Bernie wrote: >>Steve wrote: > [ ] No, this is absurd. Abort the installation. It all comes pre-installed in new Windows versions you know ;-) > Try and sue, and you'll never even make it inside the lawyer's > office. Simply by running the software, you've already admitted > you have no case. If you haven't run the software, you have no > standing. But I do have such as standing. If I as a third party suffer from the fact that someone is using a faulty program I should be able to sue someone (the poor bastard that uses Outlook probably). Anyway, this is IMHO a highly irrelvant discussion since it only applies to people in the US. Even if I would try and sue someone in a Swedish court (or any European court for that matter AFAIK) the best I would get would be 1000 USD or something like that (100USD would be more likely IMHO) - if they would even bring it up that is. Someone (sorry I forgot who) mentioned the women who got several millions from McDonalds - that case was just a "proof" for many here that the US legal system is completly weird and needs to be changed. I think they laughed in Austria at the absurd ammounts of money that they got sued over after an accident involving several US citizens lately. Sadly they are getting sued in a US court so they'll probably need to pay up... With that said I hope noone was offended, remember that this is IMHO and nothing else (no flame intended). //Bernie<< While the big jury awards make headlines, the actual awards do not, and therefore are generally unknown. Virtually all of the multi, multi-million dollar awards are not the actual awards finally made. (There must be a web site that contains the myths and realities of huge jury awards.) A judge, while he/she cannot set aside a jury verdict, has the prerogative to "set aside" jury awards as "excessive." Likewise, the person against whom the award is made can, and usually does, appeal the verdict. Oftentimes the threat of appeal can result in a multimillion dollar award being negotiated down to a couple of hundred thousand dollars. It must be remembered that although the plaintive might have hired an attorney on a contingency fee basis, the contingency fee is, "plus expenses." Expenses include everything from copying costs to deposition costs, to expert witness fees, to court costs. The successful litigant is usually satisfied, although not completely happy, to come out a couple of hundred dollars ahead after lawyers fees and expenses. Also, if an appeal reverses a verdict, the loser may be required to pay the legal fees and expenses of the prevailing side. What is generally referred to as "standard of care" has been touched on in this thread. Unfortunately, "standard of care" is not what others do, but is the instruction that the judge gives a jury --- the jury must determine what the "standard of care" is. Anytime one side can get a person to testify that such-and-such is a "standard of care," the other side can find someone who will say, "No, I've never done it that way and I know others that have never done it that way either." I am not a lawyer. Roger Turk Tucson, Arizona USA
