People selling harnesses manufactured in 1995

Just curious as to when/if people should/would speak out if someone is trying to sell a harness that is 20+ years old.
Or do I just leave a "YGD" comment and hope no one buys the harness in question.

https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_US/qc-lab-strength-of-worn-belay-loops.html
(I'll just leave this here too ^) 

I think it’s buyer beware in all cases.  That being said, the manufacture date of all soft goods (harnesses, ropes, slings, etc.) should be standard info included in the listing.  If it isn’t, the question should be asked and answer displayed publicly so that people can make their own informed decisions.

I'd have no problem taking a few TR laps in a 20 year old harness in apparent good condition. But I agree that the seller ought to disclose that info.

^agreed

Anthony DiFronzo wrote: Just curious as to when/if people should/would speak out if someone is trying to sell a harness that is 20+ years old.
Or do I just leave a "YGD" comment and hope no one buys the harness in question.

https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_US/qc-lab-strength-of-worn-belay-loops.html
(I'll just leave this here too ^) 

Its a free country, leave a comment that the harness, in your opinion, is to old to sell. Leave the link here and I will too. Shady to sell a harness like that. 

I would wear a 20 year old harness but not without visual inspection first and I sure as hell wouldn't buy one.

It’s a free country, but it’s illegal to sell expired milk.  I would say this falls under that guideline; 20 years far exceeds the manufacturer’s recommendations, even if it sat on the shelf.  Not sure how good the legal disclosures are here but if I were running the site, I would take it down.

Ted Pinson wrote: It’s a free country, but it’s illegal to sell expired milk.  I would say this falls under that guideline; 20 years far exceeds the manufacturer’s recommendations, even if it sat on the shelf.  Not sure how good the legal disclosures are here but if I were running the site, I would take it down.

Whoa Mr. Censorship! It's not the site's responsibility to police what sells and set expiration dates on goods for sale. By "free country" I mean it's the sellers right to sell it and the lookers right to post that, in their opinion, it's too old to buy. Check yo constitution bro.

Tradiban wrote:

Whoa Mr. Censorship! It's not the site's responsibility to police what sells and set expiration dates on goods for sale. By "free country" I mean it's the sellers right to sell it and the lookers right to post that, in their opinion, it's too old to buy. Check yo constitution bro.

Are you sure you know what censorship means?  My point is, as a marketplace that provided a platform for the exchange, they might be potentially liable if someone buys the harness and then goes and takes a big whip and dies.  In particular if there is a THREAD LIKE THiS WARNING OF THE DANGER and they continue to allow unscrupulous items to be sold.  Check yo Supreme Court precedents, yo.

Ted Pinson wrote:

Are you sure you know what censorship means?  My point is, as a marketplace that provided a platform for the exchange, they might be potentially liable if someone buys the harness and then goes and takes a big whip and dies.  In particular if there is a THREAD LIKE THiS WARNING OF THE DANGER and they continue to allow unscrupulous items to be sold.  Check yo Supreme Court precedents, yo.

No they wouldn't be liable. Dylan B please set young Teddy straight please.

Tradiban wrote:

No they wouldn't be liable. Dylan B please set young Teddy straight please.

Actually......this day and age you can sue anybody, any time, for anything.....and you have a 50/50 shot at winning.

A privately owned site that facilitates the marketing and sale of unsafe goods could be ​held liable in the event of an injury or death......just sayin'​​​

John Barritt wrote:

Actually......this day and age you can sue anybody, any time, for anything.....and you have a 50/50 shot at winning.

I could also win the Indy 500. This particular case would go nowhere.

A privately owned site that facilitates the marketing and sale of unsafe goods could be held liable in the event of an injury or death......just saysayin'

Define "unsafe". See where I'm going with this? There's theory here and then there's reality. Reality matters, theory doesn't.

Tradiban wrote: I could also win the Indy 500. This particular case would go nowhere.
Define "unsafe". See where I'm going with this? There's theory here and then there's reality. Reality matters, theory doesn't.

I don't have to, vicarious liability is a thing......

Negligence claims can go all the way up the food chain until someone that can afford to pay is held accountable.

Proof of a connection is all that's needed...see where I'm going with this?

Stick with what you do best....

Tradiban wrote:

No they wouldn't be liable. Dylan B please set young Teddy straight please.

You and Ted are both wrong. Section 230 of the CDA protects the site from liability in this case: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." See the EFF

 Also, it's a private platform - so they are free to stop or encourage any speech they don't like. 1A only protects you from the government censorship, not private entities. Also, moderation doesn't strip Section 230 protections.

Edit: Section 230 is exactly how companies like Craigslist are able to operate even though there are tens of thousands scams and criminals on it and close to 100 murders linked to it. I am also the lead dev on a platform that is a mix of content created by the publisher, 3rd party content that is managed directly by the publisher, user generated content, and user to user sales (including food) - there are many lawyers involved on our end and the publishers' end specifically about liability protections.

Memories grow shorter all the time. Now they don't even extend back a few years to when Mountain Tools and Black Diamond collected a bunch of used harnesses and tested them to failure. It wasn't exactly systematic, in that the submissions were accompanied by nothing more than anecdotal information about how "used" they were. But it turned out that some of the old gear, in the absence of evident significant ultraviolet or abrasion exposure, was more reliable than the recent models. Harnesses were burlier back in the day.

John Barritt wrote:

I don't have to, vicarious liability is a thing......

Negligence claims can go all the way up the food chain until someone that can afford to pay is held accountable.

Proof of a connection is all that's needed...see where I'm going with this?

Stick with what you do best....

Show me where the manufacturer says that the harness is unsafe after 20 years.

People selling cars (with seatbelts) manufactured in 1995

Tradiban wrote:

Show me where the manufacturer says that the harness is unsafe after 20 years.

i just got a new old stock harness for free. wrote bd to see what they thought and when it was from. they told me 04/05 and that it should be retired. 

petzl logic wrote:

i just got a new old stock harness for free. wrote bd to see what they thought and when it was from. they told me 04/05 and that it should be retired. 

The said "should", not "must". That's a big difference.

For the fun of it lets pretend that BD actually does officially declare that all harnesses over 20 years old are "unsafe" and must be destroyed.

A forum website is not legally required to vouch for the safety of the products that private parties offer on it. To do so would be impossible anyway.

It would be in this site's interest to NOT regulate the items sold on it regarding liability at all. If they did it might make them responsible for everything sold here because that would create the impression to the buyer that they DO vouch for each item sold.

Tradiban wrote:

Show me where the manufacturer says that the harness is unsafe after 20 years.

Nick, you’re getting lazy:

“Keep harnesses and other sewn climbing equipment away from gnawing rodents and pets.
The nylon in your harness will weaken with age if not stored free from mildew, UV light, temperature extremes or other harmful agents. If a harness has been properly stored for ten years or more, retire it.
With normal use and proper care, the life expectancy of your harness is approximately three years, and can be longer or shorter depending on how frequently you use it and on the conditions of its use.”
https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_US/qc-lab-strength-of-worn-belay-loops.html

look, are you in the market for a cheap 13 year old harness or not?

Ted Pinson wrote:

Nick, you’re getting lazy:

“Keep harnesses and other sewn climbing equipment away from gnawing rodents and pets.
The nylon in your harness will weaken with age if not stored free from mildew, UV light, temperature extremes or other harmful agents. If a harness has been properly stored for ten years or more, retire it.
With normal use and proper care, the life expectancy of your harness is approximately three years, and can be longer or shorter depending on how frequently you use it and on the conditions of its use.”
https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_US/qc-lab-strength-of-worn-belay-loops.html

They recommend to retire it, that doesnt make it "unsafe".