Thank you.
There are a couple of issues around the general prohibition. I haven't gotten a clear answer on this, but we don't actually know how far beyond the general duty of care in common law this goes. This may simply be a restatement of the duty of care that manufacturers already owe under negligence law.
Let me assume for the moment that it goes beyond that. If it does, it doesn't answer the question about what happens when the duty is.... Well, there are a couple of questions unanswered. The first is how do we know, and we don't have mandatory testing requirements under this bill. So that would be a very important element to add, if you wanted to check whether manufacturers or retailers were actually complying with that duty.