During the trial it was revealed that McDonald’s knew that heating their coffee to this temperature would be dangerous, but they did it anyways because it would save them money. When you serve coffee that is too hot to drink, it will take much longer for a person to drink their coffee, which means that McDonald’s will not have to give out as many free refills of coffee. This policy by the fast food chain is the reason the jury awarded $2.7 million dollars in punitive damages in the McDonald’s hot coffee case. Punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for their inappropriate business practice.
I’m having a hard time finding anyone who recommended 90-100F or lower for drinking, even with specialty light roasts. I usually drink my specialty light roast pour overs at 130-135F. I think you might be mixing up brew temps in Celsius for drinking temps in Fahrenheit.
The National Coffee Association says coffee should be served at 180-185F, which seems high. McDonald’s was holding their coffee at 180-190F, not 200F, and they still hold their coffee at or near that temp. The only changes from this lawsuit were that they designed better cups and lids, and put more warnings on the coffee.
I’m not arguing that McDonald’s should have won the lawsuit, or even that they did nothing wrong, but this common TIL and most of the “facts” in this thread are misleading or just wrong.