Lawsuit blames Apple's 'less safe' FaceTime implementation for fatal traffic accident

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 125
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    1) very sorry for the loss of this families daughter. That is heartbreaking and there are no words. I wish them hope, peace and comfort. They are in my prayers today. 

    2) she was truly a victim here. The driver of the other car was the perpetrator. 

    3) the wrongdoer is not Apple nor was it say the manufacturer of the perpetrators car - for not having accident avoidance autopilot capabilities. 

    4) Apple made its product within the confines of the law. Therefore, any user action while using the product, or any other product, has no bearing on them. They did nothing wrong. 

    5) this amounts,technically, and at risk to sounding insensitive to a grieving family, to nothing more than distracted driving. 

    The driver is is at fault for distracting themselves. It could be ANY PRODUCT. Even a 1990's GameBoy. 

    in the end, a shocker and deeply grieving family can be forgiven for making this error. But it most definitely is an error and is a lawsuit that should and likely will be thrown out as frivolous very shortly. 
    People do strange things while grieving, but I can't think of a word to describe the kind of lawyer scum who would approach parents at a time like this and pursuade them to deepen their grief by attempting to blackmail a corporation with frivolous lawsuit. 
    radarthekatdysamoriaapple jockeyadamc
  • Reply 42 of 125
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    williamh said:
    jsmythe00 said:
    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    I like this idea. And do away with helmet laws too
    Wearing a proper crash helmet saved my life more than once. It is risky enough already riding a bike. Stupid car drivers are everywhere. They don't care as they are nice and safely locked up inside their tin cans. I now wear body armour (kevlar) on my shoulders, elbows and knees when riding.
    I'm still here aged 60+ and have been riding bikes since Man landed on the moon. If I hadn't been wearing a helmet back on '72 I'd be long dead.
    No reason to repeal helmet laws in my opinion.
    You should wear a helmet because it can save your life. (Saved mine too.).  That doesn't mean there should be a law. 
    Horrible idea. Why don't we scrap all safety laws and make them the sole responsibility of the individual? I hate safety belts. Yes they're a good idea, but why do we need a law? And air bags ... expensive, they should be optional? Turn signals are a good idea, but heck, they cost extra, and my arm sticking out the window works just as well? Yeah, you're onto a really bad idea there ...
    edited December 2016 dysamoriaapple jockeytzm41
  • Reply 43 of 125
    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    Actually no we need laws. Without clearly defined things you can and cannot do, there's nothing to take responsibility for. 
    apple jockeytzm41tallest skil
  • Reply 44 of 125
    No one's getting paid in this except the lawyers. The family, despite their grief, should be aware that there is absolutely no merit to their case whatsoever. Their lawyer knows it and he knows that there is no way on earth to win. The low-life SOB is taking advantage of a grieving family and will make thousands from legal fees.

    What is needed is the development of a near-field jammer mounted on a steering wheel that uses a pair of intersecting fields that jams everything within three feet, and that is enabled whenever the vehicle is in gear. States would then pass laws requiring this device to be installed on all vehicles and suddenly we find all the near-misses and fender-benders due to driver phone use to be history. (Just a couple of days ago a woman arguing on a phone didn't see me enter the lane next to her and she almost hit me. Last week another woman rounded a corner while talking on the phone and nearly hit me when I was in an outside lane. I've seen both genders doing this. We all have.

    Don't blame Apple or Samsung or whoever, blame people for being idiots and blame the government for not mandating the development of this technology. They could insist on a 2-3 year deadline and overnight we would be safer.
  • Reply 45 of 125
    Let the Texas Christian implementation of natural selection have its course - and the bereaved can murder the dolt who drove into their car.
    apple jockeytallest skil
  • Reply 46 of 125
    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    Found the Libertarian.
    Is that what the kids are calling people with a usable brain these days?
    radarthekatsingularitytallest skil
  • Reply 47 of 125

    "I'll never get all the money I want out of a 20-year-old. I think I'll sue someone with big pockets!"
    Got it in one.

    Is there a prize today?
  • Reply 48 of 125

    Soli said:
    I'm sorry for their loss, but these parents are pieces of shit for using their son's death to try to fleece a company because of its deep pockets and betting on the fear of bad press despite knowing its not responsible for the poor choices of a 20yo driver.
    How much would you like to bet that some lawyer(s) went to the parents first to get them to jump on the case?
  • Reply 49 of 125
    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Why? That's disgraceful. Its called personal responsibility.
    dysamoriatallest skil
  • Reply 50 of 125

    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    Nah the libtards need their daddy government to run their lives...they are too busy blogging from their mother's basement to get a job, let alone exhibit personal responsibility.
    haartallest skil
  • Reply 51 of 125
    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    You're hilarious. People don't give a crap about the laws as they stand, but with a law the family who gets totaled by those a-holes have a course of action beyond, ``We're sorry, this prick didn't use common sense, but we can't do anything to compensate your family for their lack of self-reliance: a fantasy of the Right.''
    So you're arguing that personal responsibility is irrelevant; just go for the nearest thing with deep pockets and mine for cash?

    Kewl.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 52 of 125
    paxman said:
    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or sue the car manufacturers for manufacturing cars that travel at unsafe speeds? The amount of deaths caused by reckless driving is directly linked to the the speed the vehicles can travel at. Hit a child at 35 mph there is an 80% chance of death, at 30mph there is an 80% chance of survival.

    In short - its complicated. 

    But one day in the not too distant future people will tell tales of the old days when people actually drove cars themselves with the resultant tens of thousands of deaths annually, not to mention the serious injuries. And how in the name of personal freedom they thought that was OK. 
    You mean we will one day do away with this automobile pathology and have really good mass-transit? :smiley: 
    apple jockeytallest skil
  • Reply 53 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    steveh said:

    Soli said:
    I'm sorry for their loss, but these parents are pieces of shit for using their son's death to try to fleece a company because of its deep pockets and betting on the fear of bad press despite knowing its not responsible for the poor choices of a 20yo driver.
    How much would you like to bet that some lawyer(s) went to the parents first to get them to jump on the case?
    It's possible, but they still have to agree to it. This isn't like setting up a class action and then hoping people jump on board. Lawyers that try to bend the law for a profit instead of using their education to make a community function more effectively are pieces of shit, too. Not all lawyers do this—perhaps not even most, and billion dollar corporations aren't immune to these pieces of shit either.
  • Reply 54 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member


    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    Nah the libtards need their daddy government to run their lives...they are too busy blogging from their mother's basement to get a job, let alone exhibit personal responsibility
    Do you think that states should require a minimum level of coverage for auto insurance?
  • Reply 55 of 125
    This being Texas Apple will probably lose and also be found to be infringing of some abstract patent that would enable the safety feature by an East Texas court and slapped with an injunction preventing them from implementing it. 
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 56 of 125
    mac_128 said:
    Horrible idea. Why don't we scrap all safety laws and make them the sole responsibility of the individual? I hate safety belts. Yes they're a good idea, but why do we need a law? And air bags ... expensive, they should be optional? Turn signals are a good idea, but heck, they cost extra, and my arm sticking out the window works just as well? Yeah, you're onto a really bad idea there ...
    I started wearing safety belts long before their use was mandated. Simple risk management. I started wearing a helmet when riding bike/motorcycle before their use was mandated in my state. Simple risk management.

    Air bags are a mixed blessing; they can cause serious injury, particularly to children, in some cases. I suspect that if some manufacturers had offered them without government mandate, we might have seen whether or not they would have been a selling point, just as some other safety features have proven to be.

    Turn signals appeared on cars before they were required by law ... I'm still disappointed that my old Morris Minor's trafficators were disabled before I got the machine years ago.

    I think that government intervention as a first resort for any given issue is more than a little suboptimal. It's not like there are no other options for solutions to problems.
  • Reply 57 of 125
    Notsofast said:
    jkichline said:

    dewme said:
    Speaking of patents, this lawsuit is patently ridiculous. It's no different than suing a gun manufacturer for not implementing a fingerprint recognition guard on a firearm involved in an accidental shooting (the technology is available), suing an automobile manufacturer for not implementing breathalyzer interlock on a vehicle involved in a drunk driving fatality (the technology is available), or suing the US Park Service for not putting a 20 foot climb proof fence with razor wire around the entire perimeter of the Grand Canyon (no technology required). It's impossible to guard against all possible forms of stupidity. As we've witnessed on numerous occasions just in the past year, there is no upper limit on stupidity. Just when you thought you've witnessed the stupidest thing humanly possible, whammo, you are proven wrong! If anything needs a military grade stupidity filter, it's Twitter, not FaceTime.
    Personally I think Apple should buy Twitter, shut them down, and give the money back to the shareholders.  Boy that would be awesome and we all know why.
    How does that censorship thing work when someone is saying something you support?  We don't do it then right?   Like all this talk about fake news.  Who gets to decide?  Is MSNBC shut down because of all the fake news put out by their anchor Brian Williams?  How about CNN and Donna Brazille giving the questions out to HC, was that debate they hosted fake news then because she had the questions in advance?  You see it's easy to be upset when your candidate wins, but to call for censorship is not the answer because you won't like it when it happens to you or something you support, but it will be too late then.
    Yeah, it's a risky game to only scream about fake news when it's stuff that doesn't flatter your interests, and then to be okay with it (and help spread it) when it's an issue that does flatter your interests. https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of-julian-assanges-interview-went-viral-and-was-completely-false/
  • Reply 58 of 125
    There are problems with this, specifically how does Apple prevent a driver while not prohibiting someone who's a passenger in the car, or riding a bus?
  • Reply 59 of 125


    MalyOpa said:
    Maybe someone should sue state of Texas of not implementing a law which prohibit people from using phones while driving
    Or maybe personal responsibility can be a thing still, and we don't need The Almighty Government to tell everyone what to do. 
    Nah the libtards need their daddy government to run their lives...they are too busy blogging from their mother's basement to get a job, let alone exhibit personal responsibility.
    When you use "libtard" in a sentence, how do you know that your readers aren't reading it as a reference to libertarians?
    apple jockeygatorguy
  • Reply 60 of 125
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,541moderator
    tyancy said:
    No one's getting paid in this except the lawyers. The family, despite their grief, should be aware that there is absolutely no merit to their case whatsoever. Their lawyer knows it and he knows that there is no way on earth to win. The low-life SOB is taking advantage of a grieving family and will make thousands from legal fees.

    What is needed is the development of a near-field jammer mounted on a steering wheel that uses a pair of intersecting fields that jams everything within three feet, and that is enabled whenever the vehicle is in gear. States would then pass laws requiring this device to be installed on all vehicles and suddenly we find all the near-misses and fender-benders due to driver phone use to be history. (Just a couple of days ago a woman arguing on a phone didn't see me enter the lane next to her and she almost hit me. Last week another woman rounded a corner while talking on the phone and nearly hit me when I was in an outside lane. I've seen both genders doing this. We all have.

    Don't blame Apple or Samsung or whoever, blame people for being idiots and blame the government for not mandating the development of this technology. They could insist on a 2-3 year deadline and overnight we would be safer.
    How do you jam the application of make-up, reading of a newspaper, turning around to disciplinekids in the back seat, and other stupid behaviors where drivers voluntarily distract themselves from the act of controlling the vehicle?
Sign In or Register to comment.