Instructor: Mr. Kendall
13 February 2013
“Under the doctrine of unintentional tort, commonly referred to as negligence, a person is liable for harm that is the foreseeable consequence of his or her actions” (Cheeseman, 2010, page 80). In this court case a parent sued Meow Media for wrongful death. A teenage boy that played Meow Media’s violent video games and watched their movie resulted in him taking weapons to school, killing three of his peers, and injuring more. The courts decided that Meow Media could not foresee that their products would incite this person to commit these violent acts. Millions partake in playing their games and watching their movies. This person’s actions were not the usual result after utilizing their products. “Under negligence, a person is liable only for foreseeable events” (Cheeseman, 2010, page 87). There would be no possible way that Meow Media could anticipate for something like this to occur. In this case Meow Media can utilize a superseding event or an intervening event as a defense. They can’t be held liable for something that they had no control over.
On the other hand, you could look at it in another way. Meow Media could be at fault for influencing violence. In this case you could use strict liability. It wasn’t the products that Meow Media produced that directly hurt people but it could be considered liability without fault. “That is, a participant in a covered activity will be held liable for any injuries caused by the activity, even if he or she was not negligent” (Cheeseman, 2010, page 89). What that means to me is that because Meow Media promoted violence then in turn that encouraged this teen to act on it as well.
If Meow Media would have been found liable in this case the consequences for the video game industry would have been detrimental. No one would want their kids to play the games and they would lose profits quick. That is if the...
References: Cheeseman, Henry (2010). Business Law, 7th ed. New York: Prentice Hall.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document