In article , Alrescha
wrote:


the issue was that mcdonald's knowingly sold a product that could cause
burns on contact

Have you never been to a real restaurant? They regularly serve food
that can cause burns on contact. e.g.:

no they don't.

They do, and I gave you several examples. Why do you not address them?

because the temperature is not the issue.

you also snipped the part where mcdonald's ignored over 700 injuries.

In a country where tens of thousands of people die from accidents every
year, the 70 people who burn themselves with coffee should be ignored.
Completely.

nonsense.

you keep ignoring that some of those burns were caused by mcdonald's
own employees and some were children and babies.

burns were occurring at a rate of more than one per week, and
mcdonald's, by their own admission, had no interest in reducing that.
they simply didn't give a ****.

it is unacceptable for any business to disregard the safety and well
being of their customers.

around 100 galaxy note 7 fires occurred, causing two recalls and an
ultimate cancelation of the product.

numerous products are recalled for safety related issues:
https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/Recalls-by-Product/

they didn't give a ****.

And we get to the heart of the matter. McDonald's was punished for
being insenstive - not because they did anything wrong.

nope. they were punished for a willful reckless disregard for the
safety of their customers.

The bulk of
the damages were punitive, and unreleated to the case. The judge
struck down 80% of those, probably because he knew it was irrational
madness.

the damages were related and the judge didn't strike down anything.