Re: It takes two to tango

["Riad S. Wahby" <rsw () jfet org>]

Chris Paget <ivegotta () tombom co uk> wrote:
> Does V still have the right to sue R?

Let's put this a different way:

Ford makes a car that seems to sell pretty well.  Unfortunately, it
has a fatal design flaw: if the car suffers a rear-end collision while
it's in third gear during a rainstorm at night while the moon is
waxing, the car explodes, killing its passengers.  Consumer Reports
discovers that this is the case and publishes a warning to its readers
concerning this car.  Ford is unable to reproduce the vulnerable
configuration and ignores the warning, assuming it's a hoax.

Two weeks later, a story breaks in the national news that a psychopath
has taken it upon himself to rear-end all Ford cars on rainy moonlit
nights.  So far, five people have died.

Who is responsible, Ford or Consumer Reports?  Do you think Ford could
successfully prosecute a lawsuit against Consumer Reports?

Extra credit: if you said "no" to the second question, but think V
should win a suit against R in Chris's hypothetical situation, please
explain how the two situations are so substantially different as to
result in completely opposite conclusions with regard to liability.

-- 
Riad Wahby
rsw () jfet org
MIT VI-2/A 2002