I don't know how it is in Belgium, but we are the epitamy of the frivolous lawsuit :(. A couple of dolts sued a lawn mower company [and won] because their fingers were cut off when they lifted the mower to cut the top off their hedges. Apparently, there was no warning label on the mower to keep body parts out of the blade area while the engine is running.

We also had a lady successfully sue McDonalds because they had the nerve to serve her hot coffee which she sat between her legs (she was driving through the Drive-Thru window). She spilled the coffee and burned her legs. Amazingly McDonalds lost, had to pay her a ridiculous amount, and had to put a warning on their coffee cups. Now, many other places have similar warnings and reduced the temperature of the coffee. The taste of coffee is bad enough without it being served luke-warm.

McDonalds has the resources to take this through the courts. I, on the other hand, would be screwed regardless of any verdict. Hell, we put up signs to warn about anything in this country, including one warning about highway Guardrail Damage Ahead, as in, if you are going to lose control of your car, make sure you hit an undamaged part of the rail because some idiot before you could not drive across the bridge without hitting the guardrail.

When we expect stupidity, difficulty in achieving, and lack of common sense, we usually get it [ubiquitous in our public schools]. We even have most of the world believing the new millenium start Jan 1, 2000.


>Well Mark, I think you should think twice about the easyness to sue us. Did you specify in all your contracts that your programs will stop working properly on 31/12/99?, or do you let your user enter 4 digit centuries, and even then I guess the 29/02/00 will still be a problem won't it? And who will _you_ sue, you who are using Foxpro that, and I quote (with tears in my eyes from laughter) "operates in the manner indicated by the manual".
>
>This being said, not so sure this ruling is so much in favour of M$, because there are a few instances where Foxpo does not operates in the manner indicated in the manual. Wonder how this judge would rule in this case.
>
>Marc
>
>
>
>>>I thought I would let folks know the news that today the judge dismissed the FoxPro Y2K lawsuit (Ruth H. Kaczmaerek vs. Microsoft Corporation). The case was dismissed with prejudice (meaning the claim can not be refiled), but could be appealed within 30 days. This is the first Y2K lawsuit of record to be dismissed with prejudice. Points worth highlighting in the ruling includes the Judges finding that “FoxPro is Y2K compliant” and “…there is no ‘defect’ in the program; FoxPro operates in the manner indicated by the user manual.” There will be a more formal press release soon.
>>>
>>>Randy
>>>[MSFT]
>>
>>Funny, I was just reading the actual document filed with the court on my FPA Resource CD. It did not take long to find several factually incorrect claims. I think this would have set a bad precedent not only for MS and other software manufacturers but for developers as well. i.e., I think this could have made it much easier to sue developers as well as manfacturers based on some fairly lame claims -- primarily the complaint that heads down data entry clerks would no longer be able to enter 2 digits of the year and expect the computer to always figure out which century was implied by the clerk.
>>
>>Sanity and common sense prevailed for once.

Mark McCasland
Midlothian, TX USA