摘要：I INTRODUCTION Only rarely do provisions of the American Law Institute's Restatements of the Law rise to the dignity of holy writ. Even more rarely do individual comments to Restatement sections come to symbolize important, decisive developments that dominate judicial thinking. Nevertheless, section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts is such a provision. Literally thousands upon thousands of products liability decisions in the past twenty-five years have explicitly referred to, and come to grips with, that section. 1 Among products liability followers one need only identify an issue as presenting "a comment k problem," 2 or identify a legislative proposal as "a comment i provision," 3 to capture instantly the essence of the relevant debate and incorporate nearly thirty years of legal controversy, development and refinement. Given that section 402A has achieved the status of sacred scripture, our proposal to replace it with new text and new comments may strike some readers as blasphemous. What prompts such audacity? Quite simply, doctrinal developments in products liability have placed such a heavy gloss on the original text of and comments to section 402A as to render them anachronistic and at odds with their currently discerned objectives. By changing the relevant language to conform to current understandings -- by restating the Restatement -- we hope to clarify much of the confusion that has arisen over the years. Only recently, while working on this Article, we learned that the American Law Institute itself has decided that the products liability sections of the Restatement ...
