Slashdot Mirror
Pedestrian Follows Google Map, Gets Run Over, Sues
Hugh Pickens writes "The Toronto Star reports that a Utah woman is suing Google for more than $100,000 in damages, claiming its maps function gave her walking directions that led her onto a major highway, where she was struck by a car. Lauren Rosenberg sought directions between two addresses in Utah about 3 kilometers apart and the top result suggested that she follow a busy rural highway for several hundred meters. The highway did not have sidewalks or any other pedestrian-friendly amenities, and Rosenberg was struck by a car. Rosenberg filed suit against both the driver of the car that struck her and Google, claiming both carried responsibility in her injury. Her lawyers claim Google is liable because it did not warn her that the route would not offer a safe place for a pedestrian to walk. Google has pointed out that the directions Rosenberg sought come with a warning of caution for pedestrians, but Rosenberg claims that she accessed the Maps function on her Blackberry mobile device, where it did not include the warning."
People walk on busy highways without sidewalks and think they're going to be perfectly safe? Why on earth would a thinking person even consider going by that route?
I am scientifically inaccurate.
Who's fault is it when you're walking on a highway?
is she f&#%^g blind, just stupid or what. If you don't feel safe walking some place, DON'T WALK THERE!
No personal responsibility at all involved here? I can see how the driver is liable, but Google? Psht.
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
Nobody's perfect, lady, including Google. Maybe Google should sue you for not having the sense to stay out of the road.
she didnt press "im feeling lucky" button so
If he'd have done his job we wouldn't have to suffer through this kind of crap.
Sheesh, not sure if following the stupid directions, or suing everything in sight after wards is the worse offense.
but sooo close. maybe next time. Please try again!
My mom taught me not to walk/play in traffic when I was four. Maybe this gal should sue her parents too?
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
I'm suing Black Berry as well. It told me to take a right and I drove into a lake.
I swam all the way from Newfoundland to England and nearly DIED!!
~Mr. G. Ullible
everyone and everything but yourself are at fault right? why dont these silly lawsuits just get dismissed for wasting court time?
Woman needs to learn how to walk down the road. I'm a college student. I'm poor. I walk down major highways all the time and voila, I don't get hit by a car. I see people do it all the time, and voila, they don't get hit by a car.
I think this woman was just stupid and wanted someone to blame for her own ignorance.
"If you want a guarantee, buy a toaster."
*And Happy Birthday, Clint!
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Was she using the Blackberry while walking along that route?
They're everywhere, and not enough of them are getting Darwin Awards even when they deserve them.
Now I'll admit it's terrible that she got hurt, but let's face it, how stupid could she be to blindly follow a map into traffic?
What if a fire had engulfed the area, would she have walked into that just because a map shows that as a viable route?
I don't know about you, but I tend to avoid getting in the way of high speed multi-ton solid objects, I understand about inertia and kinetic impacts.
Guess she should sue her parents for neglecting to teach her not to walk on roads with traffic. Or perhaps for not making sure her, as an adult, didn't do something so stupid, and then have the audacity to blame someone else for her death-wish activities.
"walking directions (beta): use caution"
that's the exact text once you start point by point directions on the iPhone... I assume it's the same on her blackberry
The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
My thoughts on this article were influenced by my low empathy score.
Seriously and probably incurably retarded person gets injured through own sheer stupidity and wants others to pay. Lawyers will make a bundle. News at 11.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
$100,000 lawsuit is pretty cheap these days....
That's probably less then 3 billable days for google lawyers.
THL phish sticks
Why didn't anyone warn me my hot coffee was hot?!
What the fuck is the world coming to?
.
Trolling is a art,
There are no kilometers in Utah.
Too bad they don't give Darwin Awards to people who live to tell their stupidity...
People like this should be sent away, far far away and they dilute the gene pool.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Perhaps I should make the subject "Common sense absent"? Am I the only person left on the planet who can assess a situation and determine whether it's safe or not, and take appropriate actions to safeguard myself? On second thought I call bullshit; I cannot believe anyone is so stupid as this, this woman must be looking for a payday.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
too bad she didn't die and rid us all of probably-stupid offspring also ... moderators on this site are morons. they too shouldn't have children. if they, however, have them... they should probably kill them or give them to charity
I am a dumb fuck who is too busy looking at my phone to notice I am walking to an unsafe place and I should be removed from the gene pool.
Really... jeeze... What ever happened to common sense. If it looks dangerous... it probably is. If her Blackberry told her to insert her arm into an industrial shredder would she have done that as well?
Take a look at this... this is the road in question... There was plenty of room on the left side of the street to walk without being anywhere near the road.
I really hope this gets thrown out of court. People need to take responsibility for their own stupidity.
Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
Google is responsible for a persons stupidity now?
If Google tells you to jump off a cliff, are you going to do it?
'M' is for meritless.
Obligatory reference.
The same thing happened to me, but I turned around and found another way without Google's help.
What makes this a problem in my mind is that Google Maps doesn't offer a "detour me" feature that allows you to easily avoid specified nodes in the commute graph. My Garmin GPS had this feature and driving all over the Western half of the US for many months I can tell you it was an indispensable feature.
A good detour feature is a really necessary feature in an emergency situation. As we become more dependent on these systems, we should make sure they are at least as robust as good old-fashioned know-how. Being a firm believe in technology, I'm sure Google Maps could in fact surpass our own robustness and incorporate features to make emergencies even safer for people, but right now Google Maps seems to be focused on telling you how to go some place where you'll spend money.
Wow, I can't recall ever reading this many Slashdot responses and not seeing one word of dissent. Seems unanimous that everyone thinks this lady is an idiot and has no right to sue.
That should be legally binding.
Come on... not even a troll sticking his head up above the bridge?
Why are you letting these clowns ruin our country?
Guess they better remove the kayak across the pacific in some directions before someone does it. And can I sue Google if the directions they give me result in me getting in a car accident? After all I wouldn't have been on that road if Google didn't tell me too.
Also, while I'm at it, I cut myself with a knife at a restaurant that came up on a Google search, so I'll hit them with that suit as well. At the same time I hit them for sending me to a seafood place with my shellfish allergies.
But it's not just google. Yahoo gave me movie times to a showing any my kid learned a bad word from Iron Man 2. Pain and suffering baby!
BRB...Youtube just gave me some cool results on parkour...this should be easy.
I will sue Google because I almost drowned myself kayaking to Japan.
(See the directions from the US to Japan in Google Maps)
no reasonable person would expect the maps to be perfect, and to use the maps with caution as a guide.
It's too bad she didn't just die to stop this frivolous lawsuit
Noted in AccuWeather, Park City had a top temp of 19F that day. Could Ms. Rosenberg have been impacted by the weather? Bundled up? Ear muffs?
If only she died, she could have won a Darwin Award.
Seriously : THINK.
Or sue your parents for being such a moron.
If Google told her to jump off of a bridge, would she have done it?
Most folk'll never lose a toe, and then again some folk'll...
You got one flamebait mod. Stop whining and get over it.
Darwin would be sad to learn that she survived.
There's no scientific consensus that life is important.
It's a real issue if a map system leads people into a trap.
There was a problem in England where a map system led truck drivers down a narrow dead-end lane from which they could not turn around. This was an ongoing problem, and the local property owners raised hell.
An Oregon couple was sent down a Forest Service road in a remote area and was stuck for three days before they were rescued.
The problem is serious in situations where the map system leads people onto an initially plausible route which gets them into trouble. Looking at the pictures for this walking problem, there's a dirt trail alongside the road. But does that dirt trail end before the destination?
Because Google actually drives out roads and takes pictures, people may be led to have more confidence in Google's mapping than in systems which just use ordinary map data.
City folk indeed. Despite being raised in the city I still managed to pick up the 'common knowledge' that
a) Highways are dangerous
b) You walk on the shoulder opposite the flow of traffic (so you can see what's coming).
Hell, my city barely even has a highway in it!
I think we need more ppl like her, and rig the directions to always go to a large cliff. We can call the service Google Lemmings
That road had a patch of grass down the side of it as well which is basically a 'sidewalk'
I care not for your karma and your mod points.
"Rosenberg filed suit against both the driver of the car that struck her and Google, claiming both carried responsibility in her injury."
Needless to say she has no responsibility for her own actions. She's just a mindless drone following orders.
Privacy is terrorism.
Are you kidding! Let's see, i'm walking down a road and there are lots of cars. I think I'll walk where I can get hit, then I can sue someone. Damn! I've used google maps for walking directions, and yes there were times when I was directed to a road that was not pedistrian friendly. Guess what I went another way. What an Id10t
In addition, was she walking with traffic (wrong) or against (correct)? I didn't see it mentioned. You wouldn't believe how many pedestrians and bicyclists I see incorrectly walking with or riding against traffic (respectively).
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
On maps.google.com it says: Walking directions are in beta. Use caution – This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths. If she was using the other directions, they are defaulted to driving directions.
In the UK, and most of Europe, walking along the bigger roads without pedestrian walkways is illegal. Don't know whether that alone would be enough to get the case thrown out, but I'm fairly sure that in sane^H^H^H^HEuropean countries, you wouldn't be able to sue unless the company had explicitly told you to break the law... and even then, it'd be dubious. IANAL, etc., etc.
For not having no-pedestrian signs allowed signs at highway access points.
Just because you are using a map, even a map that makes route suggestions based on calculation of a path, does not mean you can turn your brain off.
While I was walking along, all of a sudden, a lantern stood in my way and struck me, directly between my eyes. I will sue Google as they didn't warn of lantern on my way. And I will sue my wife's optician, as I don't have glasses.
Seriously, this woman may have gotten bad directions but it was her walking along though she saw that this way wasn't adequate for her to walk. It's ridiculous to sue. Will I be made reliable, if I give directions on the road and don't mention the street lights all along the way? Oh, there were road works and I didn't warn about. Please, have some self-respect and stop this law suit!
cb
In my country there is a golden rule, when walking on a street with no sidewalks you have to walk on a side where you face the incoming traffic so when a car passes you, you are actually seeing it from a distance. Failing to do so increases your liability for potential injury.
/* Wherever you go there you are... */
Seriously. Where's a speeding, out-of-control Michael Bay-style 18-wheeler loaded with gasoline and hand grenades that's already on fire when you need one? I think Google's entire response should be a photocopy of an enormous erect penis that just says "suck it" at the bottom.
Sometimes it is can be tragic, other times it is a wonderful thing. Though this time it didn't quite work out.
This story could have been a lot more strange. She was in Utah - at least the directions didn't send her into a polygamous camp. Given her lack of common sense, who knows how that might have gone..
If you are an adult, and you need a reminder not to play in traffic.. maybe you shouldn't be out and about without constant supervision, hm?
The link with the StreetView images make the situation all the more plain: she's an idiot. For A) deciding to walk along a busy highway that in satellite images and StreetView clearly did not have sidewalks, which would have been obvious on the ground too, B) apparently being too clueless to stay on what narrow, non-sidewalk area did exist adjacent to the asphalt -- it looks wide enough to me that if you valued your life there would be room to stay off the road, and C) apparently too clueless to realize that there is indeed a walking/biking trail running parallel along Deer Valley Drive that she walked right past along her route (the entrance at the corner of Iron Horse Drive and Bonanza Drive). note the cyclist. The path was a few steps off the road, and it even has a tunnel under the highway to avoid crossing at the busy intersection. The trail is used frequently enough that you can clearly see people walking/riding all along it in the satellite images.
Personal responsibility!
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
Mod parent up funny!
Google: Thank You!
Google Maps sent us along a poorly-marked bus lane in Glasgow a couple of months ago. Not that I entirely blame Google as we were also using Tom Tom sat nav and it told us to follow that route too. And, as I said, the lane was poorly marked. Fortunately there was a kind police officer waiting to give us a helpful fine. It's good that they're making an effort to punish ruthless criminals like myself.
Amusingly, on Google Street View, the Google camera car drives along the bus lane too.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=north+hanover+street+glasgow&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=14.014358,29.267578&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=N+Hanover+St,+Glasgow,+Lanarkshire+G1,+United+Kingdom&ll=55.862477,-4.249649&spn=0.006539,0.014291&z=16&layer=c&cbll=55.862373,-4.249695&panoid=RQxr9I0-59dioMIPrJWSqQ&cbp=12,11.52,,0,22.57
Has the (city/Google) defence not argued it this way:
Surely if the woman has the intelligence to operate a Blackberry and access Google Maps on it in the first place, then she has the intelligence to be able to work out for herself that she's walking along a dangerous road?
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
and there they do say "beta, use caution".
people ride bikes and walk on busy highways all the time and don't get run over. i agree the driver is at fault in fact if you hit a person its pretty hard to prove otherwise. unless she was of course blindly following her blackberry and walking all over the road rather then to the left like peds and mounten bikers are supposed to. then its totally on her. and they dont say where she got run over was it to the left or was she in the middle of the fing road. in any case its not goggles fault. theirs plenty of disclames abought using such softwhere. like reference only can get you lost watch for 1 way streets etc. and blackberry's do have such warnings if she botherd to read the user guide.
clearly he wasn't driving fast enough, and apparently his aim isn't so good either..
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
This equal to someone suing the Food Network for not warning them that stoves are hot and might burn when following a recipe provided. If this case is actually decided in favor of this woman, then watch out for the landslide of sleazeball lawyers bringing equally dumb cases to the courts.
Good thing she didn't ask for directions from Boston to London... Not working anymore (un?)fortunately.
For wasting public air
This reminds me of a story women suing RV company for a crash. She read instruction manual, drove on highway and turned cruise control on. Then she went into washroom at a back of the RV. Needles to say she crashed. Funny thing is she won!
... it burns.
Almost a potential Darwin nominee. What a fail.
I guess it is different in the USA, but under British Law pedestrians have the right to use most roads except motorways.
(But suing Goggle sounds more like she is just trolling.)
Google maps once directed me to turn left at a spot with a sign that clearly said no left turns. I ... didn't turn there. I also stop at red lights, even though Google doesn't tell me to. Can I have a prize?
Maybe if she gets some hideous infection she can win!
Thats who should pay her, too bad she didn't get any, thats her fault.
Indeed. The longer I live, the more convinced I become that the good guys were the ones who lost that war.
Jews.... :spit!
It's a shame this person takes technology for granted and does not rely on common sense. But then she's learning from all the corporations that are too big to fail and is basically asking for a bailout for her own irresponsibility.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/17colwe.html?_r=1 and that guy was in the it business
Quiet you spik, before we kill your husband
Chances are her blackberry google maps GPS directed her all along streets... assuming she was in a car. If she had used the map in a pedestrian mode, it probably would have directed her alot differently. Hopefully in front of a moving bus.
... I believe I've covered it all here.
People today are being raised without common sense and being provided the minimal amount of logic required to:
1. Stay Alive;
2. Do as you are told;
3. Pay your taxes
Yes, lady it's your fault the oil well in the gulf is cryin'. You made it cry by walkin' when you should have driven like a normal god-fearin' American.
You don't think this is a serious suit? Go count the number of labels on your ladder sometime. For a laugh, I went to look at mine. Almost all the exterior surface that you don't step on is covered in labels.
I've wished that Google would put medical diagnostic expert systems online. It makes perfect sense - bring us information we can use about ourselves. But in the US, you can't bring a sick person information, or a hungry person a sandwich, for that matter, without opening yourself to huge legal liability.
I hope Google can fight this off. If they aren't big enough, no one is. They were willing to saddle up the lawyers to bring books online. Let's hope they just see this as a cost of doing business.
But never underestimate the absurdity of our liability laws, or the power of Bad Laws to frak up a good thing. It is not a joke.
Maybe not political correct, but the nasty and sarcastic side of me thinks: "Pity, that the driver did not hit her more seriously. She is something our gene pool doesn't need."
Google once directed me to walk through a lake to get to my destination. I laughed, and found a different route.
This woman is a moron.
Google gave me walking (actually bicycling but never mind) directions which all but crossed a 6-lane highway. Since said highway was surrounded by a tall fence, a trench and a shrubbery, I didn't apply for a Darwin award, but instead BFS'ed for a few minutes until I found a proper crossing.
As a coder, I know it's terribly difficult to write a proper pathing algorithm! I guess since I know that I'm more forgiving (just as I'm less likely to rage at buggy games).
Money's tight and jobs are hard to come by.
Does seem like one of those things where they sat around, contemplated the odds with a helpful attorney and decided to roll the dice on a jury.
I searched for walking directions from the United States to Spain using Google Maps. It advised me to swim across the Atlantic Ocean.
Maybe it's just me, but when it comes to crossing the Atlantic Ocean, "swimming" isn't the first mode of transportation that comes to mind. Nor is walking when highways are involved, regardless of what Google says.
"I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
News: Pedestrian Follows Google Map, Gets Run Over, Sues
To self: Ah, probably one of my fellow Americans being stupid.
The Toronto Star reports...
Holy cow, the Canucks are as dumb as us?
...that a Utah woman is suing Google...
I see. Carry on.
I see stupid people.
Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're stupid.
"Led" .. ok, but just barely.
"Sent" ? Really?
Seems like I'm just splitting hairs over these words, but it's actually a pretty critical aspect of what happened. You're acting like the computers are already in charge, carbon unit Animats. In Soviet Russia, code execute YOU!
... for the violation of a natural selection law??? Time and time again, neutral selection fails to work. This is just ridiculous!
If I wish to go north on Rt9 from where I live, Google tells me to enter the highway on the south bound exit ramp!
Very Bad Day.
Does she sue the driver for the loss of a Darwin award? She would have gotten one if only he had hit her harder...
On the plus side, she may get a Stella award... and a Darwin award will probably follow soon, anyway... "but I could have gotten TWO Darwin awards, your honor!"
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
WARNING: you appear to be an utter imbecile.
We're not smart enough to cope with your level of stupidity.
Please disconnect from all Google services immediately.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
I can believe people are even debating this. 1) She's a greedy cow who wants to make money off of her own stupidity no matter the long term consequences such asinine litigation has on everything else. 2) She followed directions given to her by an Internet provider via her fucking cell phone without paying attention to and/or expecting somebody else to be responsible for her safety. She's too fucking stupid to breath on her own without somebody giving her instructions to inhale and exhale and is a leech on the ass of society. 3) All of the above. I vote she just fucking kill herself and save nature the trouble.
Who the fuck modded this "Informative"?
Her lawyers claim Google is liable because it did not warn her that the route would not offer a safe place for a pedestrian to walk
But I bet she could see that as soon as she got to the road. Maybe that was the time to make the ridiculous decision to disobey Google's instructions and walk down another nearby road.
Ok. I've released you from karma purgatory. Don't make me regret it.
Will she use Google Maps for directions to the court house? This problem might end up solving itself.
IANAL, but how can she sue both the driver and Google? It doesn't make sense.
If the driver was being reckless and that caused the accident, wouldn't that mean that the woman would have been able to safely walk that route if the drivers followed the rules?
~A~
Of course with a name like Rosenberg, it's easy to figure out why she is suing.
Technology is not made for retarded people.
Sorry bout the quality, but i didn't upload this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yyKrS8jwSY
Here I thought we all learned a lesson in stupid with the McDonald's hot coffee law suit. What could be stupider? Well now we know... someone who hasn't learned to look both ways before crossing the street?
Put her up for an honorary darwin award.
I suspect that her case is weak (she shouldn't have been walking there) so she wants to say "Google said it was OK".
Lawyers tend to include any party even remotely connected to the lawsuit in case.
What's been failed to be mentioned is that she was walking down the center of the road...
I can't imagine that someone could survive to adulthood being this stupid. It seems more likely that as soon as she was hit, she started thinking, "how can I make a buck on this?" That's not stupid, as much as it is evil. Following the instructions at all would be stupid.
My question is whether she read the instructions and thought, "I've got a decent chance at getting rich in a lawsuit here. I think I'll forego common sense and pedantically follow the path they gave me." Now that would be REALLY evil.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
More chlorine needed
I've gotten Google directions that have walking paths over miles and miles of water. I guess it won't be two long until someone drowns while walking under water and Google is sued again.
America is funny because it exists!
What are the odds that she was one of 47 million uninsured Americans? she made a stupid mistake and now is faced with bankruptcy, or worse, unable to pay medical bills she needs to survive. A nice lawyer offered to split the winnings in exchange for the rights to pursue the case.
Last I checked, it was unlawful for a pedestrian to be present on the main part of any federal US highway. You can walk on the on/off ramps, but you can't walk on the main highways just for the sake of walking. Now, having your car break down and walking to the nearest exit is different.
Dear Lauren,
Please turn in your Blackberry. Pardon the pun, but you are simply too stupid to operate a smartphone. Good luck with your hospital bills.
Best regards,
- the rest of the world
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
Most big companies with lawyers on staff are involved in more than one case at once. Lawyers litigating case A aren't necessarily available to litigate case B.
Visiting Ghent (in Belgium) one time, Google maps told me to cross a bridge that didn't exist to get from the train station to my hotel. I did consider swimming, but instead spent 30minutes walk along the river to the next bridge.
I'm not sure if the article is incorrect (I haven't read it yet,) or if you're misunderstanding the terminology... Most public roads, with a few exceptions (such as alleyways) are considered highways. State highways are generally better funded, but most are still legal for pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
A freeway, which you seem to be thinking of, is a completely different beast. Freeways must be divided, access is only permitted from designated on-ramps, and bicycle and pedestrian traffic are prohibited.
I can think of quite a few highways that are completely unsafe for pedestrian traffic (In the California bay area, many parts of Highway 9, and all of Highway 17 come immediately to mind.)
I used to run a Chicken Farm. Yes, it would be feasible to create side-walks/bike-trails along with all roads if it was done so and planned so from the beginning. It wouldn't even cost that much more. Just think about. How hard would it be. To go back and retro-fit is going to be a lot of expense, I admit. But, if you make it mandatory that any upgrade (beyond re-blacktopping) involves adding bike/walk lanes (or separate altenatives) then it could be so soon enough.
No, YOU get a CLUE!
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
i want my account removed. that's all. quite simple. no regrets.
maybe she got the idea from this episode of the office: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunder_Mifflin_Infinity
seriously though, at least in that episode it was funny. in this case, it's just ridiculous.
It's hard to tell the cool to chill, my favorite hotel room has a view to an ill.
Can't we all sue her for wasting our time with this story?
What about personal respon- oh, fuck it. Just bomb Utah.
Paris has a disadvantage compared to Chicago...history.
Some might consider that an advantage...having narrow streets full of old buildings might not be good for motorists but I'd rather wander around Paris than Chicago any day.
...because the lawyers know it's cheaper for the insurance companies to just settle out of court rather than go to court and fight the suit. IANAL, but I've been on the driver's side of a pedestrian accident. I hit a guy that ran across a 5-lane highway mere yards from an intersection...he was issued a ticket, and I still got sued. Net result? My insurance company settled out of court for about $250K. Even though the accident clearly was not my fault, the insurance company paid out.
I would imagine the driver's insurance company and Google will do the same in this case as well.
If you're driving over frozen water, over mud, over gravel, you're driving on the wrong road.
Don't leave the pavement.
Get a friggin' car, ya hoser.
And here's where we learn that people are ignorant about lawsuits. See, in that particular example, McDonald's was shown to be serving their coffee hotter than any of their competitors and...they were aware of how many burns it caused and how much greater the extent of injury was than if they lowered their required temperature a few degrees.
So what, you think a restaurant chain as big as McDonalds with a corporate policy shouldn't be held responsible, shouldn't be asked to give consideration to people being injured by their product?
Sorry, but I disagree.
Whether or not Google is as liable, I don't know, but their page did leave out some information that they saw fit to include in another format.
It's something I'd certainly consider.
Why not? Were their not any sharks in the river to support an injury lawsuit? Because if there is something stupid to do where another person can be held liable, it's always worth diving in.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
If you walked 30 minutes in Ghent you'd be in Antwerp. Goddam tinpot EU microstates.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The exact temperature is irrelevant. Holding the cup between your legs while driving is still fucking retarded, and it wouldn't have spilled on her if she hadn't done so.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
hehe if only.
This will give hackers too many ideas.
"Walk 5 blocks east, wait for furry brown lemmings to appear, then follow the lemmings over Bently Cliff".
Table-ized A.I.
"But Your Honor, it didn't say Simon Says."
Table-ized A.I.
It looks like there was a sidewalk, if the given route is correct. In both street view and satellite modes, it appears that there is indeed a sidewalk that follows the highway, though with a good amount of space including grass, trees, and walls between the two.
What a dumb biotch.
FragHARD or don't frag at all
Same exact thing happened to me in Utah, so I called up injury attorneys Young, Young & Young in SLC and asked to speak to Mr. Young. "He's in trial right now". So I asked to speak with the other Mr. Young, "Sorry, he's away on a business trip." Well, then, can I speak to Mr. Young? "You're talking to him!".
I'd like to see them in a face-off with Schwartz, Schwartz & Schwartz in L.A., but between them I don't think they could figure out who the gentiles are.
I up you one. There is one place in the developed world I know of where you can in fact get into serious trouble, even with no use of Google Maps, GPS or any other aid of that sort.
You can get stuck in "blocked-in" lanes (due to construction) on I-75 in Detroit. The Bridge-to-Canada lane may several exits blocked off, and you may end up crossing the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit and end up on the Canadian side of the border. There is nothing on the U.S. side preventing you from leaving the U.S.
If you don't have your passport with you, you can get into a ton of grief (4+ hours of interrogation) trying to get back into the U.S.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
"Judaism was the world's first master race theory."
Yah, the first self-loathing, self-deprecating master race. LOL. You don't actually take yourself seriously, do you?
"otherwise known as "The Worship of Money" or "Eating Arab Babies""
Ooops, maybe you do? Well, don't forget your tin foil hat and remember to take your lithium, if not for yourself, at least to protect your family from your mild mood swings and vile behavior. Final word to ya, even if 10% of what you say is true, I think you ought to look yourself in the mirror and see what an ugly and venial defect envy and hatred is.
No wonder you remained AC.
McDonald's was shown to be serving their coffee hotter than any of their competitors
WRONG. Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants
"Though defenders of the Liebeck verdict argue that her coffee was unusually hotter than other coffee sold, other major vendors of coffee, including Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts, Wendy's, and Burger King, produce coffee at a similar or higher temperature, and have been subjected to similar lawsuits over third-degree burns"
were aware of how many burns it caused
700 in 10 years, nationwide. or, to put it another way, one burn for every 24,000,000 cups. That means .0000000416 of their coffees burned someone.
To put this in perspective, there are 251 million vehicles in the USA. There are about 6 million car accidents each year, so about 60 in 10 years. That means (statistically speaking) that .239 of the cars in the USA are in an accident in 10 years.
Does it really seem that coffee is the bigger danger here?
how much greater the extent of injury was than if they lowered their required temperature a few degrees.
"Their required temperature" was the industry standard. It was the correct temperature to brew and hold coffee at. For example, The National Coffee Association of U.S.A. instructs that coffee should be brewed "between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit [91–96 C] for optimal extraction" and consumed "immediately". If not consumed immediately, the coffee is to be "maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit".
So what, you think a restaurant chain as big as McDonalds with a corporate policy shouldn't be held responsible, shouldn't be asked to give consideration to people being injured by their product?
McDonalds should not be held responsible for peoples clumsiness: Stella "placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her". The burn was her own fault, caused by her own careless handling of the coffee.
Now, if McDonalds handed her a cup that they knew was faulty, that would be a different story. But it is not fair to hold one party responsible for the stupidity of another party.
lol uninstall!!! The thing is how do you get hit by a car on the highway and survive to sue? I want this on youtube!
please look over your cellphone, check if you're not stepping into the ocean.
"Hey Borg, look at this label: "Warning: introducing your head in this fish tank filled with fluids may cause a drowning hazard". Are the humans this stupid?"
"LOL, Xorg look at this cup: "Caution: Hot beverages are hot". And they called themselves sentient? Leave the human, take the dolphin and lets get out of here!"
-Expedition Report-
Sector Alpha Delta 1.
3rd planet of Solar System #AD1
Sentient life: none
Should have reversed over her accidentally like... "Oh sorry didn't see her - she was laying underneath my car when I did it".
.
Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.
why is it that every time we turn around an American finds a new way to show us how clueless they are?
also has no warnings against sticking it up your nose, yet WHY didn't she attempt this, eh?
Throw this one out of court, under the heading of "Hello Moron???" Time to wake the f**k up & think a little bit here, or at least take some responsibility for your own actions...
This is truly unbelievable.
.
QED - she is an idiot.
.
Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.
I think Google should randomly offer directions that lead off a tall bridge. The more stupid people we get rid of, the better.
Whether that's insightful or funny is up for debate.
did the woman crossed the road? Because Google told her so.
Dumb cunt ..move along..
Let's just say she probably wasn't going to cure cancer.
Run her over properly, next time, thank you. I feel sorry for the car driver who got sucked into this mess. I'd try to prove the opposite; like others mentioned before, this sounds like trolling for damages.
MMO Vampire Role Playing
to look both ways...
Somebody used Google maps to find the shortest way. Google didn't warn about highway. Then the somebody, after spending quite some time walking, discovers, that there is no safe way actually.
Now, ignoring what happened after that (being struck by a car) is there anything to sue for, like "you provided me with incorrect info and I had to waste X minutes of my life"?
(IMHO) A safe place for a pedestrian to walk is the responsibility of the person and the local government, except in a war-zone where everything and everyone is a little crazy.
If it had been a local street, marked crosswalk area, or parking lot, then I would consider the driver 100% at fault.
Google providing a road map with directions from A2B, like any reasonably safe reference/tool, the user must be reasonable and personally responsible in practical application. Google providing a road map with directions will make no decision for the individual, when the individual takes a safer, legally required detour... that is the reasonable individual decision.
No one can protect themselves from their own mistakes without insurance. She needs to get walking insurance, and I hope she does not have a drivers license.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
She is retarded, She broke the law crossing highway in inappropriate place. She should be fined for jaywalking!
What strikes me is that by naming Google as a defendant, she's making the case of the driver (the defendant against whom she may have a legitimate claim). By suing Google, she says, in court documents, "the highway was dangerous enough so that a pedestrian shouldn't have been there." Now the driver just has to point to her own court filings which claim that there wasn't a safe place for a pedestrian to walk along that highway.
They do get snow in winter in Utah. This would make her actions even worse than people have mentioned thus far. There would be no shoulder to walk on because of snowplows piling up the snow on the roadside. Yet she still decided to walk there, likely in the traffic lane. This is her own stupidity at work.
As for common sense, at least my brain tells me to sue the driver of the car that hit her. Why sue Google? (Then again, I do use my brain from time to time...) Oh yes, that's right. DEEP POCKETS. Let's see if she can strike it rich (and her laywer, too!), despite this all being her own fault.
Bite my shiny metal ass!
The coffee spillers, the penis manglers and other similar litigants sigh relief now: a bigger fish stepped up.
But seriously, the problem is that these lawsuits sometimes work:
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/the_stella_awards_for_the_most_absurd_lawsuits/
That explains everything.
She should be awarded the $100,000 and then declared mentally incompetant and not responsible for her actions. She should be fitted with footy pajamas and a bib, all meals to be pureed and she should not be left unattended. She should become a ward of the state unless there is family willing to assume responsibility for her well being. She should be institutionalized for a period of not less than 2 years for observation and treatment with the aim of returning her to a fully functional state.
This is the only way to ‘entice’ adults to take responsibility for their own actions and to not file these kinds of frivolous lawsuits. This is really embarrasing for the plaintiff, for the court system and for the country as a whole.
Bottom Line: If this woman asserts that she cannot be held responsible for her actions, then remove her from responsibility for ANY of her actions. And in so doing, you MUST remove her authority/ability to make and decisions that could further injure her. This would be a kind and just resolution in this case, whether she is actually incompetant or simply greedy and irresponsible. This verdict would work in either situation.
Ididn'tdoitnobodysawmedoityoucan'tproveanything!
More like they need to add a:
"You will have to apply common sense" boiler plate.
Actually in the US, if I'm not mistaken(IANAL) there is something like a generally acccepted application of common sense clause which would render her suit null and void from the get go.
Someone is a legitimate contender for the failed attempt at gaining the top Darwin Award honors this year.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Maybe the driver can sue McDonald's for the hot coffee that spilled in his lap, which cause him to drive onto the shoulder, hitting the woman that shouldn't have been there in the first place.
In this CBS News link, it is reported that Rosenberg--like almost everyone else in Park City--is actually fron Los Angeles. This is also covered in the complaint filing. CBS news writes that she was walking down the middle of the road when she was hit. This is a VERY busy multi-lane road, with a lot of SUVs full of Californians rushing to Deer Valley driving well over the posted speed limit. Does anyone else find it ironic that the person filing a lawsuit under what is basically the Nuermberg Defense is Jewish? Or at least has a Jewish name....
^^^Jew!!
I use Google maps a lot for driving directions and I find it so unreliable. I had quite a few rude surprises when I reach the place and find that the expected business is not to be found anywhere around. And it is notoriously bad with spellings, missing a space in the street name could take me to an entirely different place. I would definitely recommend a proper GPS device over Google maps
Stupid is as stupid does!
<blockquote> Should google have to write warnings for all dangers? WARNING: You are about to cross the road. Our records show that this intersection has a crosswalk. Please wiat until the red hand turns into a white funny-looking guy before proceeding. Be sure to check both ways for traffic before stepping onto the road. Be aware that there may be other pedestrians crossing the road. Be sure not to collide with them. Caution! Be aware that there may be open manholes! DO NOT step on a manhole that has it's cover removed. For a full list of applicable warnings, please go to www.google.ca/pleasetiemyshoes</blockquote>
That will render as
Free Martian Whores!
I live and work near New York City. This is a prosperous (well, generally) area, thoroughly developed. (1) I work about a mile from lots of shopping and eating places, easy flat ground. Walking there means taking one's life in one's hands, because there is not even a paved shoulder for some of the distance, let alone a sidewalk. (2) The high school is on a side street with no pedestrian access, off a main road with no pedestrian access and busy office traffic, so kids have to be driven or bussed within a town that's barely two miles across. (3) In my home town area, one could be required to go miles out of one's way to cross a river to one side or a highway to the other by foot or bicycle because the area bridges either have no walkways, or have difficult access.
I am an avid cyclist, and would have no problem bicycling the distance to work, except at some point I would have to go on a busy highway among the cars and trucks. This suburban area was almost deliberately set up to *prevent* access without a car. I've often thought this is a component of the general obesity problem, too - maybe at one time kids still walked to school on the road, before the traffic became unsafe, and now nobody walks further than from the door to the car and the car to the door.
Fucking idiot.
I wish she would have been killed in the accident! At least this way she wouldn’t be able to sue. Idiots like her are a burden on society because they slow down progress with ridiculous lawsuits.
Is there any evidence she actually followed the google route as claimed, or is it just as plausible that she walked along a busy road, was involved in an avoidable accident, and found that google suggests a route past that spot after the fact?
The fortune file a the bottom of this page is:
Make it idiot-proof, and someone will breed a better idiot. -- Oliver Elphick
The real fault here lies with the city which didn't build sidewalks along this road. There should never be unsafe roads like this anywhere - all roads should be safe for pedestrians.
If I were them, I'd offer her $200,00.00 to settle out of court with a stipulation that she has to go on public record as being a moron.
Shut up brain or I'll stab you with a Q-Tip. - Homer Simpson
Did anyone check to see if this is the same woman who sued McD's for spilling coffee on herself?
Sounds to me like another one of those "spill hot coffee on yourself on purpose and make it look like an accident so I can sue" type of deals.