Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I am not saying I wouldn't have offered a few million. I was simply pointing out that the argument the company should have offered a few million actually proves the point that thngs are haywired.

Hey, I miss lawn darts as much as the next guy, but I don't see anything haywired in this case.

eta: If the settlement was so outrageous, how come little kids' bloody guts are still being fished out of pool filters?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
eta: If the settlement was so outrageous, how come little kids' bloody guts are still being fished out of pool filters?

this actually helps my argument. If this type case was anything more than a tax, and actually did some good, then we wouldn't still be doing that.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
this actually helps my argument. If this type case was anything more than a tax, and actually did some good, then we wouldn't still be doing that.

Or perhaps the settlement needed to be higher to send a real message? It would have been interesting to see what the punis would have been.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Or perhaps the settlement needed to be higher to send a real message? It would have been interesting to see what the punis would have been.

what message? stop making pool products? the product was safe, just used improperly.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
what message? stop making pool products? the product was safe, just used improperly.

You're an IP guy, it can't be that hard to design a safe way to circulate water. If you go back to the story linked on Drudge, you'll note that legislation is pending to require pools to have multiple drains to ease the force of the suction since nobody can seem to come up with a way to keep the drain covers on. Is this just another act of liberal, nanny state regulation? If it was your daughter, how would you suggest this problem be addressed?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
You're an IP guy, it can't be that hard to design a safe way to circulate water. If you go back to the story linked on Drudge, you'll note that legislation is pending to require pools to have multiple drains to ease the force of the suction since nobody can seem to come up with a way to keep the drain covers on.

that is a fine regulation. it doesn't change that there are existing pools with only 1 drain. that drain will need a cover. the cover needs to be removable. the problem is that the maintenence guy got lazy and decided not to put the screws back in one time. what if the company put a lock on it? it wouldn't help is the maintenence guy didn't lock it.

[Gattigap]

He's in rare form. One wonders why the WSJ decided to give Ted its platform. Maybe they're preparing themselves for Murdoch's purchase.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
that is a fine regulation. it doesn't change that there are existing pools with only 1 drain. that drain will need a cover. the cover needs to be removable. the problem is that the maintenence guy got lazy and decided not to put the screws back in one time. what if the company put a lock on it? it wouldn't help is the maintenence guy didn't lock it.

How about a pump that won't work unless the drain cover is properly installed? Feel free to pass that along to one of your clients.

:love:

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
How about a pump that won't work unless the drain cover is properly installed? Feel free to pass that along to one of your clients.

:love:

• Vacuum relief safety valve for a swimming pool filter pump system United States Patent 5,682,624
  
  
  Abstract
  A method and device are provided for preventing a child or an object from being trapped by suction to a drain of a swimming pool filter pump system. The invention entails a safety valve capable of causing the filter pump to immediately lose its prime when a child or object becomes trapped against the drain of a swimming pool, so that the vacuum created by the filter pump is completely eliminated. The valve of this invention can be mounted directly to a suction line fluidically interconnecting the drain and the filter pump, and is constructed to permit air to rapidly flow into the suction line if a predetermined vacuum level is exceeded within the suction line, as is the case if the drain becomes partially or completely obstructed. The influx of air causes the filter pump to rapidly lose its prime, thereby completely eliminating the vacuum and the resulting hazardous condition.
  
  
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Inventors: Ciochetti; Michael James (Hialeah, FL)
  Appl. No.: 08/483,531
  Filed: June 7, 1995

it's from 1995. Back before Bush stopped all the funding for pool related safety inventions.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/5,682,624

Another great idea. It's good to see that Edwards' litigation is leading to safer products.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
that is a fine regulation. it doesn't change that there are existing pools with only 1 drain.

large judgments against anyone who has only one drain might help change that.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I was pointing to SS's assumption that a company that manufactured a perfectly safe product, that had been misused, was wrong in "only" offering 100K initially. This is a tax on all consumers that increases how much pools/spas cost us so that we can give an out of line windfall to someone who was horribly injured, but not due to the company's negligence.

I don't disagree that there are case out there where somone fucks up, hurts themself, and gets a windfall. So, I don't disagree with your point as a general concept.

I'm also not familiar with the facts of this specific case, so I can't really say one way or another who fucked up here. But I am generally comfortable with the notion that screws don't unscrew themselves. This was a wading pool, so I doun't think one could assume the screws were likely loosened by vibrations, as they might be on a jet, or something that moves, where a person should reasonably be expected to check screws regularly to see that they haven't worked loose.

So, my inclination here is to say it's more likely that someone fucked up, either the maufacturer, the installer, or the club that maintained the pool. Either way, I don't think the kid should bear the burden.

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
He's in rare form. One wonders why the WSJ decided to give Ted its platform. Maybe they're preparing themselves for Murdoch's purchase.

Have you ever bothered to read the shills on the NYT payroll?

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Have you ever bothered to read the shills on the NYT payroll?

Not in a couple of years.

Sure, my hemp-fueled drum circle at the coffee shop would read and discuss the best things that Paul Krugman and David Brooks would write that week to bring down the Bush Administration, but when they put it all behind the TimesSelect firewall, Atticus, Ty, GGG, club and I decided that caving in to this brazen act of imperialistic capitalism would not stand, man, not when it exceeds the prices of the half-caf latte.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk

So, my inclination here is to say it's more likely that someone fucked up, either the maufacturer, the installer, or the club that maintained the pool. Either way, I don't think the kid should bear the burden.

the manufacturer made a cover that had holes in it for screws, so it did okay. The club likely removed the screws and didn't put them back. I don't have a problem with it being sued, but there wasn't money there for some reason, so Edwards jacked up an innocent company.