Tech company faces negligence lawsuit after Philip Paxson died from driving off a North Carolina bridge destroyed years ago

Discuss!

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
40 points

No they don’t. Christ 🤦‍♂️.

It’s 100% on the local government to handle that shit. There are hundreds of sources for map data and I bet you most of them aren’t up to date.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Google Maps gave incorrect routing advice resulting (on their part) in a person’s death. It was a decade out of date, it had been brought to their attention and they did nothing. They still used that data in their routing. Obviously they have some sort of responsibility here imo.

There are hundreds of sources for map data and I bet you most of them aren’t up to date.

Idk why you think I’d think differently if it was some other company, routing provider etc. If it was a municipal roadside map that showed that you’re free to drive off that bridge then it would be the same. Or even a private roadside tourism map.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Not their problem. You can expand your definition of liability ad-nausium.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Bizarre thinking. Some rest stop owner puts up a tourist map pointing someone off a bridge and they wouldn’t hold any responsibility in your mind, not a tiny bit of moral responsibility if someone drove off the bridge while following the map’s advice?

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

resulting (on their part) in a person’s death.

Nope.

If the bridge had collapsed a few hours ago. No one would know. Due to this being a real risk. Just like anyone reading an older paper map. The driver of any car is entirely responsible for looking where they are going. Not some 3rd party navigation source.

Evidence that google is crap. In no way shape or form makes them legally responsible for your visual attention while driving. You are.

And google has faced these cases in a number of nations. Through out the erly addoption of GPS navigation in the 2000s. We saw many cases of folks driving into lakes and rivers. Because they were stupid enouth to trust the GPS system. Rather then use the minimal common sense of watching where they are driving.

Google map quest and all others never faced and requirement to take responsibility for drivers inability to drive.

After a decade. The local authority bears responsibility for failing to signpost. Or hell fix th fucking bridge. But even then nope if your driving, how long its been down. In no way relieves you of the standard job. Of watching where the hell you are going. Just means the local auth need to lose there jobs/ 10 years ago.

Guess what. Old folks crossing the road and falling over. Can happen with little notice. But if you come around a corner. And are not paying attention to the road. The fact that a little old lady fell and knocked herself out. Guess who is legally responsible for failing to drive safly when you crush the poor ladies head.

As someone with mobility and vision issues. Who is at high risk of losing my balance when travelling. It really fucks me off how many drivers fail to realise. They are responsible for driving a multi ton potential killing machine. And share the environment with the whole of society.

As soon as they abdicate that responsibility. Thay are basically saying people like me must remain locked in our houses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Of course they had a part in the death. They routed him over a broken bridge. That’s their part of it. And not fixing the map after being told about the issue. Thinking they didn’t have any part in this seems bizarre.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

You’re expectations of Google would be like demanding that the map company who printed maps must provide a free, updated map every time that the roads change. Life doesn’t work that way - sometimes people need to take responsibility for their own stupidity.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

No it isn’t? My expectation is that if someone guides someone poorly then of course they have some responsibility and part in their death. Honestly it’s simple as that and it just seems like common sense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

NAL, but I think part of it is that Google does update its map regularly (you see the latest edition whenever you access it online)

Where Google arguably failed was, despite having a system to report discrepancies which people used for this collapsed bridge, Google failed to make the routing changes that could be reasonably expected by 5+ years. They could have used some combination of satellite images, user reports, the Google car etc.

Even if you were to compare it to paper media: If you published a new edition twice a year, you had incorrect information, people reported it to you yet you still failed to correct it for 10+ editions and it causes harm to someone, then as a publisher you may be liable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

If I buy a map I don’t just drive down the road not looking out the window. The bridge could have washed out that night I would never expect a map to cover that a map is for planning a route…I would be pissed off that it had led me down a dead end and I had to stop and turn around so I might ask for money back on the map but the death and driving off a road is not on the map

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

If I buy a map I don’t just drive down the road not looking out the window.

Well duh

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 10K

    Posts

  • 113K

    Comments