Segment Two:
Here the panel looks to attack the definition used for what a “Tort” is. The professor expands the definition to say that there must be a harm and damages. Well, looking at the cases in the movie, which one of those people weren’t harmed?
They state “the film got it wrong”. Really, was there not someone in each of the cases that showed a clear tort? Both the harm and the right to claim damages? This segment was their very best attempt to attack some definition in the movie and shows how hollow the whole response is.
