| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
GATSU
Joined: 03 Jan 2002 Posts: 8412
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 3:46 pm |
|
|
| I agree with the court on this one. Meeting the bare safety standards is just cheap and lazy. Look at those zookeepers in SF who cut corners on that tiger pit last year. |
| Back to top |
|
|
marie-antoinette

Joined: 18 Sep 2005 Posts: 2626 Location: Toronto
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 4:21 pm |
|
|
Hopefully this will induce other companies to make their capsules bigger and perhaps lead to the former guidelines being changed, because they are not sufficient.
I have to say that having taken care of young children I find it a bit unreasonable to place all the blame on the parents. Kids are great at getting into things they aren't supposed to and doing it fast enough that a caretaker has little time to react. And since this was so small, it would have been easy for the boy to grab it and stick it in his mouth without his mother having any clue until it was too late for her to prevent it.
Also, why does everyone just assume that the toy was his? While it is possible, the capsule could have very easily belonged to an older sibling who left it out. I can't imagine a toy that fit in a capsule that small being safe for young children either.
Last edited by marie-antoinette on Wed May 21, 2008 5:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
| Back to top |
|
|
therealssjlink
Joined: 30 Apr 2005 Posts: 112
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 4:28 pm |
|
|
| If the parents had been living in the United States, they would have gotten A LOT more than that. |
| Back to top |
|
|
tsukikage
Subscriber
Joined: 31 Aug 2002 Posts: 50 Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 4:33 pm |
|
|
Again with thinking this is total B.S.
Now, I'm totally for changing the requirements for the shapes of the caspsules and requiring air holes - I think that's a wonderful idea! And even making the capsules a little bigger isn't bad. But suing them even though they followed federal guidelines is beyond bullshit. |
| Back to top |
|
|
testorschoice
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 465
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 4:47 pm |
|
|
| DmonHiro wrote: | | 2nd, how can you be blamed if your producs meets the requiremnts stated by law? |
| tsukikage wrote: | | But suing them even though they followed federal guidelines is beyond bullshit. |
The Japan Toy Association is a private industry group, not part of the Japanese government. The association's safety standards are voluntary rules, not laws or federal guidelines. The court is only pointing out that the safety standards that the toy companies wrote for themselves failed to ensure...well, a standard of safety. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Mohawk52

Joined: 16 Oct 2003 Posts: 3857 Location: Celebrating Lindsey Hawker murder suspect arrest, in Basingstoke, UK.
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 5:56 pm |
|
|
| Yes all parents of toddlers must be responsible for their child's safety, but even the best of parents can't be everywhere at once, and we don't know how this child managed to get hold of this packaging to put it in his mouth. This must have been questioned of the parents by Bandai's lawyers during the trial, and the judges, and/or jury must have accepted their answer, but it also might be the reason that the award was so low. but on the other hand it is the responsibility of toy manufacturers to make sure that all safety aspects of a design is considered, tested, and built into their final product before it is released to the public. Failure to do so leaves that manufacturer liable for damages, as this case proves. These parents will have to live with this on their conscience for the rest of their lives, and that award will never support that child into adulthood. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Teriyaki Terrier

Joined: 26 Mar 2008 Posts: 1609 Location: Chihuahua Island
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 7:18 pm |
|
|
Truthfully, this is the parent's fault. Don't blame the company entirely, because I am sure the parents should have paid more attention.
Just remember, the kid could have gone to greater achivements, such as doctor, lawyler or scientist, now the best he can do is janitor. Unless the parents give him to a adoption agency, you'd be surprized to hear this is common if the child has something wrong with them. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Batman3777

Joined: 18 May 2007 Posts: 159 Location: Down the Shore, NJ
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 8:05 pm |
|
|
This decision seems fair, and I'm glad to see the Japanese court is challenging the established guidelines for safety. What do you know, it looks like people may actually ::gasp:: learn a lesson from this and change things for the better?
As far as I know, a 2 year old can jam a small object into its mouth pretty quick. Parents can actually look away from their children for a few seconds every now and then, you know.
This is NOT like that case where those kids buried the other kid in the sand, and he died... Those kids were older and should have known better, and the parents would have had PLENTY of time to notice, if they had been paying proper attention.
I don't blame anyone in this capsule case (no pun intended). This was an accident, one that appears to have taught a valuable lesson, albeit at the unfortunate expense of the child's mental capacity. If the toys are changed, than this accident (or worse, death by gashapon) will not happen to any other child. Frankly, this child is a hero. But I bet no one else will think of it that way. |
| Back to top |
|
|
TornadoTatsumaki
Joined: 01 Feb 2008 Posts: 145 Location: Mission Bend,Texas
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 8:22 pm |
|
|
While you heart goes out to the now 8 year old boy and his family I kinda feel more sorry for NamcoBandai they seem to be a poorly run company who can seem to take these things seriously, not only do they invest very little in thier declining 128-bit arcade line and recycle old dated technology, but they fail to notify thier subsaries about the proper precautions about choking hazards for children under 3.
I hope Namco gets thier act together and stops losing money on arcades. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Xanas
Joined: 27 Aug 2007 Posts: 1311
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 8:31 pm |
|
|
I don't think this is a "natural selection" issue as someone thought this would be, the kid was only 2 years old. If he were >5 I'd be a little less forgiving.
Anyhow, it seems legitimate to me based on the facts of the case and the decision sounds reasonable. I do think the parents would have obtained more in US courts, but I'm not sure I think that's a good thing. This wasn't incredible negligence on the part of the company or something like that. At the same time they can handle the hit, and the parents really cannot. 250,000 put into decent investments and not spent frivolously should allow the child to have expenses paid, which seems fair to me. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Gingy
Joined: 14 May 2008 Posts: 57
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 8:55 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | I agree with the court on this one. Meeting the bare safety standards is just cheap and lazy. Look at those zookeepers in SF who cut corners on that tiger pit last year. |
How can anybody even think suing the company of any amount of money is remotely reasonable?! The company have not done anything wrong, and now they have to pay a ridiculous amount of sum just because some kid got permanent injury. Meeting the bare safety standards is STILL meeting the safety standards. If some kid choked to death eating chocolate bars, should we be suing the producer of the chocolate bars money because of it? Because they didn't make the chocolate small/big enough? The company met the safety standards nonetheless, so they are not wrong at all. Even if they did make bigger toys. Then kids would just smash them into smaller pieces and then swallow them. Or they could just swallow other toys besides those gashapon capsules.[/list] |
| Back to top |
|
|
The Xenos

Joined: 29 Mar 2004 Posts: 1101 Location: Boston
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 9:17 pm |
|
|
I see the disease of the sue happy parents looking for someone to blame has spread to Japan. It's a sad story, but nothing the company could have done is the problem. It was an accident, a horrible accident. If anything, the capsule should have been thrown out by the parents. It's a 2 year old child. That's part of taking care of a two year old child. You have to be careful of all the things they put in their mouth. It is ridiculous to place blame on the company. Very sad on a number of fronts.
You cannot childproof the world. You have to look after your own children. |
| Back to top |
|
|
testorschoice
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 465
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 9:21 pm |
|
|
| Gingy wrote: | | Quote: | | I agree with the court on this one. Meeting the bare safety standards is just cheap and lazy. Look at those zookeepers in SF who cut corners on that tiger pit last year. |
How can anybody even think suing the company of any amount of money is remotely reasonable?! The company have not done anything wrong, and now they have to pay a ridiculous amount of sum just because some kid got permanent injury. Meeting the bare safety standards is STILL meeting the safety standards. |
However, the incident demonstrates that the old safety standards--which the toy companies created for themselves--are inadequate. One purpose for lawsuits like these is to upgrade safety standards. That's one way we end up with safer products.
| Quote: | | If some kid choked to death eating chocolate bars, should we be suing the producer of the chocolate bars money because of it? Because they didn't make the chocolate small/big enough? The company met the safety standards nonetheless, so they are not wrong at all. |
That's an invalid comparison--apples-and-oranges. Actually, it's not even apples-and-oranges. Apples and oranges are at least both edible. Chocolates and plastic capsules don't even have that in common.
| Quote: | | Even if they did make bigger toys. Then kids would just smash them into smaller pieces and then swallow them. |
Toys for small children also have to meet a certain criteria for fragility.
| Quote: | | Or they could just swallow other toys besides those gashapon capsules. |
If the main result of this lawsuit is higher safety standards, then those other toys will also have to meet higher safety standards. So that problem is solved as well. |
| Back to top |
|
|
bglassbrook

Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 529 Location: Gaithersburg, MD
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 10:04 pm |
|
|
| I think the parents bare more onus in this, so the finding certainly could have been worse. However, the article seems to indicate the kid had been running around with the capsule for a while before starting to choke on it. If this is the case, then the parents should only receive a nominal finding with instructions to fix the safety guidelines. Chances are the penalty was small enough Bandai won't bother apealing for anything short of a videotape showing the parents stuffing it down the kid's throat. |
| Back to top |
|
|
hikaru004

Joined: 15 Mar 2004 Posts: 1832
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 10:39 pm |
|
|
| bglassbrook wrote: | | I think the parents bare more onus in this, so the finding certainly could have been worse. However, the article seems to indicate the kid had been running around with the capsule for a while before starting to choke on it. If this is the case, then the parents should only receive a nominal finding with instructions to fix the safety guidelines. Chances are the penalty was small enough Bandai won't bother apealing for anything short of a videotape showing the parents stuffing it down the kid's throat. |
Now this is truly uncalled for. The article doesn't give a complete account. The kid could have been running around panicking because there was a foreign body lodged in his mouth that he couldn't get out. If anything it could be a hint as to how much suffering that kid and the parents went thru.
If this was the US, the award would have been greater. Also, we have a recall system. Is there such a thing in Japan? |
| Back to top |
|
|
|