Do you think WoTC should be sued?

[Leon Crabb]

VGMaster9, as a law student and an (old school) gamer, I think you could have something. You could have a case on the grounds that what is currently being sold as the Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game is by no reasonable gamer's standards a Roleplaying Game, much less D&D.

Of particular interest to this claim would be ESS Entertainment v. Rockstar, Galoob v. Nintendo (which establishes a customers right to modify a product they have bought, something which WotC took away from you with the GSL) and any of the many suits filed by Palladium, which do define a roleplaying game in a legal sense. if you wanted to mail me your claims I would be happy to talk it over with you.

 

[Cyronax]

VGMaster9, as a law student and an (old school) gamer, I think you could have something. You could have a case on the grounds that what is currently being sold as the Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game is by no reasonable gamer's standards a Roleplaying Game, much less D&D.

Of particular interest to this claim would be ESS Entertainment v. Rockstar, Galoob v. Nintendo (which establishes a customers right to modify a product they have bought, something which WotC took away from you with the GSL) and any of the many suits filed by Palladium, which do define a roleplaying game in a legal sense. if you wanted to mail me your claims I would be happy to talk it over with you.

Can you opt to make this a class action law suit?

I think you'd have more strength in numbers and just think of all the grievances you'd have to build your case.

Perhaps Morrus could create a special 'Legal Matters' Forum to serve as your war room.


C.I.D.

 

[BryonD]

... * Reasonableness is decided by the Trier of Fact (a jury or Judge, depending) Here ...

Clearly the system worked as intended. But there is plenty of room for the opinion that the system is f'ed up in the first place.

I think there is a lot of room for concluding that "justice" was reverse-engineered to fit a desired outcome based in no small part on the perception of the defendants ability to pay.

Spilling coffee on oneself is a completely critical element in the outcome. Much moreso than the temperature. If the temperature had been industry standard and been spilled, some harm would still occur. If you spill coffee on yourself today, you will expect to incur harm. But, if the coffee had been even hotter but the individual had been more responsible, then all harm would have been avoided.

You yourself express this responsibility when you state that you avoid hot liquids when mobile.

Justice was not based on the relative accountabilities, but instead on the size of perceived money bags.

If this had happened at "Sam's Coffee Shop", we would not be discussing it.

And it is certainly possible that some DEGREE of liability could have been found. But this case has an irrelevant fact (how much MD can afford) determining justice and a highly relevant fact (the individual was responsible for an exposure they knew was not the intended use of the product and was to be avoided) discarded.

Playing legal games to retrofit a misjustice does not make it ok.

 

[shadzar]

(to which McDonald's counter-offered $800...for third degree burns over 6% over a 79-year old grandmother's body).

I still laugh at us as a country for this happening an someone getting paid for incompetence. Not your or anything, just using the quote from your post rather than reading the article again, and leaving links in place so others can read your entire post in its entirety.

Yeah they were told many times the coffee was too hot for people to drink right away. Oddly the word "hot" escapes people and if not labeled, status quo doesn't say coffee is served frozen. I would assume she drank some in the past or saw other people drink coffee before and noticed the steam.

Did she forget than, as a grandmother, what she should have taught her children about what "hot" means? They reach for a pot on a stove and she tells them "hot" but they can't see if and touch it anyway, they learn what hot means and probably, like she did, learned she signs of something hot was...like the steam she should have seem form other people's coffee to know it wasn't server at room temperature but above.

The whole thing is as dumb as the person attempting larceny who sued a home owner because after falling through the home owners front porch when trying to rob them, he badly injured his leg....AND HE WON THE CASE!

Shows common sense does not exist in courtrooms to even allow some of this stuff.

Always check food prepared by someone else before eating, that is what I was taught because not everybody does things the same way. OMG if she actually got a fresh burger from McD's for a change she could have had a heart attack because it wasn't sitting under a heating oven getting stale for 3 hours.

I can't help but laugh at that story/case.

Likewise suing WotC/HASBRO even for mental anguish wouldn't be posible if you had a case, unles you had enough money to fight HASBRO, so it would be moot even IF anyone thought a case could be made.

The only results it would have is similar to the MCDs coffee incident where people would lose more faith in humanity, but specifically to gamers or the game if the case was in the public view.

WotC makes a product, jsut like everyone else that is using planned obsolescence. They make products to break down after a set time or need to be replaced within the laws of their industry. I don't think games like D&D have laws for it like home appliances, so they can really plan for it to break down at any time. Therefore your purchasing and using the product is at the consumers risk. You bought a book, you got a book. If the book was damaged you might be able to get it replaced. Like a cup of coffee from MCds, check to make sure your purchase is what you want before you leave the place of purchase. Too hot, too cold, pages missing, etc the consumer needs to be responsible for some of their own doings rather than play pass the blame for their own consumer negligence.

I dont even think 4th edition advertisement and marketing, with its treatment of the views of older editions players, would be strong enough for lawsuits relating to liable/slander, or even defamation of character.

The more companies get sued the higher prices go, so unless you REALLY have something that is solely the companies fault, get off the sue-wagon because even if you win your case, that extra money for a silly lawsuit wont go far as more people continue to sue and cause companies to raise prices for everyone to recover the cost of the lawsuit and any payments having to be made in regards tot he cases themselves.

[/ ]

too long didn't read version: To OP: No.

 

[DaveMage]

Is gamer culture so out of touch of with reality and so incredibly self-centered that we think suing a company for making business decisions we, as consumers, disagree with is justifiable?

Are you saying D&D players live in a fantasy world?

 

[olshanski]

This is the most blatant case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film, "The Never-Ending Story".

 

[JeffB]

I'm not happy with the color Red- I really don't like what Red has been doing with it's shading and vibrance lately.

:flipsthroughrolodexdforlawyersbusinesscard:

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Justice was not based on the relative accountabilities, but instead on the size of perceived money bags.

Actually, part of the reason the award was reduced was because of the granny's share of accountability in this matter.

What happened is that McD's released into the stream of commerce a product that was more dangerous- more likely to cause serious harm- than most other businesses selling a similar product- and with no underlying justification that by doing so, the public was better off. And they got burned.

Compare the Ford Pinto case: few people think the case of the exploding cars was frivolous. But here's a secret: many cars of the era had a similar design flaw. Ford is just the one that got caught (AND they had that infamous memo about the expected costs of litigation).

In some of those Pinto deaths, the drivers were the persons who caused the accidents. It didn't matter because the car's design was deemed to be so dangerously flawed that the manufacturer's responsibility was considered to be overwhelming.

 

[OnyxPharaoh]

It says nothing if the kind: an industy standard is simply a description of the standard practices set within the industry itself, not imposed by outside authorities like laws or regulatory commissions. Every industry has them; every product is measured against it's competition. Think of it as an average of sorts.

Thanks for that detailed description but I know what an industry standard is.

Now do you know what micromanaging is? It doesn't refer to regulations 'imposed by outside authorities like laws or regulatory commissions'. It refers to the managing of something with excessive attention to detail. When you are servering your coffee at a specific temperature and not just "hot", then you are micromanaging the out of that coffee.

When someone hands you a cup of coffee through the window it shouldn't matter if its 100 degrees or 1000 degress, I just need to respect the fact that it's HOT COFFEE and treat it accordingly.

 

[OnyxPharaoh]

I still laugh at us as a country for this happening an someone getting paid for incompetence.

But that's the new "American Dream". Wait for someone to up, sue them and get rich off your ass.