View Single Post
Old 09-19-2008, 04:36 PM   #214
tompe
Grand Sorcerer
tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Serious question, Tommy - how can you "prove" a negative? I don't see how it would be possible to prove that a design is not faulty.
How do you prove that you did not break it? It is also a negative.

An alternative is to show that the customer broke it. The point is that when this change was made in the laws (regulations) it was to make it better for consumers. Before the rule was that the consumer had to show that it was a design fault.

Of course in most cases it is not possible for the seller to show that it is not a design fault that caused the problem so the he has to replace the item. And that is the intended consequence of the law.
tompe is offline   Reply With Quote