(Scenario) Sherwin-Williams created advertisements for paint that was lead-based in the early 1900s but stopped selling white lead paint for inside use in 1943. However, a California court argued that although lead paint wasn’t illegal until 1978, Sherwin-Williams and other paint makers knew about some of the dangers of this product yet continued marketing it to homeowners anyway. After nearly 20 years of litigation, a settlement of $305 million is to be paid by Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries, and ConAgra over a period of six years, but the companies were not required to admit any wrongdoing.
Which one is justified and why?
1. There should be a time limit or statute of limitations to protect businesses from decades-old advertising.
2. There should not be a time limit to protect businesses from previous business practices because companies should be held responsible, even after decades have passed.
Leave a Reply