Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
1–10 of 60 posts
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#2My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault'
But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#3My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
This reminds me a bit of the McDonald's coffee case, something that seems absurd in a headline, but once you take time to understand it (like a jury or court would), makes a great deal of sense. The court of public opinion is generally a bad place to try things.
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#4My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
A filter that displays your current speed has no inherent danger and does not encourage anything in and of itself. Idiots that decide to drive over 100mph in a car not designed for high speeds, on public roads, and with no proper training just to capture a cool number on a screen are the ones who should be put in jail.
Should we jail the person that invented the speedometer as well?
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#5> Carrie Goldberg, a victims' rights lawyer who specializes in online abuse, brought a similar product liability case against the dating app Grindr, but a federal appeals court, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, rejected it on Section 230 grounds.
> To see a different federal appeals court go the opposite way could create an opening for more cases to challenge tech companies over flawed platform design leading to foreseeable harms, she said.
Article author seems to misunderstand section 230. Section 230 protects against liability for 3rd party content, such as the fake Grindr profile from that case.
I've never used Snapchat, but my understanding is filters are 1st party content: created by Snapchat themselves. That is why this case doesn't get 230 protection.
Edit: commenters below have informed me there are 3rd party filters but the speedometer one is 1st party.
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#6My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
How is it different from snapping the speedometer in a car for clout?
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#7Maybe I misinterpreted the cause and effect here, but is there a meaningful difference between a Snapchat video with a "speed filter" and a cellphone video of somebody driving fast that includes footage of their car's speedometer? Is any speed gauge likely to make people drive fast, and therefore open to litigation?
Edit:
Here's footage of the Speed Filter in action:
https://youtu.be/Bk45g_5l6m0?t=68
https://youtu.be/SUcvsHxaX_o?t=100
You'll note that neither of them have any special display for reaching fast speeds (IE "incentivizing" driving over the speed limit), and that the first one even says "Don't snap and drive".
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#8My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
A filter that displays your current speed has no inherent danger and does not encourage anything in and of itself. Idiots that decide to drive over 100mph in a car not designed for high speeds, on public roads, and with no proper training just to capture a cool number on a screen are the ones who should be put in jail. Should we jail the person that invented the speedometer as well?
We have speed limits on e-scooters and e-bikes, it's only path dependence that means we don't have them on cars, despite the obvious difference in risk.
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#9My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
A filter that displays your current speed has no inherent danger and does not encourage anything in and of itself. Idiots that decide to drive over 100mph in a car not designed for high speeds, on public roads, and with no proper training just to capture a cool number on a screen are the ones who should be put in jail. Should we jail the person that invented the speedometer as well?
A speedometer does the opposite of encouraging unsafe behavior by alerting you to the unsafeness of that behavior. The filter in question encouraged unsafe behavior by incentivizing such behavior for social engagement, however absurd you think that incentivization is personally. This is a bit like saying a frat house hazing isn't wrong because no one actually makes the kids drink, the social incentive remains dangerous.
Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules
#10My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.
A filter that displays your current speed has no inherent danger and does not encourage anything in and of itself. Idiots that decide to drive over 100mph in a car not designed for high speeds, on public roads, and with no proper training just to capture a cool number on a screen are the ones who should be put in jail. Should we jail the person that invented the speedometer as well?
Agreed. In fact, some dashcams have built-in speedometers (via GPS tracking I believe). Should manufacturers be forced to disable them and/or face liability in case someone uses a dashcam to capture their dangerous driving?