Nintendo: 3DS Warnings Are Lawsuit Deterrent

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Nintendo: 3DS Warnings Are Lawsuit Deterrent


Nintendo CEO Satoru Iwata says the company will continue to caution against letting young children use the new 3DS, not because it's dangerous but to protect itself against lawsuits.

The issued a statement [http://www.amazon.com/Nintendo-3DS-DS/dp/B002I090AG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1294677825&sr=8-1] dismissing the concern, saying that children with "normally developing" sight should suffer no ill effects from using it, but Nintendo is maintaining its position anyway.

In an interview with the Japanese edition of the Wall Street Journal [http://jp.wsj.com/IT/node_168287], Iwata said the warnings aren't an indication that the device is dangerous in any way but are instead part of the company's effort to keep its customers fully informed, a policy which it "very actively" pursues. He also pointed out that gaming devices tend to be used for longer stretches than other 3D hardware and maintained that some specialists still believe that long periods of watching 3D video can have a deleterious effect on young eyes, in spite of the AOA statement.

Nintendo is understandably concerned about potential lawsuits being filed by parents who feel their children have been adversely affected by using the device. Because of that, the 3DS packaging and instructions will still carry cautions against letting young children play with it, despite the general consensus that it should be harmless. As the saying goes, better safe than sued.

The Nintendo 3Ds comes out in Japan on February 26 and hits the rest of the world in March.

Source: Gamasutra [http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/01/10/iwata_defends_3d_warning/]


Permalink
 

JaredXE

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,378
0
0
LOL, I love indemnity clauses. They actually have NO real power in a court of law and are used basically to scare the idiots who believe that you can sign away your right to sue if you get injured. Protip: you can't!
 

TheEvilCheese

Cheesey.
Dec 16, 2008
1,151
0
0
If it was a serious health concern, I'm sure there would be protest gruops alll over it.
Go nintendo, Protect ya monehz.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
Croaker42 said:
In this lawsuit happy world I sure as hell don't blame them.
Pretty much that.
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
No, but if the warnings are there then case usually gets shut down before it even gets going or any considerable amount of money is wasted in legal fees.
 

Rigs83

Elite Member
Feb 10, 2009
1,932
0
41
Reminds me of stupid warning labels in America like these [http://www.oddee.com/item_88437.aspx]

edit
Couldn't get the images to show
 

Gammaj4

New member
Nov 18, 2009
212
0
0
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
While true, most cases of this sort will get thrown out of court if there was a clear warning.
Edit: Ninja'd

OT: makes sense to me.
 

Crazie_Guy

New member
Mar 8, 2009
305
0
0
This is news? Has a big-business issued warning ever been about anything other than protecting their own asses?
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
canadamus_prime said:
Croaker42 said:
In this lawsuit happy world I sure as hell don't blame them.
Pretty much that.
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
No, but if the warnings are there then case usually gets shut down before it even gets going or any considerable amount of money is wasted in legal fees.
Not really. True from Canada. The ever popular Tim Horton's coffee shop was sue because a lady spilt hot coffee on her lap and scolded herself. All coffees come with a (Warning contents may be Hot) warning on the top of the lid of the cup. She somehow still got money. Living in the World today eh?
 

Rigs83

Elite Member
Feb 10, 2009
1,932
0
41
Crazie_Guy said:
This is news? Has a big-business issued warning ever been about anything other than protecting their own asses?
I remember when the original Xbox came out and had a warning to not drop it on small children
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
Gammaj4 said:
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
While true, most cases of this sort will get thrown out of court if there was a clear warning.
Edit: Ninja'd

OT: makes sense to me.
Not entirely true. People have sued coffee shops for being scolded by their coffee. Their coffee cup lids all say "(Warning, contents may be Hot)" on them. In some cases people still receive money.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
AzrealMaximillion said:
canadamus_prime said:
Croaker42 said:
In this lawsuit happy world I sure as hell don't blame them.
Pretty much that.
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
No, but if the warnings are there then case usually gets shut down before it even gets going or any considerable amount of money is wasted in legal fees.
Not really. True from Canada. The ever popular Tim Horton's coffee shop was sue because a lady spilt hot coffee on her lap and scolded herself. All coffees come with a (Warning contents may be Hot) warning on the top of the lid of the cup. She somehow still got money. Living in the World today eh?
Wasn't it McDonald's? And didn't such warnings come about as a result of that case?
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
canadamus_prime said:
AzrealMaximillion said:
canadamus_prime said:
Croaker42 said:
In this lawsuit happy world I sure as hell don't blame them.
Pretty much that.
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
No, but if the warnings are there then case usually gets shut down before it even gets going or any considerable amount of money is wasted in legal fees.
Not really. True from Canada. The ever popular Tim Horton's coffee shop was sue because a lady spilt hot coffee on her lap and scolded herself. All coffees come with a (Warning contents may be Hot) warning on the top of the lid of the cup. She somehow still got money. Living in the World today eh?
Wasn't it McDonald's? And didn't such warnings come about as a result of that case?
It was McDonald's first and that did bring the warnings, but I'm talking about Tim Horton's in Canada. The judge deemed Tim Horton's warning not visible enough or some BS even though the warning is on top of the damn lid and on the side.

Someone tried to sue a McDonald's for the same thing in the U.K. 2 years after and the case got thrown out even without warnings on their cups. The judge there ruled that common sense should've taken precedence.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
AzrealMaximillion said:
canadamus_prime said:
AzrealMaximillion said:
canadamus_prime said:
Croaker42 said:
In this lawsuit happy world I sure as hell don't blame them.
Pretty much that.
AzrealMaximillion said:
What Nintendo doesn't realize is that most people who sue don't EVER read the warmings.
No, but if the warnings are there then case usually gets shut down before it even gets going or any considerable amount of money is wasted in legal fees.
Not really. True from Canada. The ever popular Tim Horton's coffee shop was sue because a lady spilt hot coffee on her lap and scolded herself. All coffees come with a (Warning contents may be Hot) warning on the top of the lid of the cup. She somehow still got money. Living in the World today eh?
Wasn't it McDonald's? And didn't such warnings come about as a result of that case?
It was McDonald's first and that did bring the warnings, but I'm talking about Tim Horton's in Canada. The judge deemed Tim Horton's warning not visible enough or some BS even though the warning is on top of the damn lid and on the side.

Someone tried to sue a McDonald's for the same thing in the U.K. 2 years after and the case got thrown out even without warnings on their cups. The judge there ruled that common sense should've taken precedence.
Yeah I know, I live in Canada. However I'd not heard of either of those two cases.
Common sense eh? That's a rare thing these days, which is ironic when you think about it.