3 ms·
they would get sued to oblivion in USA.
by dominotw 8y ago
they would get sued to oblivion in USA.
- jpatokal 8y agoAlmost out of date food, which is commoly sold at a discount in the US as well.
- zip6 8y agoI think they were referring to saying that a product is "not bad after" it's expiration date.
- thaumasiotes 8y agoA vendor could be sued for that in the US, but not a manufacturer. Expiration dates have no legal meaning for manufacturers. (A manufacturer actually was sued when, after encountering production issues, they recovered by simply relabeling the expiration dates on existing product. But the manufacturer won that suit decisively.)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- kwhitefoot 8y agoLabelling here, Norway, distinguishes between a 'best before' (best før), and a 'last edible date' (siste forbruksdato). The second typically appears only on fresh produce, such as a sliced ham, that becomes dangerous as it gets older, in contrast to products like milk, yoghurt, vegetables, etc., which typically simply decline in quality but are not dangerous even weeks or even months past the best before date.
- dominotw 8y agothats different though.
- pkaye 8y agoMaybe you've never been to discount grocery stores in the US.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]