so. I trust their opinion more than yours.
How do you know whether anyone was hurt by this bug or not? First of all most Toshiba laptop owners are probably not aware of this lawsuit. I also doubt whether they are technically inclined to debug their floppy controller micro-code when they encounter missing data on their floppy disks either.
Toshiba got what it deserved. Glad to see the Young Republican clubs are still churning them out.
Now if only the greedy lawyers would send some over there as well rather than spending it on 30 cars, 10 houses, etc...
It's amazing that all you can get out of this article is how much the lawyers are making out like bandits. The lawyers per centage of the take is less than 10% of the take, which is extremely low for a class-action suit. The law firm put up the expense to prosecute the case and are being compensated justly.
Toshiba abused its relationship with its customers by not providing a fix for a problem that it was aware of for 10 years. Corporations that don't view there customers as partners don't get my sympathy. If they look at us like cash cows, then the hell with them.
Toshiba sold a lot of laptops, it's that simple. If you read the article you would see that the personal awards are very small. Toshiba will probably not have to pay the majority of the decision anyway.
If Toshiba pays out against all claims, the lawyers per centage of the take amounts to less than 10%. That is a fair fee.
It's simply amazing to see people defend Toshiba. Let me ask you a question. Would you feel differently is there was a manufacturer whose faulty materials was causing planes to self-destruct and blow up in mid flight? You probably wouldn't object to a legal "award" in that case. Now what would you say if the design for the piece was incorrectly saved on a laptop because of a faulty floppy disk controller?
Toshiba knowingly and negligently put out a faulty product. Just because you personally weren't damaged and can't concieve its serious is your problem. You can blame the attorneys all you want since that's the easy thing to do.
Is there anything inherrently different about keeping data on a hard drive as opposed to a floppy disk? People are advised to keep floppy disks away from magnets and the sun. If they were similarly advised that the floppy controller possibly will miss writing data every now and then, and the user still used the floppy drive, then the user would be at fault. Since Toshiba knew this could happen, for 10 years no less, but did not do anything to correct the situation or inform users, they are liable for any data loss.
I don't feel sorry for Toshiba at all. Lawyers are always getting knocked but they performed a valuable service here. Only in a society where we have become accustomed to shoddy quality and bug laden software and hardware can we blame lawyers for Toshiba's screwups.
Actually all you need to do is find a company who was aware of a flaw in their system for 10 years and did nothing to fix it. Then you deservedly will reap a windfall lawsuit.
Your post is amusing but it's nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to lawsuits in general. There is a general antagonism to lawyers and legal recourse. Much of this has been fostered by republican legislators who have attempted to protect corporations from these such lawsuits. When corporations put as much as effort into their products as they do in making profits, they won't be put in these situations.
More power to the plaintiffs in this case. Toshiba got what it deserved.