Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There is a lot more nuance and a lot you missed.

- if I as an entrepreneur, create a product in good faith, work with the experts, honestly go through all of the FDA approvals, get approved and follow all of the regulations, then if later on my product is at fault, I don’t think I should be sued [1]. Sometimes things happen even if no one was being negligent and everyone was acting in good faith.

- on the other hand there seemed to have been abnormalities in how the product was produced by the company they outsourced to. Yes you can outsource manufacturing, but you can’t outsource responsibility. It was the company’s selling SimplyThick responsibility to ensure that all of its partners were doing things in compliance. So yes, SimplyThick should have been held liable.

- Even when they found that their might be problems, they buried the lede and put the warning down 9th on the list.

[1] I am on the other side of this argument. I have relatively mild cerebral palsy. I’ve lived an active life - run half marathons, was part time fitness instructor and today I have a decently well outfitted home gym - when I research information on CP, the first few links and all of the ads are for lawyers looking to get people to sue doctors. I find it appalling. My parents didn’t spend time in the 70s looking for people to sue - they were looking for doctors, therapists, etc.



> My parents didn’t spend time in the 70s looking for people to sue - they were looking for doctors, therapists, etc.

For some people (at least in the US), the suing was presumably to be able to afford the doctors and therapists.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: