4 ms·

This actually sounds plausible, in some weird way, especially the bit about manufacturers being kept in check by lawsuits. >Yes, there is. The OP used the prod

This actually sounds plausible, in some weird way, especially the bit about manufacturers being kept in check by lawsuits. >Yes, there is. The OP used the product in accordance to the manufacturer's guidelines[1], and adhered to all safety warnings (which, by the way, didn't even mention risk of fire or chemical burns under normal operating conditions). No, the OP claims he did that ;) But even then... >Given that, the manufacturer's fault appears to be clearly established. No, honestly, it isn't. There is such a thing as pure accident. Things break, and you have no expectation things won't ever break. This time it broke in a somewhat dangerous way. To me, in order for the manufacturer to be liable, the manufacturer must have committed an "avoidable" act and not acted negligent, such as a deign flaw or manufacturing flaw that could have been avoided by following current knowledge and best practices, or was negligent testing the product properly before release or didn't do proper, constant product quality assurance especially of the dangerous parts. There are plenty of other reasonable explanations, such as customer misuse, vendor not storing the product properly in some warehouse, improper shipping, or just "shit happens" were nobody really is at fault and all parties involved didn't do anything that was avoidable wrong.

picardythird 5y ago
A product that is worn on one’s head potentially exploding or spontaneously causing a chemical fire due to to suboptimal environmental factors counts as a design flaw, at least in my book. Something that is used on people’s heads should not fail that way if it is going fail.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  That depends on how it was treated right up to that point. For instance: unauthorized repair, wrong substitution parts, messing with the charging circuitry and so on are things that can and do happen. It need not be a design flaw right away, but it well may be. Of course you could be of the opinion that it should be impossible for something like this to happen, and that is definitely a valid position. But even wired headphones have on occasion killed people (a Swiss HAM, for instance).

picardythird 5y ago

A product that is worn on one’s head potentially exploding or spontaneously causing a chemical fire due to to suboptimal environmental factors counts as a design flaw, at least in my book. Something that is used on people’s heads should not fail that way if it is going fail.

jacquesm 5y ago
That depends on how it was treated right up to that point. For instance: unauthorized repair, wrong substitution parts, messing with the charging circuitry and so on are things that can and do happen. It need not be a design flaw right away, but it well may be. Of course you could be of the opinion that it should be impossible for something like this to happen, and that is definitely a valid position. But even wired headphones have on occasion killed people (a Swiss HAM, for instance).