“SawStop suit stopped”

Last month federal district judge Claude Hilton dismissed an antitrust suit filed against rival makers of table saws by SawStop, a company that has patented a table saw with innovative safety features. “Hilton’s ruling, while a blow to SawStop, has no legal bearing on the company’s efforts to get the Consumer Product Safety Commission to require the use of their technology on most table saws sold in the U.S.” Trial lawyers at Boies Schiller and elsewhere have also filed numerous product liability suits against makers of conventional saws; many saw users prefer to go on buying conventional saws, which are much less expensive, in preference to using the SawStop system [David Frane, Tools of the Trade, background; earlier]


  • But have any children been injured by this lack of a safety feature?

  • @rxc: According to this source, yes: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100113172150.htm

    “Males (97 percent) and adults (97 percent) accounted for the majority of table saw-related injuries. In comparison to adults, children were more likely to injure their heads, faces and necks and to be injured at school.

    “While the majority of the children who were injured were between the ages of 14 and 17 years, children as young as 6 years were found to be injured while operating a table saw,” said study author Brenda Shields, MS, research coordinator at the Center for Injury Research and Policy at Nationwide Children’s Hospital. “More research is needed to determine appropriate age restrictions.””

  • The video on their website makes the technology look amazingly cool. But are there that many consumers with the interest in table saws who can’t weigh the costs and benefits? Is there some way this decision is meaningfully different from the buying decision of selecting between a Volvo wagon and a Honda bike?