Stillman’s Mission
… is to cultivate principled leaders through an educational experience that transforms concepts into business practice.
Welcome to Products Liability
Welcome to Products Liability. This is the first part of our course syllabus. We will meet face-to-face twice weekly. All required materials for this semester are described here or linked from these pages. I will update the syllabus if I add material to the course or if an unexpected event intervenes. Given the rapid evolution of digital products and platforms, as well as their legal treatment, I will update the syllabus this semester. You are responsible for remaining current with the course deliverables and schedule by regularly reviewing the entire syllabus for updates.
This course is an elective for students pursuing a Minor in Legal Studies. It serves students majoring in business, diplomacy, the humanities, and science who seek to understand how legal liability shapes business decisions in the age of digital products and platforms.
On this site, you should carefully review the entire syllabus, including “Review This First,” “Deliverables,” “Schedule,” and other materials. You will find answers to most of your questions by examining the information on this site. If you have any questions after you’ve reviewed the syllabus, you can message me on Teams.
What Should You Expect?
The Managerial Perspective
This course is built around a central insight: law is not an abstract doctrine; it shapes how companies make decisions about product design, warnings, recalls, and risk management. Products Liability is an undergraduate course serving a mixed audience of business, diplomacy, and humanities majors with minimal prior legal training. The managerial perspective is central. You will learn not just legal doctrine but how products liability exposure drives business decisions, risk management strategies, and corporate accountability.
Every concept in this course is anchored in real cases and real business consequences. We ask: Who benefits from limiting liability? Who bears the cost of a defective product? How should manufacturers balance safety, cost, and innovation?
Digital Products & Emerging Liability Questions
A defining challenge of our moment is that digital products, platforms, and networks are transforming faster than products liability law can keep pace with. Consider:
- When an algorithm makes a hiring decision that harms a protected class, is the AI system a “product” subject to the products liability doctrine?
- If a social media platform’s design encourages harmful user behavior, is the platform defective?
- When a cloud service fails and causes business losses, does the products liability doctrine apply?
- Can we define a “defect” in a system that learns, adapts, and behaves unpredictably?
- Who is the “manufacturer”: the software developer, the AI trainer, the company deploying the system, the cloud provider?
These questions do not yet have clear legal answers. This course prepares you to think about them rigorously. By mastering traditional products liability doctrine, you will develop the analytical tools to evaluate how the law should extend (or not) to digital contexts. You will learn to distinguish between doctrine that adapts flexibly and doctrine that breaks under the weight of new facts.
The FAIR Framework Applied to Products Liability
This course uses the FAIR Framework, Flexibility, Adaptability, Imagination, and Resilience, as a lens for understanding both historical doctrine and emerging challenges:
Flexibility: Recognizing That Products and Risks Evolve
Flexibility in products liability requires a willingness to question assumptions about products, consumers, and responsibility.
Historically, products liability emerged in response to industrialization. Courts confronted defective automobiles, machinery, pharmaceuticals, and household products. The legal doctrines that developed reflected the technologies and risks of their time.
Today’s products are fundamentally different.
A modern automobile contains millions of lines of software code. Medical devices may rely on artificial intelligence. Smart home systems continuously collect and exchange data. Consumer products increasingly receive software updates after purchase, altering functionality long after they enter the marketplace.
Flexible legal thinkers recognize that traditional assumptions may not always fit emerging technologies.
For example:
- Is a software defect equivalent to a manufacturing defect?
- When an AI system learns and changes after deployment, who bears responsibility for resulting harms?
- Should cybersecurity vulnerabilities be treated as product defects?
- Does a product become defective when a future software update creates a hazard?
Flexibility encourages students to remain open to new legal interpretations rather than assuming existing frameworks will always provide complete answers.
A flexible products liability practitioner understands that the law must often adapt to technologies that did not exist when the governing doctrines were first developed.
Adaptability: Applying Established Principles to New Contexts
Products liability law has demonstrated remarkable adaptability throughout its history.
The law evolved from caveat emptor (“let the buyer beware”) to negligence-based liability and eventually to modern strict liability principles. Courts and legislatures repeatedly adapted legal standards to address changing technologies, manufacturing methods, and consumer expectations.
Adaptability today requires applying established legal principles to unfamiliar circumstances.
Consider several contemporary examples:
- Autonomous vehicles
- AI-powered medical devices
- Consumer drones
- Connected home technologies
- Biometric systems
- Advanced robotics
Each raises novel questions while still implicating familiar products liability concepts such as duty, defect, foreseeability, and causation.
Adaptable legal thinkers understand that while technologies change, many underlying legal principles remain relevant.
The challenge is determining how to interpret and apply those principles.
For example, strict liability developed in part because manufacturers are often best positioned to identify and manage product risks. As products become increasingly software-driven, courts and regulators may need to adapt traditional defect analyses to account for algorithmic design choices, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and machine-learning systems.
Adaptability enables legal professionals to bridge the gap between established doctrine and emerging realities.
Imagination: Anticipating Future Liability Challenges
Products liability has always been a reactive field. Historically, legal reforms often followed significant injuries, public outcry, or technological failures.
However, emerging technologies increasingly require proactive thinking.
Imagination enables students and practitioners to anticipate future liability challenges before they emerge as major societal problems.
Questions that require imagination include:
- How should liability be allocated when autonomous systems make independent decisions?
- What happens when products continuously evolve through machine learning?
- How should courts evaluate injuries caused by AI-generated recommendations?
- Who bears responsibility when multiple interconnected products interact to produce harm?
- How should liability be assigned within complex global supply chains?
These questions have no simple answers.
Yet products liability professionals must begin considering them now.
Imagination is particularly important because products increasingly function as systems rather than standalone objects.
A smart thermostat may interact with cloud services, software platforms, mobile applications, and third-party devices. When harm occurs, identifying responsibility may require examining an entire ecosystem rather than a single product.
Imaginative thinking helps students explore plausible future scenarios and evaluate how existing legal doctrines may respond, or fail to respond, to them.
It encourages future lawyers and policymakers to move beyond precedent and consider what legal frameworks may be necessary in an increasingly complex world.
Resilience: Managing Failure, Risk, and Uncertainty
At its core, products liability law exists because products fail.
No matter how carefully products are designed, manufactured, tested, and regulated, some failures will occur. Innovation inherently involves uncertainty.
Resilience is therefore a central concept in products liability.
For manufacturers, resilience means developing systems that anticipate failures, learn from incidents, and continuously improve safety.
For legal institutions, resilience means developing doctrines that can respond to new forms of risk without undermining innovation.
For consumers, resilience means understanding that absolute safety is unattainable and that legal systems seek to balance innovation, utility, and risk.
For lawyers and policymakers, resilience means recognizing that technological progress will continually create unforeseen challenges.
The history of products liability demonstrates resilience in action.
The legal system responded to industrial accidents by expanding the negligence doctrine.
It responded to mass production by embracing strict liability.
It responded to pharmaceutical disasters by strengthening regulatory oversight.
It responded to increasingly complex products through evolving standards of warnings, design defect analysis, and post-sale duties.
Each response reflected society’s effort to learn from failure and improve future outcomes.
Resilience allows legal systems to evolve rather than collapse when confronted with new forms of risk.
These are not abstract questions. They drive real business strategy, risk management, and compliance decisions.
Why This Matters Now
The products liability doctrine emerged in the mid-20th century to address manufactured goods, automobiles, appliances, and pharmaceuticals. The doctrine has proven flexible enough to address warnings, design defects, and scope questions across many industries. But digital products present tests that push doctrine to its limits:
- Fungibility: Digital products are infinitely reproducible; a defect in code can affect millions instantly
- Attribution: Multiple parties (developers, deployers, platforms, data providers) contribute to harm; who is the “manufacturer”
- Foreseeability: Algorithmic systems behave in ways designers didn’t anticipate; can you “warn” about emergent risks?
- Causation: When an AI system contributes to harm, how do you prove but-for causation or proximate cause?
By engaging these frontier questions, you will develop judgment about how law adapts under pressure, how doctrine preserves core values while accommodating new facts, and how ethical reasoning informs legal change.
How We Will Work Together
Case-Based Learning
Our primary teaching and learning method is case-based analysis. Every doctrine is anchored in a real case. You will brief cases, identify legal issues, apply doctrine, and draw managerial implications. Discussion questions at the end of each chapter drive in-class engagement. You are expected to arrive prepared to discuss cases thoughtfully.
The PL Project: Your Capstone Work
The PL Project is the primary deliverable for this course. You will work in teams to analyze how the products liability doctrine applies (or fails to apply) to a specific digital product, platform, or network. Your project will:
- Identify a real digital product or platform (e.g., a social media app, AI hiring tool, autonomous vehicle system, cloud service, cryptocurrency exchange)
- Analyze how existing PL theories (negligence, strict liability, warranty, fraud) could be applied
- Evaluate whether traditional doctrine is adequate or whether new legal frameworks are needed
- Anticipate how manufacturers, platforms, and regulators should respond to liability exposure
- Present your analysis in a multimedia WordPress portfolio that integrates text, case analysis, policy recommendations, and visual/interactive elements.
The PL Project unfolds across the semester in phases, with teamwork documented in Microsoft Teams. You will refine your thinking iteratively, respond to feedback, and publish a final multimedia portfolio.
Individual Assignments
In addition to the PL Project, you will complete individual assignments (case evaluations, reflection papers, policy memos, analysis exercises) at key points in the semester. These assignments reinforce doctrine and prepare you for the PL Project work.
Discussion & Engagement
Success in this course requires active participation in discussions. We will use case evaluations, Socratic questioning, policy debates, and scenario exercises to deepen your understanding. You are expected to come to class prepared, contribute thoughtfully, and engage respectfully with competing interpretations.
Before We Meet
Before our first class, please:
- Review the entire syllabus, including Review This First, Deliverables, Schedule, and Calendar
- Join our Microsoft Teams Workspace – our primary platform for course communication. All announcements, discussions, and assignment submissions will occur on Teams.
- Introduce yourself – Post a brief introduction in the Teams channel: your name, major, why you’re taking this course, and one product (physical or digital) you find interesting
- Learning Contract – Complete your review of the materials included in this site, including the entire course syllabus, Course Policies, Plagiarism page, AI Use Policy, and the AI Engagement Plan, then post in the Learning Contract channel in Teams that you have completed your review and have reviewed and understand the Course Policies
- Prepare for the first case – Read the introduction to the textbook and brief your first assigned case using the Case Brief Template.
- Consider course partnerships – The PL Project is team-based. I will form teams for the PL Project.
Required Text
Please purchase this book as soon as possible:
- Products Liability: A Managerial Perspective, 2nd Edition by Richard J. Hunter Jr., John H. Shannon, Henry J. Amoroso, available from the SHU Bookstore or Amazon. All chapter readings are assigned in the course schedule.
Additional materials will be provided as linked readings, case excerpts, regulatory guidance, and contemporary examples. These are listed in the course schedule.
Technology & Platforms
Microsoft Teams
Microsoft Teams is our primary communication and collaboration platform. All course announcements, discussions, reading materials, assignment submissions, and team-based project work will occur on Teams. You are responsible for checking Teams regularly (at least daily). I will not use email for course communication; use Teams DM or channels instead.
You must download and install the Teams client (desktop and mobile) before our first class. Browser access is available, but does not include all features.
WordPress & Adobe Express
The PL Project will be developed and published on a WordPress site. Teams will use WordPress to create a multimedia portfolio documenting their analysis, research, case studies, policy recommendations, and foresight tools. You will use Adobe Express or similar tools to create visual, interactive, and multimedia elements within the WordPress site.
You will need access to Adobe Creative Cloud (available free through SHU) or equivalent design tools. Familiarity with WordPress is helpful but not required; we will provide training and support.
Canvas (Limited Use)
Canvas will be used for submission of deliverables and grade reporting. Work on the PL Project will be submitted via WordPress, not Canvas.
Course Policies & Expectations
You are responsible for familiarizing yourself with the full Course Policies, including:
- Attendance and participation expectations
- Preparation and engagement standards
- Assignment guidelines and due dates
- Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Use of AI (required disclosure of AI-assisted work)
- Grades and assessment
As in matters of law, ignorance of the Course Policies is not an excuse.
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
This course welcomes thoughtful engagement with AI tools (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, etc.) as both a subject of study and a tool for learning and project development.
You are required to disclose any use of AI in your assignments and project work. Disclose how you used AI, what prompts you gave, and how AI-assisted work compares to your independent analysis. This transparency is an academic integrity requirement and a practical skill you’ll need as an emerging professional.
For detailed guidance, see my policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI.
Communication & Office Hours
Professor John H. Shannon
- Office: 651 Jubilee Hall
- Communication: Microsoft Teams DM (preferred)
- Office Hours: MW, 10-11:30 a.m., or by appointment (DM me on Teams with available days/times)
I will respond to Teams messages within 24 hours. For video meetings, DM me with several day/time options, and we’ll schedule via Teams.
I maintain boundaries between professional work and personal time. Messages sent late Friday evening will receive responses Monday morning unless it’s a genuine emergency. Please plan ahead for assignment questions.
Why This Course Matters
The products liability doctrine is foundational to how capitalism works. It allocates risk, shapes incentives, and determines who pays for injuries. In an era of digital products, platforms, and algorithmic decision-making, these questions become urgent:
- Do digital products need regulation, or can tort law handle it?
- Who should bear liability when an AI system causes harm?
- Can manufacturers “opt out” of liability through licensing terms?
- What responsibility do platforms have for user-generated harms?
By mastering traditional products liability doctrine and extending it thoughtfully to digital contexts, you will develop the analytical and ethical reasoning needed to lead in an uncertain legal environment. You will learn to think like a business leader who understands legal risk, not like a lawyer applying fixed rules.
That skill, the ability to adapt legal thinking to new facts, to balance competing values, to make decisions under uncertainty, is what this course cultivates.
Ready to begin? See “Deliverables” for assignment details, “Schedule” for the week-by-week breakdown, and “Calendar” for due dates.

