Many companies have argued that the evolution of strict liability has:Unfairly burdened them with excess costs.        Changed top management's attitude about the consumer.Decreased liability insurance rates.Increased corporate revenues and dividends.

Many companies have argued that the evolution of strict liability has unfairly burdened them with excess costs.

Here are the steps to understand this:

1. Strict Liability: This is a legal doctrine that holds a party responsible for their actions or products that cause damage, regardless of any negligence or fault on their part.

2. Unfairly burdened them with excess costs: Companies argue that strict liability has led to increased costs. This is because they have to pay for damages caused by their products, even if they were not negligent or at fault. These costs can include legal fees, compensation payments, and increased insurance premiums.

3. Changed top management's attitude about the consumer, decreased liability insurance rates, and increased corporate revenues and dividends: These are not typically arguments made by companies about the impact of strict liability. The main concern for companies is usually the increased costs associated with being held liable for damages.

So, many companies have argued that the evolution of strict liability has unfairly burdened them with excess costs.