Yes, but it’s 100% the duty of a parent to keep track of their kid. Its not the company’s fault that she isn’t a good parent. Just like it isn’t McDonald’s fault if a person chooses to eat there every day for a year and dies of diabetes.
Theyre throwing everything with the kitchen sink into the lawsuit hoping something will stick. This sounds like a case from a person that attempts a lot of frivilous lawsuits like this all the time hoping for a big payout, and not a person actually concerned with bad business practice. Strange how Sony and Nintendo are not mentioned here when they also market their products to children. A Nintendo or PlayStation game is equally as addictive as an Xbox game, so why aren’t they included? Probably because their cash reserves are much lower than Microsoft.
Do you have the same thoughts on tobacco and alcohol as you do gambling in games?
Like, is it solely the duty of the parents to make sure their kids don’t smoke or drink? You can’t think of anyone else who should be involved? Like say, the government making laws and regulations, the store clerks being general gatekeepers, teachers covering the gap while at school, and the parents filling in the rest as possible?
Find me a kid that’s with their parent 100% of their life. Good luck.
Do you have the same thoughts on tobacco and alcohol as you do gambling in games?
Yes. Until the kid is old enough to make their own choices, it is the duty if the parent to make those choices for them, and teach them why they should make the same choices. Obviously once your kid is old enough to make their own decisions, its up to them what they’re going to do.
If the parent is doing their job, theoretically government regulations wouldn’t need to exist. I would argue that governmental regulations for children are primarily the result of parents continuing to fail at their job and blaming everyone else but themselves.
Yes, and some kids don’t have parents, and some kids have horrible parents. And some of us aren’t pieces of shit, and we would like rights and protections for those who can’t defend themselves from shitty parents, so therefore we ignore how “theoretically” things could be better if all parents were magically “doing their jobs” and sometimes it makes sense to sue or institute laws to force people to not harm their kids.
Yes, but it’s 100% the duty of a parent to keep track of their kid. Its not the company’s fault that she isn’t a good parent. Just like it isn’t McDonald’s fault if a person chooses to eat there every day for a year and dies of diabetes.
Theyre throwing everything with the kitchen sink into the lawsuit hoping something will stick. This sounds like a case from a person that attempts a lot of frivilous lawsuits like this all the time hoping for a big payout, and not a person actually concerned with bad business practice. Strange how Sony and Nintendo are not mentioned here when they also market their products to children. A Nintendo or PlayStation game is equally as addictive as an Xbox game, so why aren’t they included? Probably because their cash reserves are much lower than Microsoft.
Do you have the same thoughts on tobacco and alcohol as you do gambling in games?
Like, is it solely the duty of the parents to make sure their kids don’t smoke or drink? You can’t think of anyone else who should be involved? Like say, the government making laws and regulations, the store clerks being general gatekeepers, teachers covering the gap while at school, and the parents filling in the rest as possible?
Find me a kid that’s with their parent 100% of their life. Good luck.
Yes. Until the kid is old enough to make their own choices, it is the duty if the parent to make those choices for them, and teach them why they should make the same choices. Obviously once your kid is old enough to make their own decisions, its up to them what they’re going to do.
If the parent is doing their job, theoretically government regulations wouldn’t need to exist. I would argue that governmental regulations for children are primarily the result of parents continuing to fail at their job and blaming everyone else but themselves.
Yes, and some kids don’t have parents, and some kids have horrible parents. And some of us aren’t pieces of shit, and we would like rights and protections for those who can’t defend themselves from shitty parents, so therefore we ignore how “theoretically” things could be better if all parents were magically “doing their jobs” and sometimes it makes sense to sue or institute laws to force people to not harm their kids.