Well, first, I'm not the only one. That's the recommendation of one of the top comment here as well[1]. Second, I was spamming "Report to CPSC, then talk to a

Well, first, I'm not the only one. That's the recommendation of one of the top comment here as well[1]. Second, I was spamming "Report to CPSC, then talk to a lawyer". The advice to sue or not sue is not for me to make. Third: > you to have a bone to pick with Bose for some reason or another They caused chemical burns to the person I am talking to while I tell them that they should consult a lawyer. That's my bone. ------ Another reason is that selling hazardous products that aren't labeled as such is a threat to the free market, which many people here are in support of. In short: what makes market different from scam is rules. Delivering the product for which the money was paid is one such rule. Warning about hazards of the product you try to sell is another. If there is no cost to violating the rules, the rules will not be observed, and the free market ceases to exist. I want Bose to bear the cost of violating the rules of the market, to ensure that they don't poison the well for other participants (in particular, who may be selling safer products after investing in safety). Is the above clear, or should I elaborate further? [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29602437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29602437