<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics: Comments on Dickie Roberts: Wham-0!</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:43:39 EDT</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Comment by Jim Carruthers</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/09/120823.php#comment-18055</link>
<description>There was actually a judgement against Mattel for over $12 million because he tried to use a Slip and Slide while drunk, broke his neck, and had to blame somebody with money.

The culture of litigation in the USA has led to this. I once saw on the label of a bottle of California wine (after all the disclaimers about pregnancy, liver disease, etc.) &quot;Open other end&quot;.

I once did a report on litigation in New France in the 18th Century. Because of the notary system, litigation was the hobby during the winter, it didn&#039;t cost much, and passed the time. Most of the cases were never resolved.
</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">18055@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:43:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Michelle</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/09/120823.php#comment-18031</link>
<description>Well, I would imagine that over the past decade there have been hundreds of lawsuits over the slip-n-slide, which as my favorite toy as a kid caused me to have lots of injuries too.  Really, how many people actually just slid nice and safe on one?!  Blame it more on the lawyers of the parents than Wham-O.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">18031@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:23:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Phillip Winn</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/09/120823.php#comment-17925</link>
<description>Ya think? ;)</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">17925@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Sep 2003 14:28:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by TDavid</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/09/120823.php#comment-17919</link>
<description>Wait, I just realized ... maybe Wham-O is milking this publicity!</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">17919@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Sep 2003 14:01:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by TDavid</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/09/120823.php#comment-17918</link>
<description>That was the funniest part of the previews! (ok, the &quot;your mom is hot&quot; part was a runner-up).

Wham-O should be milking this FREE promotion!

So we&#039;re supposed to believe that kids everywhere are going to skin themselves on the slip-n-slide because they saw this in a movie? And then their parents are going to sue Wham-O for it? C&#039;mon.

Lawyers who suggest or make frivilous legal manuevers like this should be fined by the bar.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">17918@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Sep 2003 14:01:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>