Apple Sued for Choosing Not to 'Lock-Out' iPhones Behind the Wheel to Prevent Texting and Driving

[teezy]

California resident Julio Ceja is seeking a class action lawsuit against Apple, accusing the company of placing profit before consumer safety by choosing not to implement a lock-out mechanism that would disable an iPhone's functionality when being used behind the wheel by an engaged driver.

Ceja demands that Apple halt the sale of all iPhones in California until a lock-out mechanism is implemented. He also demands that Apple release a software update that adds a lock-out mechanism to all iPhones already in the hands of consumers. He is not seeking further damages beyond legal fees and costs.

The complaint, filed with the Los Angeles Superior Court on Tuesday, asserts that Apple's willful decision not to implement a lock-out mechanism on iPhones, chiefly to prevent texting and driving, constitutes "unfair business acts and practices" under California's Unfair Competition Law. A jury trial has been demanded.

Ceja asserts that Apple's "enormous market share" means that it is the "largest contributor" to texting and driving, while noting it is "downright shocking" that smartphone companies like Apple "do nothing to help shield the public at large from the dangers associated with the use of their phones."

"If texting and driving is a vessel of trouble, Apple is the captain of the ship," the complaint alleges.

The complaint claims that Apple recognized the dangers of texting and driving, and the important role it should play in stopping it, in its lock-out mechanism patent filed in 2008 and published in 2014.

The patent notes that "texting while driving has become a major concern of parents, law enforcement, and the general public," and further claims that "texting while driving has become so widespread it is doubtful that law enforcement will have any significant effect on stopping the practice."

The patent describes one method where a motion analyzer would detect whether a handheld device is in motion beyond a certain speed. A scenery analyzer would be able to determine whether the holder of the handheld device is located within a safe operating area of a vehicle. Otherwise, the device could be disabled.

In other embodiments, a vehicle or car key could transmit a signal that disables functionality of the handheld device while it is being operated. To a lesser degree, a vehicle could also transmit a signal that merely sends the device a notification stating that functionality should be disabled.

In November, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommended smartphone makers develop a "Driver Mode", a simplified interface that would prevent access to non-driving-related tasks such as text messaging, social media, and viewing images and video unrelated to driving.

The complaint comes less than one month after a Texas family sued Apple for failing to enable said lock-out mechanisms to prevent distracted driving. On Christmas Eve in 2014, the family's vehicle was struck by a distracted driver who admitted to using FaceTime while driving. The accident caused one fatality.

Apple has faced other similar lawsuits in the past. In response to a Texas lawsuit filed in 2015, Apple indicated the responsibility is on the driver to avoid distractions in a statement provided to The New York Times:Ceja himself was rear ended by a driver who was texting behind the wheel. Whether this latest complaint has merit will be up to the court to decide. Apple has yet to publicly comment on the matter.

Article Link: Apple Sued for Choosing Not to 'Lock-Out' iPhones Behind the Wheel to Prevent Texting and Driving

Yeah this is silly. The decent in me wants to say that I'm sure the guy means well by this, but... the petty in me wants to know why he's only coming for Apple? There are other manufacturers of smart/dumbphones in the world that drivers are loyal to!
This is guy, at a binary level, is absolutely tripping though, for sure.

 

[ou812]

Ceja is a waste of skin, the lawyers are money grabbing whores and the people who bring about these lawsuits are uneducated lazy f-tards. These are the type of people who will collapse the US and it's great American companies. Darwin awards exist due to the likes of Ceja. It's sad when some get's killed by a distracted driver, but given the amount of drivers in the US that text (Canada is no better), it's most likely the one who got killed by the distracted driver was probably texting just a few seconds prior themselves. Just put your phone down while driving, simple. Should companies like Apple also supply you a helmet as well? Your peanut sized brains! There are 2 types of people in the world, educated/talented people who have been using Apple Products for many years, the 2nd type, a majority of mindless idiots who jumped onto Apple to buy it's iPods and iPhones.

 

[Dormammu]

Hard to believe people can be so stupid.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Stupid. Just stupid. If this was a 'feature', passengers couldn't use their devices.

And that's exactly the problem. They would need to institute some kind of car link whereby the car knows who is driving it and locks out only their cell phone controls at speed, not everyone's. But the legal argument in general is invalid. It's like saying a gun maker is responsible if someone uses a gun in a crime. You can use a candlestick holder in a crime (see board game CLUE). It's the user's responsibility to use a product within the law, not the company that makes the product. Case dismissed!

 

[Benny L]

Pelosi, boxer , waters ceja - see the common cali theme.
Hope they charge ceja for frivolous lawsuit and ALL Court costs

 

[TsMkLg068426]

Idiots on the road blaming others for being a idiot driver, when will people start using the other half of their brain instead of someone else doing that for them. You need to make a phone call or text pull over or just ignore it the caller can live without getting any replies from you for a day.

 

[BeforeTheMeds]

That lawsuit happened to be a bad cliche. The woman in question was seeking reimbursement for medical expenses, after McDonalds served coffee hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns. Most people expect hot coffee to hurt. They don't expect to receive burns that require skin grafts.

It's weird that they didn't make changes earlier, considering that others had incurred injuries. A couple decades later, people still inaccurately portray that lawsuit.

I have seen the picture and I do not believe it. I have spilled boiling water on my hand and it did not give me anything like that. I have seen someone hit with steam and while it burned him it was not as bad. When in the USN I was on an old ship before overhaul the showers would put out straight steam sometimes. Several got burned, nothing like that. I got burned on my back. Do you really think the water was boiling when they gave it to her? Steam? Do you think non boiling coffee could cause a need for skin grafts? It was a scam. I believe she burned herself another way.
[doublepost=1484792406][/doublepost]

The woman put the HOT COFFEE in between her LEGS and drove away from the restaurant! She sued for a MILLION DOLLARS!

That too. I don't believe coffee below boiling point can cause that type of burns so I think she got it another way, but what's next? Banning sizzling fajitas? Sizzling steaks? You don't put them between your legs either.

How many other people had to have skin grafts? How many mouths, throat's etc? It would surely fry that tender area? Not buying it.

 

[geoff5093]

And that's exactly the problem. They would need to institute some kind of car link whereby the car knows who is driving it and locks out only their cell phone controls at speed, not everyone's. But the legal argument in general is invalid. It's like saying a gun maker is responsible if someone uses a gun in a crime. You can use a candlestick holder in a crime (see board game CLUE). It's the user's responsibility to use a product within the law, not the company that makes the product. Case dismissed!

Even then, many times a driver may have his phone paired to his car but asks his passenger to put in a destination on his phone so the directions come out over the car stereo.

 

[Mlrollin91]

The woman put the HOT COFFEE in between her LEGS and drove away from the restaurant! She sued for a MILLION DOLLARS!

Do you know anything about the case? She wasn't asking for payment. She only wanted her medical expenses covered and McDonalds said "screw you". She had 3rd degree burns beyond belief. Her body was permanently destroyed because of the negligence. The jury awarded her the money because of her pain. She never sued for it. She only sued for $160,000 which was the exact cost of the medical bills because of the skin graph.
[doublepost=1484794802][/doublepost]

I have seen the picture and I do not believe it. I have spilled boiling water on my hand and it did not give me anything like that. I have seen someone hit with steam and while it burned him it was not as bad. When in the USN I was on an old ship before overhaul the showers would put out straight steam sometimes. Several got burned, nothing like that. I got burned on my back. Do you really think the water was boiling when they gave it to her? Steam? Do you think non boiling coffee could cause a need for skin grafts? It was a scam. I believe she burned herself another way.
[doublepost=1484792406][/doublepost]

That too. I don't believe coffee below boiling point can cause that type of burns so I think she got it another way, but what's next? Banning sizzling fajitas? Sizzling steaks? You don't put them between your legs either.

How many other people had to have skin grafts? How many mouths, throat's etc? It would surely fry that tender area? Not buying it.

I'm sorry but you are so incredibly wrong. Do your homework before you post. The pictures are 100% real and it's a case used in law school to teach gross negligence and torts. It's taught during the first year because it's so important.

McDonalds served the coffee well over the temperature they should have. They kept the coffee at 180-190 degrees, 30 degrees over the serving temperature. Because she spilt the coffee on her clothes, it seeped in causing 3rd degree burn. At 190 degrees, 3rd degree burn can happen in under 5 seconds. Spilling boiling water on your hand is nothing like spilling boiling water on your clothes. She was wearing cotton sweatpants, and like a towel, it completely absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin. Wet clothes stick to your body and make it that much worse. There is no scam about it.

The coffee was at such a high temperature that Starbucks has even reduced the serving temperature of their coffee, because before they kept it at 175 degrees, and that is also too hot.

Your words sum it up exactly "I don't believe". Just because you don't believe doesn't mean its not true and a scam.

 

[cyberlocke]

I remember hearing a comedian suggest that we ban seatbelts and cover every dashboard with razor sharp knives.

And anvils for airbags. I like it!

 

[CarlJ]

The woman put the HOT COFFEE in between her LEGS and drove away from the restaurant! She sued for a MILLION DOLLARS!

Clearly you know nothing of the case other than the general meme. She wasn't the driver and the car wasn't in motion, for starters. McDonalds was serving coffee at a temperature far exceeding drinkable, capable of causing third degree burns in seconds. They were just asking for McDonalds to cover medical expenses, the jury decided to punish McDonalds for flagrant negligence and indifference. How about actually learning some facts rather than JUST SHOUTING? I mean, I know that SHOUTING IS FUN, but it doesn't actually make things true. Here's a place to start: The McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case, or maybe the Wikipedia article: Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants. If, you know, you want to actually understand the facts, rather than just YELLING MOSTLY UNTRUE THINGS.
[doublepost=1484796940][/doublepost]

I have seen the picture and I do not believe it. ... Do you think non boiling coffee could cause a need for skin grafts? It was a scam. I believe she burned herself another way.

Ah, okay, you've seen a picture. Not read the extensive documentation of the case, just seen a picture. Clearly you understand the situation better than the ER doctors who treated her.

 

[Mlrollin91]

Clearly you know nothing of the case other than the general meme. She wasn't the driver and the car wasn't in motion, for starters. McDonalds was serving coffee at a temperature far exceeding drinkable, capable of causing third degree burns in seconds. They were just asking for McDonalds to cover medical expenses, the jury decided to punish McDonalds for flagrant negligence and indifference. How about actually learning some facts rather than JUST SHOUTING? I mean, I know that SHOUTING IS FUN, but it doesn't actually make things true. Here's a place to start: The McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case, or maybe the Wikipedia article: Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants. If, you know, you want to actually understand the facts, rather than just YELLING MOSTLY UNTRUE THINGS.
[doublepost=1484796940][/doublepost]Ah, okay, you've seen a picture. Not read the extensive documentation of the case, just seen a picture. Clearly you understand the situation better than the ER doctors who treated her.

Someone who actually knows the facts of the case. Thank you for joining!

 

[JosephAW]

They are making the same mistake as those who are suing gun manufacturers claiming their guns kill people. NO, people kill people. Likewise those who text kill people, not their phones. It's called personal responsibility.

 

[littyboy]

Looks like Ceja is trying to get out of getting a job.

 

[Tech198]

The number of people u see texting or on a phone while driving. Even i check my phone while driving. and I guess we've all gotten used to it,but Apple isn't exactly helping here..... When u "limit" something while your driving, that is not a valid reason, as u can still use the handset..

We get used to something because the company we buy phones from make us get used to by not including it...

Perhaps this is why Apple wanted to do a self driving car, because by not locking us out, gives us the freedom more to just concentrate on our smartphones and ignore everything around us.

Apple would rather trust their customers, then implement things they just cannot do....

haha..ya ok, like i'm actually gonna obey what Apple says... if u wanna text, people are gonna text

They are making the same mistake as those who are suing gun manufacturers claiming their guns kill people. NO, people kill people. Likewise those who text kill people, not their phones. It's called personal responsibility.

Since phones can't have a mind of the own (just yet), we will eliminate the actual distraction drawn to it (which makes more sense) What else are u gonna do ?

Or people just get smarter behind the wheel (yeah.. that's not gonna happen)

 

[timborama]

I agree there should be more responsibility - such as a NEW LAW that treats any phone operation while driving like a DUI. 1 year suspension and heavy fines. Without teeth people will still text and kill people because of it.

UK is working on such a law. If you cause a death via distracted driving, life in prison.

 

[thekev]

I have seen the picture and I do not believe it. I have spilled boiling water on my hand and it did not give me anything like that. I have seen someone hit with steam and while it burned him it was not as bad. When in the USN I was on an old ship before overhaul the showers would put out straight steam sometimes. Several got burned, nothing like that. I got burned on my back. Do you really think the water was boiling when they gave it to her? Steam? Do you think non boiling coffee could cause a need for skin grafts? It was a scam. I believe she burned herself another way.
[doublepost=1484792406][/doublepost]

That too. I don't believe coffee below boiling point can cause that type of burns so I think she got it another way, but what's next? Banning sizzling fajitas? Sizzling steaks? You don't put them between your legs either.

How many other people had to have skin grafts? How many mouths, throat's etc? It would surely fry that tender area? Not buying it.

I'm not going to argue with hand waving or other nonsense. Good day sir.

 

[carrrrrlos]

Plaque sues toothbrush.

 

[Douglas B]

"If texting and driving is a vessel of trouble, *the driver* is the captain of the ship," the complaint alleges.

There, fixed it for you.

 

[raghu8912]

I call this dumb proofing the phone, if people are dumb nobody can do anything.
People who win these cases should be able to recover the cost of litigation from the loosing side.
[doublepost=1484804864][/doublepost]

Well then add McDonalds Wendy's , Jack-in-the-Box and all of the fast food places plus all of the supermarkets because eating while driving can be just as distracting and dangerous.

Food box/wraps that can't be opened while driving ?
[doublepost=1484805327][/doublepost]

The highway fatality rate has actually INCREASED because of cell phones.

The people against this idea have literally never seen Americans drive.

You see all sorts of stories of people crashing and killing multiple other people because of texting and driving.

It is the person's fault, not the phone's fault, what next food wraps/boxes that don't open when driving ? so that people don't eat while they drive ? Coke bottles that don't open while driving ? Coffee mugs that don't open while driving ? we don't want Govt/Corporation controlling what we do, we have bigger brains that phones we should be responsible. If some one is driving too fast & involved in a crash are we going to sue car manufacturer for not locking the speed ? Do we want a car manufacturer to decide how fast we drive ?
[doublepost=1484805616][/doublepost]

Eating and driving is nothing. Have you ever tried driving with children in the car?

No children in car while driving, problem solved.

 

[pankajdoharey]

What nonsense!! There are at least 4 ways, I could think off that this case can be argued in courts:

1. Drunken driving is even more dangerous. Thus all cars should be installed with alcohol breath analyser. And all car sales should be stopped immediately till an analyser is installed in every car. All car manufacturers are putting car sales before consumer safety. The car should only start once the car engine has analysed your breath and only then would the keyhole unlocks and starts the engine.
2. All car manufacturers are putting the lives of consumers in danger and should lock the phones independent of brand or platform and should only start the car when the phone is securely attached, any attempt to do otherwise should seize the engine, and fill the engine with water instead of gas.
3. All cars should have self-driven computers installed. All car manufacturers are putting the lives of consumers at risk for over a 100 yrs because they value car sales above consumer safety. All car sales should be stopped immediately till a time self-driven cars are invented and built or self-driving computers are installed in every car.
4. The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is putting the lives of all consumers at risk by handing out licenses to drive cars by human drivers, who are utterly incompetent and commit mistakes from time to time. Humans are inefficient organisms to be driving cars, thus all car manufacturing should be stopped and DMV and Car manufacturers should be asked to pay a combined public fine, every yr until the time when they invent self-driving cars.

All i mean to say is that this guy eats lots of mushrooms of the wrong kind to sharpen his intellect!!

 

[wikd1]

This is likely just a shakedown. The evidence is in the posting: "He is not seeking further damages beyond legal fees and costs."

Ambulance chasers have simply put this dude forward as a shill. It's well known that these kinds of law-firms actually get investors to bank roll their cases in exchange for potential significant returns should the case prevail, and damages awarded — even if everyone believes there's little merit. Sometimes the defendant just settles to avoid the hassle and expense of going to court.

It's a shocking misuse of the legal system, and a distortion of actual justice.

 

[MaxinMusicCity]

What a ****ing idiot

California seems to have more than it's share of those : )

 

[hiddenmarkov]

That too. I don't believe coffee below boiling point can cause that type of burns so I think she got it another way, but what's next? Banning sizzling fajitas? Sizzling steaks? You don't put them between your legs either.

How many other people had to have skin grafts? How many mouths, throat's etc? It would surely fry that tender area? Not buying it.

the backstory to that was the link to McD's internal policy to make the coffee extra hot to have it take longer to cool. Tin foilers say this was to not have McD's give out as much free refills for it. this what I was told. And as much as I like tin foil...I don't have this hat.

Maybe its because I am a guy. Even mildly hot I tend to not put stuff near that area. Hell even cold. Some ass hat drives bad, quick driving correction and that stuff is all over the area. Or you know its just there...area tends to be, you know, sensitive. Hell lets make it tap water temps....same situation and it looks like someone couldn't control their bladder comments to start...now.

that and Cupholders...feature built into most cars and if not...lots of 3rd party to stick one in. Again maybe my thing...I drove cars with a stick for years. Legs working clutch/gas/brake for years so lap not even considered. Still don't even on automatics now.

this litigation....person knows they aren't making jack off the person who hit them, so going for someone who can pay better. lawyer they dredged up from the bottom a barrel...banking on settlement most likely to have this drop off the presses and no trial.

This stuff is crap really. Me when hit...I am a very fair man. Bills associated with the accident...that's what insurance is for. Your insurance talks to my insurance..get that covered. What's supposed to happen between decent and reasonable people. Just cover the bills from this accident and move on.

 

[techwhiz]

This guy is a moron.
Patent != Perfect and working.