IMO, implying that folks are responsible (to the point of liability) for following the news closely enough to see whether the manufacturers of the products they own have lied to them sets a dangerous precedent. That would mean you not only have to research your purchases beforehand to make good economic decisions for yourself, you also lock yourself into some unknown period of ongoing investigation with unknown depth to keep from being liable for someone else’s failures. It’s one thing if what is being marketed and sold is comprehensive driving assistance theoretically requiring no driver input, it’s another when it’s called full self-driving and the CEO makes overreaching claims about its capability. It’s been repeatedly ruled that corporations can’t bury clauses that fundamentally alter the nature of their agreements with consumers deep in the fine print and expect that to reverse what was otherwise communicated plainly.
IMO, implying that folks are responsible (to the point of liability) for following the news closely enough to see whether the manufacturers of the products they own have lied to them sets a dangerous precedent. That would mean you not only have to research your purchases beforehand to make good economic decisions for yourself, you also lock yourself into some unknown period of ongoing investigation with unknown depth to keep from being liable for someone else’s failures. It’s one thing if what is being marketed and sold is comprehensive driving assistance theoretically requiring no driver input, it’s another when it’s called full self-driving and the CEO makes overreaching claims about its capability. It’s been repeatedly ruled that corporations can’t bury clauses that fundamentally alter the nature of their agreements with consumers deep in the fine print and expect that to reverse what was otherwise communicated plainly.