[Someone else's Fault] Suit claims Snapchat caused women to speed and wreck

Are you serious or joking?

 

Yea. . . . Remember they served lemonade and did a bump of business and made post cards at Lynchings
so
something like this is not surprising or new

The app is incredibly stupid and hazardous . .. what is the point of it beyond encouraging reckless behavior

If HOT COFFEE is a hazard to the community this app is worse

Rocket River

 

A quick Google search reveals many similar news items, but with fatalities.

I do wonder what is the point of such an app, other than to boast at how fast you're traveling.

 

I was serious.

 

i used my kids snapchat mph feature to fix a golf cart motor LOL!!! my kids use it all the time when cruising on the golf cart or on the boat. i don't "get it" but i can see its fun. guns can be very bad but they can be fun too...

 

I can't believe the amount of people holding the app responsible for the accident. Bottom line is the girl caused the accident and is liable 100%.

 

No one is denying that she is liable.

 

I challenge you to find anyone in this thread saying the girl was not 100% responsible for the accident.

 

All these posts place some responsibility on the app.

Nobody has ever said using a phone while driving is safe. Yet when accidents happen due to texting, the phone manufacturers are never blamed. Why is this different?

 

I don't see what is mutually exclusive about saying the girl is 100% to blame for her accident, and that Snapchat has created a public hazard. It doesn't absolve the driver of any responsibility at all for the choices she made. But, I also don't understand the drive some people feel to absolve companies from responsibility for their actions just because others have free will. I may need to actually use this app to better understand it, but it looks to me like they've created something that they should have known would leverage social rewards to incentivize dangerous behaviors. If by a freak of statistics somehow no one ever got hurt using this filter, I'd still condemn them.

Why this is different from a phone or texting: those are tools with genuine and positive use values that have, on the whole, been a benefit to society. Being able to snapchat yourself and record your speed has no use I can think of, and I have a hard time believing that the benefits I can't think of outweigh the negatives I can imagine. Texting is something we want to keep as part of our lives and we just need to find a way to live with it that minimizes the abuses and negative consequences. Posting your speed -- we can probably flush that down the toilet and not think twice.

 

Because Snapchat made a very specific functionality that encourages unsafe behavior. Have a feature that records how fast you are going when you take a selfie is clearly encouraging risky behavior.

It's not that Snapchat is to blame for the accident, it's a question of negligence and accountability. If you create a product that is inherently unsafe and results in death - you may be liable. This is a check on corporations to prevent them from conducting dangerous business as much as possible.

The girl obviously should be persecuted fully - you seem to ignore that I wrote that already. But that doesn't absolve the app from liability.

The point is that it's one thing to make a feature so you can get the content you want, and another thing to make a device that enourages risky behavior.

And a feature that encourages you to take pictures of yourself while speeding at high speeds given that their audience is teens - was definitely a huge mistake.

 

If Snapchat marketed this filter as "Use this while driving", then yes, they are encouraging irresponsible behavior and should be held accountable for that. But, I highly doubt they did.

I'm not down with this culture of "blame the company for someone's irresponsible behavior." Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. It's not always someone else's fault.

That's not to say the victim was playing a stupid game. He should take all he can from the teenage driver. I just don't see how the app is responsible for her causing the accident.

 

The guy who got the brain damage didn't play any stupid games.

I think you have blinders on. Again, no one is absolving the driver of anything. Where Snapchat comes in is a wholly separate issue of whether their product is inherently dangerous. I think when I look at the science of the brain, social rewards, and the development of teen brains in particular, it looks inevitable to me that a product like this would result in unnecessary car wrecks. I'm happy to have a free market and all, and to encourage innovation even where the use value may not be immediately clear -- but when a hazard is obvious and the use value is no where to be found, why should society put up with it?

 

Why not both?

 

It's a question of negligence - this isn't a criminal case for the app company as it is for the driver. She is clearly at fault criminally.

But there is a thing called product liability. If you create a product feature and not only enables but is seen to encourage dangerous behaviors that you can be held liable.

Think of a gun company promoting a shoot in a random direction day as a way to promote their brand. Such a promotion would leave the company liable even if the person who actually fired a gun in a random direction and hit someone is criminally accountable.

This is why Waze has a feature that when you are moving, you have to indicate you are a passenger - it's how they absolve themselves of negligence.

 

So snapchat called her and told her to do it?

 

Following up on this story, the app explicitly states "Don't Snap and drive" when you open it up. If that Waze disclaimer is enough for you to absolve Waze of liability, that warning should, too.

The app wasn't intended to be used for driving. People have snapped when they're flying, walking, etc. Just because you don't see the value in it doesn't mean others don't. If they didn't, the filter wouldn't be used.

The reason I bring this thread up is because of all these stories about people ending up in accidents due to Pokemon GO. Pedestrians have fallen down cliffs, been hit by cars, and car accidents have occurred because idiots are focused on their phones while driving. The app has a warning to "Be aware of your surroundings" when you open it up.

If this lawsuit succeeds, then every app can be liable when some idiot indirectly gets hurt or hurts someone while using the app.

 

If Pokemon GO is intentionally placing Poke's in the middle of an interstate, then yes, they should. I dont know how the filter works but the dangers of using your phone while in motion seems to be more dangerous than not. It sounds like a terrible idea. And yes, the woman should be thrown in prison.

 

Pretty common sense to not look at the phone for any extended time while driving. Even more common sense to not speed at 100mph like this teenager was doing.

 

Seems like going after gun manufacturers instead of the person that fired the bullets IMO.