Torts and Warranties
James.Oliver78
AIU Online

Abstract
This is an essay about a story of the four wrongs, and the invasion of privacy. It is about a
Harvard Law Review article and what the newspapers in 1890 had to do with it. The differences and similarities of the four wrongs which make-up the invasion of privacy principle, and then on towards the world of warranties and what they mean. How warranties affect our lives in today’s society and a brief description of what the buying customer can expect from a warranty. The essay ends with what defective products do to business and the legal system. How a defective product is defined legally, and how it affects profits of a business. Last but not least, a comment about the buying public, the business, brand name, and the lawyers that make-up a business in today’s world.

Invasion of Privacy There exists a story involving invasion of privacy and it dates back to the 1800s, in Boston, Massachusetts. The story starts with a young married couple by the name of; Mr. and Mrs. Samuel D. Warren. Mr. Samuel D. Warren was a young lawyer who inherited a paper manufacturing business. At the time, he was partners in a prestigious law firm with his Harvard classmate, Mr. Louis D. Brandeis. There came a time when, Mr. S. D. Warren decided he would have to devote more time and energy to his paper manufacturing business and less time with his practice of law. Mrs. Samuel D. Warren was a pillar in elite high society of Boston, and a matron (A married woman usually marked with maturity or social distinction [www.merrium-webster.com]), who held elaborate social events and gatherings at her home and frequently. She was what society called her status as “blue blood”. Mrs. Warren would invite the press and newspapers to her events but made sure that her good name and private affairs were kept out of the public-eye, so she thought. One evening, at one of these gatherings, a newspaper by the name Saturday Evening Gazette, decided to write about “…her parties in highly personal and embarrassing detail.” (Prosser, 1960). This type of reporting continued, which was dubbed yellow journalism, until one of the Warren’s daughters held a wedding. Mr. S.D. Warren was outraged at the press coverage of his daughter and his daughter’s wedding. This event set into motion Mr. S.D. Warren, to approach his law partner Mr. Louis D. Brandies, and publish an article in the Harvard Law Review entitled: “The Right to Privacy” (Warren & Brandeis, 1890). They wrote the article after researching old legal decisions that had similarities “…in which relief had been afforded on the basis of defamation, or the invasion of some property right, or a breach of confidence, or an implied contract…” (Prosser, 1960), and came to an agreement that these offences should be recognized as four separate principles, that added up to a greater principle, that should be looked upon by law and law practice. Later (seventy-years) in 1960, a professor and scholar by the name of Mr. William L. Prosser, named the four types of offenses as the four wrongs. Today we have the term, invasion of privacy which legally addresses the four wrongs of Intrusion, Public Disclosure, False Light, and Appropriation. The legal system grows with the times, along with business practices but, not as fast. To help business do business and keep ahead of the legal system, corporations, small-business, and employees follow a set of policies provided by employers. The four wrongs are applied in every business to keep a level playing field. Intrusion is when privacy is affected in a wrongful way. It could mean trespass of property, the recording of an unauthorized conversation between unknowing-party’s, unauthorized photos, even intruding into public-figures private domains. The intrusion principle helps cover a person or business in the affairs of privacy. Public disclosure covers the publishing of hurtful and embarrassing offensive facts. It means that the facts may be true but, be careful of what is published. The False Light principle concerns giving false statements, framing a person, presenting in a false light, and defamation. Then the fourth principle of Appropriation, which is the unknowing, unauthorized, and non-approval of commercial use of a name or image, is included. The principles are separate from one another but, together the four wrongs are representative of the invasion of privacy.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranties Act, General Warranties, and Lemon Laws In 1975 two democrats, Senator Warren G. Magnuson of Washington state, and U.S Representative John E. Moss of California, with the help of Senator Frank Moss of Utah, introduced The Magnuson-Moss Warranties Act. “The Act deals with deceptive warranty practices in the consumer products field.” (Schroeder, 1978). There was a belief that existing rules of warranties were too complex for the consuming public, were varied, too restrictive, and complicated to understand. (Schroeder, 1978). The Act did not interfere with state laws but did provide remedy by requiring federal disclosure requirements, and requiring federal minimum standards. Usher in two distinctions, the “full” warranty and the “limited” warranty. The full warranty has to abide by minimum federal standards and the limited warranty follows federal minimum standards but limits the duration of time that the warranty is in effect. The Magnuson-Moss Warranties Act, also addressed the language of a warranty making it more readable and less confusing to the general public. A General warranty is a warranty used primarily in real estate and is applied to property and the title of property. “A general warranty deed is a legal document that conveys the greatest level of ownership, or “title”, in real estate from a seller, …” (Anderson, 2012). Within the general warranty there are six specific warranties. The first specific warranty is that the owner actually owns the property and has a legal right to sell it. The second specific warranty is that the property is free of any liens or encumbrances. The property may have liens and encumbrances but they must be specifically stated in the title or deed of the property upon sale. The third specific warranty is the guarantee that the title or deed is, “superior to any other title that may exist on the property” (Anderson, 2012). The fourth specific warranty is interesting due to the seller of a property promising to get any and all legal documents that is needed by the buyer to make the title good. The fifth specific warranty insures that the seller defends the buyer’s title or deed from any and all claims against it. The sixth and final specific warranty of a general warranty is that, the seller is responsible to compensate the buyer of any loss due to a bad title or deed.
Lemon laws cover the operational condition of all types of vehicles. Lemon laws vary from state to state and are of different names. A lemon law is an “express” type warranty that is a written warranty and for the lemon laws to apply, a product must be purchased with a warranty. If a product is not purchased with a warranty, then the lemon law does not take effect. All the fore mentioned warranties, general warranty, lemon law warranty, and any other consumer product warranty have something in common. The similarity is that all state warranty laws are addressed by the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranties Act of 1975.
Defective Product It is the manufacture that is responsible to provide a safe product to the buying consuming public. “Under the law of torts, a manufacturer is held strictly liable when one of its products, placed on the market with the knowledge that it will be used without inspection for defects, proves to have a defect that causes injury to a human being.” (www.answers.com). A defective product represents legal liability not only of the manufacturer but, of the design and workmanship, and what is called a marketing defect (a failure to warn). The legal system uses basically three types of criteria in defective product liability litigation, breach of warranty, negligence (strict liability), and consumer protection. When breach of warranty occurs, the word “privity” is used. Privity means that the manufacture or seller must have had dealt directly with the injured party. “Breach of warranty-based product liability claims usually focus on one of three types: (1) breach of an express warranty, (2) breach of an implied warranty of merchantability, and (3) breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.” (www.answers.com). Usually, negligence is used in certain specific situations where a manufacturer violates a law or regulation. Negligence deals with the behavior of a manufacturer and strict liability (warranty liability) deals with the actual product. “Strict liability claims focus on the product itself. Under strict liability, the manufacturer is liable if the product is defective, even if the manufacturer was not negligent in making that product defective.” (www.answers.com). When it comes to consumer protection, lemon laws of the states are often used because a defective product is sometimes defective to itself and does not create or produce any physical harm to a human being, except economically.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the four wrongs of intrusion, public disclosure, false light, and appropriation affects and governs the way businesses are conducted. The Magnuson-Moss Warranties Act does not replace each state’s consumer protection laws but, it does provide a federal law for definition, guidance, and understanding that oversees the consuming public’s business dealings.

References:
Prosser, W. L. (1960). Privacy. California law review Vol.48, No.3, pp.383-385.
Schroeder, M. R. (1978). Private Actions under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. California law review, Vol. 66, No.1 pp. 1-5
Warren and Brandeis (1890). “The Right To Privacy”, Harvard law review, Vol. IV, No. 5, n.p.
Anderson, R. (2012), Demand Media, What is the general warranty deed?. Retrieved from: www.hearstcommunicatiosinc.com
Answers.com (2012), Product Liability. Retrieved from: www.answers.com