Question

1. On what public policy grounds is strict liability imposed? Explain

2. Should victims of a mass shooting be able to sue the manufacturer of a violent video game for a design defect if the shooter had been a devoted player of that violent game?

3. In what circumstances might the doctrine of strict product liability apply in the context of cyberspace? Should a business be liable in product liability if it spreads a virus unwittingly—by, for example, sending an infected document to another computer, or simply leaving a company computer “on” and connected to a broadband network through which a hacker gains access?

4. To avoid liability on a negligence theory in a product liability suit, to what extent must a manufacturer exercise due care?

Answer 1

Warning Labels for video games

• Each item that is bought must have proper admonition names relying upon the negative effects that they may have or the harms that they may make to the general population.
• vedio games should likewise have a fitting admonition name and the customer classes as far as age section who can play the games or watch the games being played.
• Even in the event that they are not paid off-the-rack yet being downloaded there must be suitable admonition messages.
• While leasing computer games, the age of the supporter must be confined particularly for savage vedio games – as there might be a negative effect on the kid's activities , whenever impacted by the brutality that he watches.

There must be a benchmarked acknowledged standard of rating framework for such vicious computer games. In this way, it will be left to the client to choose if he would need to proceed with the purchase,borrow of the vedio game and use it.

• On sixteenth September 2013, the shootout that happened where shooter Aaron Alexis, left 13 individuals dead at the Washington Navy Yard. According to the reports, Alexis played rough computer games for around 16 hours one after another.
• There was a segment of individuals who were not with this contention, and individuals are as yet searching for a response to this wrt. the job of vedio games in such savagery.
• The games would not have been the main factor for such a forceful conduct. Possibly, there were other unstable issues couple with this. Be that as it may, the fierce Warning Labels for video games has been one of the contributing components for forming his mind.
• It has been seen that hostility increments in individuals who play violet computer games for 20 minutes one after another. Also, Alexis had been playing it for 16 hours one after another, so this had been a central point.
• Different explores have deduced that fierce vedio games increment forceful musings and conduct, makes physiological energy, for example, increment in pulse, circulatory strain), furious sentiments and decline sympathetic emotions towards humanity.
• Additionally it was seen that these players in a sensible world focus on and take shots at the objective precisely.
• There have been different instances of individuals who have acted like Alexis. Adam Lanza who slaughtered 26 youngsters in a school in Connecticut was likewise an enthusiastic player of shooting games.
• To shield our general public from brutality and t relieve the negative effect, fitting admonition marks must be accessible to manage the clients, guardians and youngsters who may utilize it.
• With regards to the internet, the principle of severe item liablility can occur if the client's information got spilled because of bumbling firewall of the web stage, and the client endured because of the equivalent, at that point all things considered, the web stage or the information considering organization can be considered responsible for the harms under the teaching of exacting item obligation.
• At the point when a client imparted his information to the organization, as a rule the organization settles on him consent to a protection certainty arrangement, which expresses that his information will stay secure and the organization can be held liable for any sort of information break.

For Example: The latest corporate breakout was the Facebook information spill embarrassment that occurred in year following 2010, when Facebook had opened a stage called open diagram. The purchaser information from the stage was utilized by another expository firm, Cambridge Analytica. The information was utilized for directing prescient examination for Donald Trump's presidential political decision casting a ballot.

• The underlying driver of this occurrence was the imprudence of Facebook to permit any firm enrolled over its system, to get to purchaser information. Facebook utilized the customer's information without taking earlier authorization from the buyers.
• This was ethically and socially deceptive. This security emergency should be managed proficiently or, more than likely the entire foundation of Big Data will go under difficulty.
• Facebook violated the human right to security where it unveiled the shoppers' data to an outsider without illuminating or taking assent of the purchaser.
• Class activity was held up against both Facebook and Cambridge Analytica for abusing the individual information of clients under exacting item liability .
• A business ought not be held at liability in item obligation on the off chance that it spreads an infection accidentally as the infection or the assault occurred in his numbness or without his insight and consent.
• The programmer would have assessed the business' framework and assessed the extent of break. The penetrate prompted the assault.
• There was no job of the business in empowering the programmer or allowing him to hack. Thus, in such case, the tenet of severe item liability may not be held pertinent.