Are juice vendors taking it to far by adding other stimulants?

[NickZac]

Realistically, the forum and the mod manufacturers probably will not be sued, and even if they were it would probably not be a successful suit. General tort liability requires four elements: duty, breach of duty, causation, and damages. Duty is analyzed under a reasonable person standard. Essentially, everyone owes everyone else the duty to behave reasonably under the circumstances. Some duties are assumed, like those prescribed by law. So, the question is, "what would a reasonable person in a forum/suppliers position be expected to do with manufacturers adding various questionable things to juices?" The answer is that they should make it be known that they do not support the actions of other manufacturers in this regard. Thankfully, oldsoldier quickly responded with ECF's stance on the addition of supplements on this thread already. So, if ECF's duty is to warn of improper products (and even this point is debatable), then they have not breached their duty and thus a tort claim must fail.

Similarly, a competent attorney would argue that they were not the proximate or legal cause of the hypothetical allergic reaction (the supplier was), the person who had they reaction was contributorily negligent by not checking the ingredients of their juice, and the person with the allergic reaction assumed the risk of their behavior.

The point is, the best way to shield yourself from this kind of liability is simply not to associate with (and affirmatively disavow) those who may be doing something questionable. Even better, a disclaimer of liability (like the one I'm about to give) works pretty well too.

Disclaimer: The foregoing is provided only for informational purposes and should not be construed as legal advice or guidance. Always consult an attorney before pursuing a legal course of action.

I agree with you but for the sake of caution I am thinking worst case and in layman's terms. I realize what you are saying and technically neither the mod maker nor the forum has any requirement to take a stance on it, but a formal disclaimer that disassociates with the idea is the ideal IMO. And so the disclaimer is a must, which I suggested in my original post and if I didn't then I meant to.

 

[aubergine]

Infuriating. Obviously imbecilic. Like we really need a ton of confounding variables at this point. Growl...