It's as if I served you a plate of lutefisk after the "soaking in lye" stage but before the "soak in water to get rid of the lye" stage.
Edit: oh, and that serving it that way was corporate policy and that there had been hundreds of prior problems, some also involving injuries. I suspect the "corporate policy" part was a big factor in the punitive damages portion of the case which was based on 2 days of coffee sales.
Then, to cut costs, McDonalds raised the temperature of their coffee without telling people what it could do. I personally lost the ability to taste anything after taking one sip. Came back after a day or two but no coffee has ever done that. Then, this woman gets third degree burns from something she expects to hurt and make her skin red at worst.
That's nothing even a smart person or coffee junkie should expect to happen. It's unusual. That's because it was a dangerous thing McDonalds did to squeeze more money out of their operation. The danger damaged people who couldn't see it coming. They should pay for it.
How does raising the temperature of coffee cut costs?
Profit went up with most people taking damage thinking they couldn't win against legal team of a giant. They just put in complaints instead of lawsuits. The suit that won got watered down a lot on appeal. The marketing team combined with the media, which makes a fortune on McDonalds ads, turned her into a laughing stock. McDonalds added a warning or something afterward but the cost-benefit analysis was good enough to justify all of it.
Also, 180 degrees is considered standard serving temperature for coffee according to the Specialty Coffee Association of America. Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, and a host of companies serve at this temperature as well. While some might complain this is still too hot, I would not say that mcdonald's serves it's coffee UNUSUALLY hot.
The coffee was hot enough to cause full thickness ("3rd degree") burns. It remained hot enough to cause these burns after they left the restaurant, and after a short drive.
Warning labels do not work - if warning labels worked no-one would ever get a speeding ticket. A warning label on the side of coffee is ignored by the people making it and the people drinking it.
A jury looked at the facts of this case and decided McDonalds was negligent and that the woman deserved punitive damages.
Although, if you hate this lawsuit, most of them (and they continue to happen, McDonalds didn't change the temperature of their coffee after the case) get thrown out of courts.
Why so hostile?
Not everyone who reads HN is from an imperial or customary units country. The inline conversion provides context for those readers, in addition to being a natural form of speech, the same way you might say "60 meters? That's like 200 feet! How can they hold their breath that deep?".
I really don't think GP was lording primary school math skills over the HN populace.