(10-12-2021, 02:43 PM)btreger Wrote: - SoClean alleges, Philips has misled the public, deliberately placing blame on SoClean for recall.
In some ways, SoClean does have a case against Philips for specifically using SoClean's name on the registration site, in interviews and on press releases. Philips made a mistake there. They should have generically stated "ozone cleaning of the internal ventilator system" (or something similar).
It was inevitable that SoClean would respond. They'd have to, as they're entire company is on the line. I wonder if Philips could have a counter-suit, stating SoClean stated it was "safe" to use and continually aggressively promoted its usage.
But then again, Philips designed a faulty product with carcinogenic foam that degrades over time. The only thing SoClean did was speed that up. SoClean needs to do everything to show that non-SoClean users also experience foam degradation. They could do that through extended lab testing. They could do that by first hand user reports. They could do that by bringing in a group of non-SoClean Philips user systems to study.
If I were a judge, I'd have give the edge to SoClean for the following reason:
No doubt, Philips hates SoClean. Philips' faulty foam might never have become an issue since most users upgrade their systems every 5-10 years. SoClean put the spotlight on Philips' faulty foam issues. SoClean may end up costing Philips $1 Billion. Philips may end up destroying the SoClean company.
SoClean should get onboard with the other lawsuits and support the notion that Philips created a faulty product for decades, later discovering the issue, did insufficient laboratory testing, ignoring user complaints, delayed fixing the existing products (but put out an entirely new product), delayed informing the public, etc. etc.