I read everything. My parents used to make fun of me when, for lack of anything better to do, I would read the cereal box labels at breakfast.
So I read EULAs, and privacy policies, and all that stuff people count on you not reading. I came across a gem today, in the disclaimer for a replacement cleat for my clipless pedal.
LOOK declines, within legal limits, all responsibilities in the event of direct or indirect damage resulting from an incident involving its products. In certain countries or regions, limitation of responsibility for injury resulting from material or immaterial damage is illegal. The previous paragraph therefore would not apply.
So a) if crazed EPO-freak cyclists go on a killing rampage in your town, Look wants you to know that they take no responsibility for either their superior mobility and pedal power or the indirect effects of the spree.
b) unless it’s illegal to say that. Then pretend we didn’t just say that, though we pretty clearly just did.
I love the semi-lawerly slinking tone.
c) technically, “previous paragraph” is the warning that the “Good operating guarantee” only applies to products made by Look International, thus leaving the illegal disclaiming of responsibility intact.
Derek, I know about those disclaimers, especially as they relate to used cars. I actually filed a lawsuit when I was still in private practice. Gist: ineffective disclaimers are deceptive and, therefore, illegal under Washington’s Consumer Protection Act. Result: I left to become a law clerk and the client took a decent chunk of money, but I didn’t get to prove my point for the benefit of any other consumers. Maybe later.
What am I doing reading your blog on a Friday evening?
If I sue Look pedals, do I get a lifetime supply of cleats? Because that would be a significant help to my standard of living, as sad as that sounds.
Unless you suffered some damages from the disclaimer, the best scenario? You’d get your name on court filings and an injunction against such disclaimers for the benefit of the public (including you).
I’d get a “reasonable” attorney’s fee that I would ethically prohibited from sharing with (kicking back to)you.
Any questions about why these disclaimers aren’t challenged?