Final answer:
True, under the doctrine of supervening event, the original seller is not liable if the product was materially altered by a third party after it left the seller's possession, causing injury. However, if the seller knew about a defect before selling and distribution, as in the given automobile manufacturer example, they would be liable for any resulting harm.
Step-by-step explanation:
True, under the doctrine of supervening event, the original seller is generally not liable if the software was materially altered after it left the seller's possession, and the alteration caused the injury. This principle is based on the concept that if a third party alters a product in a way that introduces a defect or hazard that was not present when the product was in the control of the seller, and this defect causes harm, the seller is not responsible for the harm caused by this new defect. The liability generally shifts to the party who made the alterations.However, the provided counter example situation with the automobile manufacturer points to a different issue. If a manufacturer is aware of a defect in their product – such as a brake system defect – and proceeds with sale and distribution of the product, they would be held liable for any resulting injuries or deaths. This is because the manufacturer had prior knowledge of the defect and did not take the necessary steps to remedy the situation or prevent the product from entering the market.