The doctrine of strict liability holds the manufacturers of defective products such as machines, automobiles, boats, and drugs responsible for the damages caused by their dangerous products regardless of whether or not they knew the product to be inherently dangerous. If a product which presents an unreasonable degree of danger to the user is produced and sold, the manufacturer may be held liable for the defect in the design or manufacture of the product. Not only is the manufacturer of a defective product responsible under the theory that he should design it properly and produce it in a prudent manner, but the merchant who sells the product and warrants it to be fit for the purposes for which it is intended is also responsible, even though she had nothing to do with the manufacture of the product. When an automobile, for example, is manufactured and shipped to a local dealer for sale, the dealer has a duty to inspect the automobile for possible defects. If the automobile is not inspected and a defective condition exists which causes injuries to the consumer, both the manufacturer and dealer may be held responsible for damages.
Some large corporations show a willful disregard for the safety and rights of the consumer.
These corporations would rather continue producing dangerous, deficient products than correct the inadequacy and experience a loss in their products. An example of this would be the Ford Pinto situation where the industry was aware and had actual knowledge of numerous accidents that had injured and killed people, but hid its knowledge from the consumer. The manufacturer of a product, by marketing his product for use and consumption by the general public, has undertaken and assumed a responsibility toward any member of the consuming public who uses the product and may be injured by it. The public has the right to expect that the manufacturer will stand behind the product, and demand that the burden of injuries caused by the product be placed on those who make it. Fraud and concealment of defects or dangerous qualities of a product is wrong, and damage awards against manufacturers for such wrongful actions are proper.