How often do people crash cars? Are all those annoying harnesses and expensive safety devices really necessary?
How often do people crash cars? Are all those annoying harnesses and expensive safety devices really necessary?How often do people crash cars into objects across the ocean? All we've seen here so far are very specific and fairly exceptional scenarios.
Weller decided to save on safety features
I think something was lost in the translation from Swedish. Let me correct your English for you.This model doesn't include a particular feature that protects the iron from gross mis-use such as supplying twice the intended voltage.
All we've seen here so far are very specific and fairly exceptional scenarios.
Scenarios that really happen.
(but this has already been pointed out a zillion times in this thread, you're just refusing to accept it).
Mitigation costs a few cents, there's no excuse on a device that costs over $100 that gets sold to engineers.
(and this has also been pointed out a zillion times, you're just refusing to accept it).
Flipped around: What valid excuse does Weller have for doing this when all common sense and engineering practice says it's a bad idea? How would anybody justify Weller not adding a fuse? Spell it out for us...
Weller decided to save on safety features
I think something was lost in the translation from Swedish. Let me correct your English for you.This model doesn't include a particular feature that protects the iron from gross mis-use such as supplying twice the intended voltage.
I'm just asking how often it does happen and whether that's enough to justify it.
There's obviously not enough data for that, but there's been (I believe) three reports of it happening just in this thread.
If it's often enough to happen a widely followed blogger? That's when Weller should have had enough sense to admit they're Doing It Wrong.
They failed.
Completely.
That's when Weller should have had enough sense to admit they're Doing It Wrong.
They failed.
Completely.
I think we can agree there's not enough data. Three cases with fairly exceptional circumstances on a forum filled with people doing unusual things with electronics doesn't sound like a very high rate.
Does it have to be "very high" before you take any action?
Does it have to be "very high" before you take any action?The counter question would be whether you take action when the impact may very well be marginal or nearly non-existent. Protecting against everything isn't possible, so the sensible approach is to ascertain what failure modes have the biggest impact and to protect against those.
"Impact" includes damage to your company reputation as well as damage that may be caused by your products.
A reputable company would at least do the things that:
a) Are very cheap to do
b) Their competitors are doing
c) The target demographic is very likely to notice
You'll still need to address whether that fuss is valid, which has so far been proven to be rather tricky.
a) Doesn't sound like you're trying to build a company, only count beans.
b) What's your opinion of this:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/contests/win-a-weller/
a) Doesn't sound like you're trying to build a company, only count beans.
b) What's your opinion of this:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/contests/win-a-weller/I think it's a forum thread?
What precautions should you take if you give away a Weller (or even sell one on eBay)? Are you responsible for damages?
What precautions should you take if you give away a Weller (or even sell one on eBay)? Are you responsible for damages?You'd have to ask a lawyer who knows about your local law about the degree of responsibility you have when giving away an item.
OK, question: As a CEO, are you happy owning a company where people feel they ought top consult a lawyer before they can give away one of your products?
Read that contest thread again (the one where you apparently see nothing special): Somebody is trying to give away a Weller soldering iron and the comments are, "delivered with a cardboard box that can be used to contain the smoke" and "Shame it won't arrive at the winners door in time for New Year Eve, so they miss out of their own personal fireworks display."
This is now Weller's reputation.
All for the sake of a few cents in the BOM of a product which is being promoted using $100,000 stands at large trade fairs (alongside competitors who've seen Dave's video and will happily tell their clients about it).
If you think that's money well saved then I wouldn't want you in marketing any of my products.
Goodbye!
OK, question: As a CEO, are you happy owning a company where people feel they ought top consult a lawyer before they can give away one of your products?
Read that contest thread again (the one where you apparently see nothing special): Somebody is trying to give away a Weller soldering iron and the comments are, "delivered with a cardboard box that can be used to contain the smoke" and "Shame it won't arrive at the winners door in time for New Year Eve, so they miss out of their own personal fireworks display."
This is now Weller's reputation.
All for the sake of a few cents in the BOM of a product which is being promoted using $100,000 stands at large trade fairs (alongside competitors who've seen Dave's video and will happily tell their clients about it).
If you think that's money well saved then I wouldn't want you in marketing any of my products.
Goodbye!Don't mince my words. You specifically asked me about liability when giving away a product, and I said you'd need to consult a lawyer about your local laws about liability when giving away a product. Any product.
The people who responded in that thread are mostly the same handful of people who have expressed their opinion in this thread. They've seem to taken Dave's cue, but haven't contributed any facts which show worrisome qualities. They simply chimed in. If that's an example of the scale of the rather manufactured outrage, Weller has nothing to worry about. More importantly, outrage isn't evidence or proof. Outrage is an opinion. It doesn't grant you special rights or treatment and it doesn't eliminate the need for proving there's actually a quantifiable issue. I'll quote Stephen Fry, and substitute : offended" for "outraged" wherever appropriate. "It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."
I really don't appreciate being railroaded onto Weller's side. Let's stop fishing, baiting and framing and get back on topic.
Pure demagogics. Of course there are *lot* of products that you can give away without even thinking of asking your lawyer first.
As opposed to your cited Stephen Fry the Weller issue *has* a meaning and a purpose. The meaning is that cutting safety corners is a bad thing, and the purpose is to make Weller stop this practice.
I think your are perfectly in line with spin doctoring. But you have an harsh enemy : common sense.
The only sensible answer when people are asking for legal advice on the internet from an unknown place is "go see a local lawyer". Just like the only sensible answer to questions about a medical condition is "go see a doctor". Fungus asked about liability. He should ask a lawyer what trouble he may or may not get himself in when he gives away a product. That all has nothing to do with Weller in particular and attempting to spin it as such is just tiring.