3 ms·
> 3M said its participation in the settlement "is not an admission of liability" These kind of statements always crack me up, like "oh, really, so you just dec
by RankingMember 3y ago
> 3M said its participation in the settlement "is not an admission of liability"
These kind of statements always crack me up, like "oh, really, so you just decided to give away X millions/billions of dollars out of the goodness of your hearts?". Would love to see some kind of policy that ends this kind of absurd post-settlement spinning.
- ethbr0 3y agoIt's not spinning: it's a legal message. It's almost always part of the settlement, because it limits future liability on the matter. Yet news sources always report it as though it's something the company voluntarily says.
- MetaWhirledPeas 3y agoThat doesn't make it any less absurd. Legal hoop-jumping is not so different from spin. The law itself is often silly.
- ethbr0 3y agoThe law is the law. Saying it's silly is like an architect saying that gravity is silly. Yes, but... it's the system you're operating in.
- RankingMember 3y agoThe difference is that law is a human construct
- WeylandYutani 3y agoWe recently celebrated the end of slavery in my country. Laws can be silly.
- Cthulhu_ 3y agoIf they admitted liability, people could sue for individual damages on top of the settlement. It's a buy-out, water under the bridge kinda thing, because individual lawsuits would cost years, would cost each individual thousands, and could cost 3M even more once all added up. It's a legal logistical nightmare. Instead, people are offered a one time payment to basically drop the case. I think a lot are happy to take it because it means they don't have to fight a tedious legal battle.