Janet Jackson is to be sued for exposing her breast during the Superbowl half-time show.
This is clearly insane, and continues in a long tradition of ludicrous lawsuits filed in the US.
1)McDonalds Coffee
Clearly the winner in the 'idiot lawsuit' category is this one. If you remember, Stella Liebeck bought coffee from McDs, spilt it on herself, and got burned. She successfully sued for 2 or 3 million dollars, complaining that there was no warning on the cup.
Apparently, she considered suing the manufacturers of her car, because they had not put cup-holders in the vehicle.
2)Bullet Manufacturers
More controversial, but in Chicago, I think, a guy went crazy a few years ago and killed a lot of people in an office building, before killing himself. The relatives of the victim, having no-one else to sue, decided to sue the manufacturers of the weapon. They lost, I believe. They considered suing the manufacturers of the bullets as well.
3)Fat kids
Obese kids are now suing fast-food manufacturers for selling unhealthy food. Apparently, there is no clear warning on a Big Mac or a Whopper that says 'this food is unhealthy - We do not advise you eat it every day, 3 times a day.'
Garner's advice - try suing your parents for letting you eat this offal all the time!
Finally, one that I had never heard - this in fact is the winner of the 2002 'Stella Awards' , named after the aforementioned Ms Liebeck
4)Sisters Janice Bird, Dayle Bird Edgmon and Kim Bird Moran sued their mother's doctors and a hospital after Janice accompanied her mother, Nita Bird, to a minor medical procedure. When something went wrong, Janice and Dayle witnessed doctors rushing their mother to emergency surgery. Rather than malpractice, their legal fight centered on the "negligent infliction of emotional distress" -- not for causing distress to their mother, but for causing distress to them for having to see the doctors rushing to help their mother. The case was fought all the way to the California Supreme Court, which finally ruled against the women. Which is a good thing, since if they had prevailed doctors and hospitals would have had no choice but to keep you from being anywhere near your family members during medical procedures just in case something goes wrong. In their greed, the Bird sisters risked everyone's right to have family members with them in emergencies.
Thanks to Antipixel Jeremy for the Janet Jackson story.
As an aside, which has NOTHING to do with my America-bashing above, I once spoke to Latoya Jackson (later a Playboy pin-up) on the phone. There was a phone-in contest, and she was manning the phones. I won one of the prizes, which was a video and a signed 12" single. I wonder where those valuable items are now...
Posted by Gary at February 20, 2004 11:24 AMgary,
i too have a jackson family connection.
in 1987 i bunked in to see him performing at aintree racecourse in liverpool. it was in his "bad" days and he was wearing a red leather jacket with the cuffs rolled up.
whos bad?
dave
I always agreed with the McDonald's verdict. Their coffee was dangerously hot! I mean it. It was not even possible to drink it until it cooled for a long period of time. McDonald's got thousands of complaints a year about it and knew that the coffee was kept at a temperature that caused serious burns to human skin. Their surveys showed that the coffee tasted better when it was kept hot and so they made a calculated decision to serve the coffee at dangerously hot temperatures. Many people were burned as a result of this. The law suit finally forced McDonalds to change their dangerous policy and now, thanks to that court decision, thousands are not unnecessariously burned each year!
Posted by: chris at March 1, 2004 07:08 PMHi Chris,
I was castigated by another American friend, Pete, about this post. He pointed out that the cups were made to hold liquid of a certain temperature, but the coffee McDonald's served was much hotter. I promise to do more homework before rashly posting in the future!!
I suppose the point is, from an outsiders point of view, Americans sue each other rather too frequently, and if they do win a case, the punitive damages awarded are often completely out of line with the original crime. This is where the idea that the American legal system is out of control comes from.
The Janet Jackson case did not go ahead, thank goodness, but it is an example of a knee-jerk reaction from an overly litigious society. Whereas in Japan, you can lie, cheat and steal, and as long as you bow low enough when you apologize, you will not get sued (Did that snow brand dairy company get sued by consumers?)
America is overly litigious, but I think one area where the system works is in consumer safety. Lawsuits have forced industries to always make the consumer's safety their top priority. I think we will see increased lawsuits aimed at the food industry. Currently the American food industry is allowed to operate in near secrecy. They can put just about anything in food and are not required to provide much detail about the health consequences. For decades McDonald's actually was putting beef fat in their french fries and calling them vegetarian.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0308-02.htm
This is going to change slowly, over time, as a result of lawsuits and perhaps some legislation. In the end when you eat a cookie, you will be aware of the health risks.
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/14/oreo.suit/
I think that gun manufacturers and bullet manufacturers should also be sued by victims families. Ok, I know it sounds strange, but hear me out. Technology now allows guns to be built that only fire when held by the person who bought the gun. Finger print reading technology makes this affordable and possible. Now if a child gets ahold of a gun by accident, that child will not be able to shot themselves or their playmates. Lawsuits can be used to force gun manufacturers to adopt this as the default standard on all guns sold.
In addition, all guns leave a unique mark on bullets fired from them. Gun manufacturers are currently not required to keep a database of these marking although they could be of great use to law enforcement and to victims families. Lawsuits can probably change this over time, perhaps faster than politicians.
I think that there are a lot of different levels of thinking about lawsuits. Ground breaking lawsuits often seem crazy or out of place, but there is a method to their madness. Those who are suing the food industry now, have a goal. It is not to enrich the person that they represent, although that often happens as well! In the end, the consumer benefits.