Speed bump video (now tort law discussion)

[G.Irish]

My last detail that I think is important about this case is that upon further analysis, it was found that McDonald's did a cost/benefit analysis comparing serving super-hot coffee (using cheapest bean possible) and having lawsuits against using the "average bean" coffee and not dealing with lawsuits. It was found that it would be cheaper to just sell the super hot coffee, so they did just that. This is the business practice that I think is just wrong.

Now that is wrong/immoral but I still would have a hard time awarding punitive damages. Its still coffee and its still supposed to be hot and you're still not supposed to spill it on yourself.

Now, if we relate this whole liability issue topic with cars, here is an interesting thing...ever notice how over the past ten years how many more warning labels have been put on American cars? It's all so that companies protect themselves...because companies can become liable for injury if there is a "failure to warn." Ever noticed Jeremy Clarkson complain about this when he was testing the SRT-10 Roadster?

Lemme guess, a warning about getting burned by touching the door sills that are over the side pipes? Personally I think that's a feature :lol: