Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 9:21 PM
Sun Nov 29
8 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/13/09
You know, I really wish this bullshit would stop. Trolling in the comments section is bad enough without the actual writers doing it too. #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
#bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
We need a service like this in USA... I already have Netflix on my PS3, so I want a different serivce with different content on the Wii. #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
Here are a couple of screens: #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
Must go watch some Mighty Boosh! #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
Because...y'know, it's not like it plays video games or anything.
I wish Kotaku's writers didn't troll the Wii so much. If you guys don't like it, that's fine, but making fun of it on a daily basis has gotten kind of old. #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
Now If only they gave PS3 it's own app rather than a hard coded bookmark.
Cos the desktop Iplayer on PS3 would be amazingly useful. #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
11/13/09
So surely you should be able to get to it on PS3. Same with SkyPlayer.
Though not really tried either.
let's try it now
Edit:
Skyplayer needs Silverlight.
4OD just doesn't work. no idea why. it just doesn't.
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
I do hope that the wii version has a HQ option, as in the video he talks of it being a lot better and faster. #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
11/13/09
that doesnt mean that it cant have a HQ stream.
do you think that youtube HQ streams are better than 480p? no, i didnt think so #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
It does not output in HD (720p or 1080p) but it can show video with DVD quality (480p). #bbciplayerwiichannel
11/13/09
11/13/09
10/31/09
1. Ignorance x Too much love for her kids
2. How much is too much when it comes to being partly responsible for someone's death
3. Why do people have to take such extreme stands when it comes to commenting on blogs
Too all those calling the woman stupid, completely responsible for what has happened to her, and stuff like that: You can get down your high horses now and just think a bit on how many dangerous stuff you got into because someone told you it was "safe". If you ever been in an amusement park, that's it.
And yet, if you died during a rollercoaster ride for any reason whatsoever, no one would call you stupid... it'd be the amusement park's responsibility.
I mean, has anyone ever heard of someone dying from drinking too much water before this case?
If you all know so much about warning signs and whatsoever, why don't you tell us what they are? It could be something sudden you can't control. Suddenly, there are lots of doctors and people with first hand experience in the house it seems.
You know. "I'd never do that because I'm so fucking smart".
Jennifer there was just trying to get her sons a Wii. She probably didn't have much money, so she had to take chances on the radio contest.
Probably not being as fortunate as most of us here, who has a decent internet connection and money to buy a Wii without taking risks, this was one good chance.
She probably got someone telling her she wouldn't have problems drinking that ammount of water because, you know, it's just water.
About the value. It's not about how much that sum means to us, it's how much the judges felt adequate to the case. It doesn't matter if it's 5 bucks or 50 million usds, as long as it's meaningful to the case and high enough to punish the station and for other people never to try doing a constest that stupid again. #lawsuit
10/30/09
the american court system is a joke #lawsuit
10/30/09
10/30/09
1. Adult woman voluntarily engages in an act that is well known to be potentially fatal for a chance to earn a $200 prize.
2. Woman is warned repeatedly that this is probably stupid.
3. Woman dies of self inflicted hyponatremia.
4. This somehow entitles her to $16 million dollars.
WRONG!
There is a strange trend in this country for placing monetary value on idiocy. #lawsuit
10/30/09
10/30/09
It boiled down to the station being liable in a negligent/wrongful death worst case scenario that this contest resulted in.
The whole thing was stupid and what basis is there for common sense to tell you that you can die from excessive hydration? I've never drank too much ater and I didn't even know you could until now.
They are totally at fault for this, the lady is dead and her kids have to grow up without their mother $16M should be enough to fill the gap in income but family members can't be replaced. #lawsuit
10/30/09
10/30/09
But...
"During the trial a tape of the program revealed that an on-air host had mentioned the potential fatal effects of drinking too much water - citing a 2005 fraternity hazing death. A listener also called to advise they not try the stunt."
It says right there that she was warned.
When it comes down to it, I wouldn't deny the family that money. It's just odd how different amounts are justified. How does her family deserve any more money than the family of a person who dies... say running a marathon? I guess the only difference being that the groups that hold marathons are smart enough to make their participants sign liability wavers. #lawsuit
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
"No, no that kid drank like 2 gallons of water."
Then they all share a laugh.
A few minutes later you can hear the woman saying, "Oh my stomach, I look like I'm pregnant again!"
Another laugh all around.
It's a very disturbing listen and the fact that this stunt was deadly was pretty openly discussed.
(Although, if the woman was unaware of the 2005 incident, she could have just taken these statements to be an attempt at getting her to drop out early.
After all, "these guys are professionals, they'd never let us do something dangerous".) #lawsuit
10/30/09
Also if it she heard about the potential side effects, that would also be Assumption of the Risk. #lawsuit
10/30/09
This means that, and this is only if this was how the ruling played out, both parties will assume comparative liability in the case- with the defendant having to pay the sum equal to the percentage the party is liable. Judging from the defendant's statements following the verdict:
"Charles Sipkins, a spokesman for Entercom, said in a statement: "Jennifer Strange’s death was a tragedy. Our hearts go out to all of her loved ones, including, in particular, her husband and children. While legal restrictions preclude us from commenting further on the verdict, we respect the jury’s decision and hope that it will assist the Strange family in coping with its loss.""
I don't see how you reached your conclusion: "that's your own dumbass fault it happened
Man, all of the armchair lawyers are really coming out of the wood-works tonight huh? Don't try to sound so pretentious next time, or if you do, at the very least please try to back it up with something substantial. Throwing around legalese doesn't make your arguments or you any more credible. #lawsuit
10/30/09
Secondly, the term I'm using is contributory negligence... well at least that's the term taught to my class, by our tort professor who happens to be a veteran litigator here in Southern Ca. So no, I'm NOT looking for non-absolute comparative negligence. Though out of curiosity, I've gone to both CBE and ABA law schools and not once heard it refereed to that, do you practice outside of Ca?
And no I did not want to use comparative negligence as, contributory is a total bar to recovery and in this case, I don't think they should have recovered. Yes it's cold and yeah people think I'm a dick for it. Especially if she was warned of the risks before hand. If she was warned is she not assuming the risk of drinking all that water? If she was warned would she not understand the risks involved? And did she not choose to encounter the risk regardless? Therefore is not Assumption of the Risk an applicable defense here?
Here tell you what, give me all the facts and I'll give you a full analysis. If YOU are a lawyer, you can score as if it was a bar question and tell this "air chair lawyer" what I still need to work on, before I take the bar in about a year. Actually no, don't bother unless you practice in Ca, since Ca has the hardest Bar Exam in the country, I only want a Ca lawyer giving me advice on it.
10/29/09
Most people don't seem to understand that intelligence and education are not the same thing. Water poisoining is not as well known as it should be. She is not stupid, she was uninformed. I dare to ask people around you if they know you can die from drinking too much water. You might be surprised by how little it is known. In fact, I only found out myself in a university class in physiology.
10/29/09
10/29/09
If you don't understand how the court system works, don't try to criticize it. #lawsuit