Non Linear Pro-is a company that sells editing equipment. Recently, the company was involved in a transaction that involved the lease of equipment to Quick Text Video on a trial basis. Before the purchase, the sales representative for NonLinear Pro and the company manger for Quick Text Video discussed the pros and cons of the product. The salesman indicated that the system would be up and running within a day in a half of delivery and that it would be twice as fast as the current system in use at Quick Text Video. The system was delivered, including a delivery document for the signature of the recipient. The document included a lease agreement for three months. Quick Text Video attempted to use the equipment for two weeks. However, it was not performing properly for a number of reasons, the first and most obvious of which was that the promise of the equipment functioning within a day and a half was not kept. The product therefore did not function properly as promised, did not cut the work in half, and in addition also injured a worker at Quick Text Video.

For these reasons, the company contacted NonLinear Pro-to return the product. However, the latter sent a bill for the amount of $5,000 for the three-month lease period, as stated on the lease agreement that was signed at the delivery of the equipment. In legal terms NonLinear Pro-does carry some product liability, since it did not perform as promised and caused an injury. There is therefore a tort violation as a result of worker injury. The worker who was injured was Jane, who cut her finger on the sharp edge of the equipment. The injury was infected and she was obliged to visit a doctor, incurring a loss of worker hours for the company and wages for her, while also costing medical bills.

Criterion 1 &...

Statements made by the salesman for Non-Linear Pro-were accepted as fact regarding the equipment prior to accepting its lease for the trial period. One of these statements was that "Any of your editors, if they're computer savvy, will pick this up in a day, day and a half tops." As stated, "The people at the company used the product for more than half a day, they read the manuals, and they were not able to figure out how to use the product. So clearly the product did not live up to the standard that was set forth in the express warranty."
There was therefore a clear discrepancy between what was promised and what was delivered.

In addition, another tort includes liability for physical injury. At the start of the video, for example, Jane cut her hand as she was reaching for the software CD. She stated a wish for a warning label regarding dangerous sharp edges. This could be related to negligence or product liability as a result of an injury that might have been prevented with the appropriate warning, because those "manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers, and others who make products available to the public are held responsible for the injuries those products cause." (White, 2006) No warning was provided with this product, which means the company is liable for the injury. In addition, the same person, Jane, cut her hand again when trying to insert and remove the discs from the machine.

The product itself also did not work as originally promised, either in terms of functionality or within the specified time frame. This occurred after company representatives performed due diligence with the product and software.…