Return-Path: Received: from mail.viclink.com ([66.129.220.6] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP id 2705649 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:27:47 -0500 Received: from mail.viclink.com (p025.AS1.viclink.com [66.129.192.25]) by mail.viclink.com (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id hA1DRco04004 for ; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 05:27:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3FA3B4A7.3030208@mail.viclink.com> Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 05:27:03 -0800 From: Perry Mick User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Mazda Sue???? References: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020908060808060506050301" X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030217) (mail.viclink.com) --------------020908060808060506050301 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > > > >>Ed Anderson wrote: >> >> >> >>>Me thinks this is much ado about little for the individual Mazda Engine >>>converter. On what grounds could Mazda possibly sue you? You have >>> >>> >signed > > >>>no document that precludes you from using the engine you got out of the >>>"Junk Yard" in any way you want. >>> >>> >> > >> >> >>>There! my 0.02 and now off the soap box and on to flying more rotary >>>engines. >>> >>>FWIW >>> >>>Ed Anderson >>> >>> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> >>Ed, I don't think we have to worry about Mazda sueing us, we have to >>worry about what Mazda may do if it is ever sued by someone's heirs >>after a fatal aircraft accident. I find it almost unbelievable that >>Mazda could ever be found responsible, but court verdicts in this >>country rarely make any sense. Monetary rewards are way out of line, etc. >> >>-- >>Perry Mick >> >> >> >> >No argument with you over that point, Perry. No question that the tort >legal system in this country has simply become another way for some lawyers >to enrich themselves. > >Ed Anderson > > > Remember John Denver. Anyone who knows anything about that accident would tell you it was pilot error. The plane had been flying for 10 years. His estate sued the maker of the fuel selector valve, and the company settled out of court. Ridiculous. The valve probably wasn't even faulty, just located in a bad spot. That was not the fault of the valve manufacturer, but the airplane manufacturer. But the airplane manufacturer didn't have deep enough pockets. It was Mr. Denver's fault he didn't put some gas in the plane before takeoff. If the manufacturer of a small fuel valve can be sued over something that wasn't their fault, I can understand why Mazda would be nervous. Who started all this crap, Ralph Nader? http://www.nader.org/ -- Perry Mick --------------020908060808060506050301 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ed Anderson wrote:

Me thinks this is much ado about little for the individual Mazda Engine
converter.  On what grounds could Mazda possibly sue  you?  You have

signed

no document that precludes you from using the engine you got out of the
"Junk Yard" in any way you want.

There! my 0.02 and now off the soap box and on to flying more rotary
engines.

FWIW

Ed Anderson

> >

      

Ed, I don't think we have to worry about Mazda sueing us, we have to
worry about what Mazda may do if it is ever sued by someone's heirs
after a fatal aircraft accident. I find it almost unbelievable that
Mazda could ever be found responsible, but court verdicts in this
country rarely make any sense. Monetary rewards are way out of line, etc.

--
Perry Mick

No argument with you over that point, Perry.  No question that the tort
legal system in this country has simply become another way for some lawyers
to enrich themselves.

Ed Anderson

Remember John Denver. Anyone who knows anything about that accident would tell you it was pilot error. The plane had been flying for 10 years. His estate sued the maker of the fuel selector valve, and the company settled out of court. Ridiculous. The valve probably wasn't even faulty, just located in a bad spot. That was not the fault of the valve manufacturer, but the airplane manufacturer. But the airplane manufacturer didn't have deep enough pockets. It was Mr. Denver's fault he didn't put some gas in the plane before takeoff. If the manufacturer of a small fuel valve can be sued over something that wasn't their fault, I can understand why Mazda would be nervous. Who started all this crap, Ralph Nader?

http://www.nader.org/

-- 
Perry Mick

--------------020908060808060506050301--