Which of the following statements about strict liability is NOT true?

The statement that requires the plaintiff to prove negligence is not true in the context of strict liability. In strict liability cases, the defendant can be held liable for damages without the need for the plaintiff to establish that the defendant was negligent or acted with fault. This legal standard applies specifically to certain types of activities, such as those that are inherently dangerous, and to product liability cases, where the focus is on the product's defect rather than the conduct of the manufacturer.

This principle means that if a person engages in a hazardous activity or produces a defective product, they can be held liable for any resulting harm, irrespective of how careful they were. Therefore, under strict liability, proving negligence is irrelevant, and it simplifies the process for plaintiffs seeking compensation for injuries related to these activities or products.

Options citing liability regardless of fault and coverage for defective products align correctly with the principles of strict liability, emphasizing that the legal focus shifts from the defendant's intent or carelessness to the activities or products themselves.