Talk:Warning label

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

12312313 I heard some moron tried to use McDonalds cuz she burnt herself on the coffee. I heard now Starbucks don't serve hot coffee anymore. You can get coffee, but it's not hot.

The case you mentioned is Liebeck v. McDonald's Corp. --cesarb 17:51, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think maybe that this article should mention that there are some rediculous warning labels as a result of lawsuits. On many products it says "do not smoke" or "do not eat". -- Frap 20:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It does mention it already: "Some of them are intended to prevent lawsuits against the item's manufacturer, which sometimes results in labels which state the obvious." --cesarb 17:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]