Finefurnituremaster

A couple of comments:
First, the Osorio lawsuit is just the precipitant here. Stupid employer, who should have been held accountable, untrained person operating the saw - although remember, he had worked for them for a while. He was not a first month on the job newbie. Ryobi also had first crack at the Sawstop technology, so they are in a uniquely vulnerable.

Second, the CPSC. Their call is that the cost to society is too much to have tablesaws without Sawstop-type technology now that it is available. The benefits to society at large far outweigh the costs, like seatbelts. If everyone is required to have one on their saws, then new designs will be developed over time, some probably better than sawstop, but certainly this is a good place to start.

It does not stop employers from not training their employees, and it does not stop injuries, but the benefit to society is enormous. And don't feel sorry for the manufacturers - they will still get their profit percentage on a more expensive machine. And there will still be some low-cost manufacturer who puts out a low cost machine.

Having heard both sides of this, and using Unisaws and larger, more powerful saws for more than 30 years, I have a couple of comments.
First, one of the purposes of government is to make our collective societal lives better, and to make decisions that the market will never do, because of cost, greed or whatever. Think seatbelts and clean drinking water. In this case, it is clear there are several better solutions (riving knives and Sawstop technology) that the market would not adopt, until forced to. I see the real question here as one of cost to society, not to the individual. $3B of injuries (increasing society's health care costs - yes, we all pay for that) vs $400M sales of machines (goes into the manufacturers pocket)

Second is the lawsuit. Simply put - my opinion is that this should not be an issue. The government has not mandated the change, and the saw was not defective, and the person un-trained. This shouldn't be paid.

So in short: Sawtop or some safer technology - yes
Lawsuit payment: no

An addendum: my experience as a business owner for many years tells me that if mandated to use sawstop technology, someone will come up with an alternative that is not covered by the patent, if the cost of licensing it is too onerous.

The 0pening reception is open to the public - August 6, 5-7:30pm at Canterbury Shaker Village. Come and meet the Masters.

Asa
Thanks for covering the show in this year of tight funds and even tighter travel restrictions. I know that the people who visited the conference were singularly focused on not only the business side, but also on the renewed desire to master the design challenges in front of us. And a plug for the Furniture Society 2010 conference which which will be held in Boston at MIT.
Richard Oedel