Su(r)e We Do!

There are many quick ways to make big money – but most of these usually involve high levels of chance (gambling, lottery), great risk to life and limb (adventure sports, crime), or being subject to intense humiliation and ridicule accompanied with an acceptance to be the laughing stock of the country (reality TV, politics). There is, however, a fourth and easier way to make big money that doesn’t involve any of the above – although it’s probably applicable only if you’re in the US. Every now and again, you read these amazing stories about customers suing corporations in America, winning the subsequent lawsuit and ensuring their financial security for the next seven generations or so. You know what I’m talking about, the ones that typically sound like this:

“Woman wins $3 million from McDonalds”

McDonalds was ordered by a federal court to pay $3 million in damages to Wilma Flintstone, a 35 year old native of Lincoln, Nebraska. Mrs. Flintstone sued McDonalds after getting burn marks on her forearms after spilling a McCoffee. Seeking compensation for the consequent series of cosmetic surgeries and considerable mental anguish, Mrs. Flintstone alleged that the steam emerging from the cup was insufficient evidence that the cup of McCoffee was hot, and insisted that McDonalds had not warned her that the cup of McCoffee could possibly have a high temperature and was unsuitable for application on her forearms.

In an unusual move, the judge announced his verdict by starting with the classic joke about a horse walking into a bar and being asked by the bartender “Why the long face?” The judge then proceeded with the verdict, explaining that he narrated the joke so that the courtroom could distinguish between the joke and the judgment.

“Man gets $5 million compensation for eating cardboard box”

A man who ate the cardboard box containing some pesticides he’d purchased sued the manufacturer Dow Chemicals Ltd for not having given sufficient warning as to the inedibility of the box. While the pesticide packet had a sufficient number of “Poison - Do not consume internally” warnings; the man claimed that there was no instruction whatsoever to stop him from eating the carton. Dow Chemicals, already feeling guilty about a number of past misdeeds, decided that it was best to settle out of court rather than face the potential negative publicity of a lawsuit, and agreed upon a settlement of $5 million in small, unmarked bills.

All this made me wonder – how come we don’t have any of this in India? If you look at most news channels or online forums, you’ll realize that Indians do get outraged – very easily and very frequently. In fact, if you look at someone like Arnab Goswami, he’d get outraged even if you told him that he’d just won a lottery, a genie would fulfill his top three wishes AND God had reserved a place for him in heaven. (“Mr. Finance Minister, the nation demands an answer. What sort of a country do we live in where one man can get everything he’d ever hoped for, yet more than half the country is living in abject poverty? Is this what we’ve been reduced to? If this is not a black spot on the nation’s credibility, I don’t know what is!”) So how come we don’t sue, the way the Americans do?

As someone who’s not an expert in law, psychology, anthropology, socio cultural phenomena or consumer affairs, I have no clue as to what the answer is. One possible explanation could be that Indians do sue, but we do it more out of a sense of community duty or for the ‘greater good’ as opposed to a profit motive. This would explain the large number of PILs. As a matter of fact I personally knew a guy who’d filed a PIL against Fashion TV complaining that their late-night content was inappropriate for family audiences. What on earth made him choose Fashion TV over a hundred other possible channels while watching TV with his family at midnight, one can only guess!

This is why the corresponding headlines that you’d come across on court cases in Indian newspapers would sound like these:

“Man files PIL against RCB Cheerleaders”

Activist BN Krishna has filed a PIL against the cheerleading squad of the Royal Challengers Bangalore in the IPL, alleging that the use of skimpy clothes and provocative gyrations was against Indian culture and tradition and would have a negative influence on millions of viewers across India, especially men.

“Man files PIL against Pune Warriors Cheerleaders”

Advocate PS Kirpal has filed a PIL against the Pune Warriors cheerleading squad, saying that dressing up and dancing traditionally for a Western activity like cheerleading was demeaning to Indian culture and portrayed it in negative light. He also added that Bharatnatyam, the dance used by the cheerleaders, was actually a Tamil dance form and not a Marathi one; and this was insulting to either the Tamilians or the Marathis, or maybe even both.

Basically, if an American didn’t like something, he’d sue, citing ‘mental trauma and duress’ and demand an insanely high level of compensation; whereas an Indian would file a PIL saying that it was against culture/religion/society and demand that it be discontinued.

Maybe advertising has something to do with this – the ‘Jaago Graahak Jaago’ ads do little to inspire confidence in the consumers. While the ads make it look like you, the consumer, has a lot of power, it feels like some fake sort of power. The sort of power where if the company does not mention the correct quantity present in the pack, you, as an empowered consumer, can go to the consumer court and fight a lengthy court case at the end of which the company would have to tell you that they were sorry. At the most, they would replace that pack for you, or if you’re really lucky, they’d give you an extra pack for your trouble. Now if the ads were changed to show some down-on-his-luck sort of fellow who happens to buy a product one fine day, sues the company and in the next scene is shown with a bevy of women by his side, wearing the finest designer suit and hopping into a stretch limo – that’s the sort of thing that would really awaken the consumer!