Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
theregister.com
Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#2What I want to know: if they had submitted the mask for testing, would it have passed?
I agree there should be a fine given that "N95" refers to masks that have actually passed NIOSH testing, but I think it interesting to know if the mask worked.
If the masks worked, there was never a risk to public health.
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#3What I want to know: if they had submitted the mask for testing, would it have passed? I agree there should be a fine given that "N95" refers to masks that have actually passed NIOSH testing, but I think it interesting to know if the mask worked. If the masks worked, there was never a risk to public health.
I want to know how much they made selling them? If they made $30m, and they get fined $1.2, that isn't really much deterrent...
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#4What I want to know: if they had submitted the mask for testing, would it have passed? I agree there should be a fine given that "N95" refers to masks that have actually passed NIOSH testing, but I think it interesting to know if the mask worked. If the masks worked, there was never a risk to public health.
Or were the filter elements already submitted for N95 rating and Razer thought that the rating was transitive rather than having to get the entire apparatus certified.
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#5It is a little unclear from reading the article. Is the claim that their filters were not as effective as N95 masks, or that they were just as effective but did not go through the testing needed to prove it?
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#6What I want to know: if they had submitted the mask for testing, would it have passed? I agree there should be a fine given that "N95" refers to masks that have actually passed NIOSH testing, but I think it interesting to know if the mask worked. If the masks worked, there was never a risk to public health.
I want to know how much they made selling them? If they made $30m, and they get fined $1.2, that isn't really much deterrent...
The article claimed that the fine is 100% of the revenue from the sales of the mislabeled masks:
> The vote approving the complaint and proposed order was passed 3-0, and the FTC will use the $1.1 million sum, equal to revenue generated by the Zephyr, to provide full refunds to customers.
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#7Its too bad this went off the rails so bad. I was very interested in the Razer-- despite the RGB it would have been cool to have a silicon sealing mask thats less industrial than a 3m Respirator mask, had a window so you could see someones mouth, and used a fan to help overcome the resistance of the filter element.
If the availability wasn't at "practically unobtainable" levels I probably would have gotten one.
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#8[flagged]
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#9A tech company doing sketchy things and skirting regulations? Why I never!
Re: Razer made to pay $1.2M over 'N95' face mask that wasn't
#10What I want to know: if they had submitted the mask for testing, would it have passed? I agree there should be a fine given that "N95" refers to masks that have actually passed NIOSH testing, but I think it interesting to know if the mask worked. If the masks worked, there was never a risk to public health.
Or were the filter elements already submitted for N95 rating and Razer thought that the rating was transitive rather than having to get the entire apparatus certified.
The generous reading is this. And I don’t exactly blame whoever interpreted the regulations like that.
However, they really should have gotten a lawyer or consultant specializing in health product regulations.