So by your logic they wouldn't be liable if they hadn't supplied a strap despite the fact that this would have caused [i]more[/i] accidents, not less? In other words, car companies become liable for damages caused by car accidents because they have included seatbelts? Legally, you might have a point in that this indicates Nintendo considering this a potential problem and thus, legamagically, they are liable for said problem, but are you really saying that taking steps to prevent morons with cheeto-covered hands from destroying their TV because of overenthusiasm makes them liable for a TV that is destroyed despite their efforts? Does this mean that I could be charged with battery/murder/criminal charges if I try to help out a guy being beat up on the street, chase the attackers away but still fail to prevent him from dying in the hospital later? Why, exactly, does recognizing that if your customers act like morons and ignore the guidelines you suggest they might cause problems for themselves and making a small effort to prevent some of these problems make you a bad, bad company?