Are these people serious?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Gav2k, Jan 3, 2017.

  1. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
  2. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #3
    nah. This will never be awarded.
    I hope that it's just a way for the parents to raise some sort of awareness on the consequences of using the phone while driving...
     
  3. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #4
    No doubt it wont amount to a pay out. How much will Apple have to pay the lawyer defending this lawsuit though? If you must sue, how about going after the one that was irresponsible.
     
  4. kobalap macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    #5
    Why? You don't have faith in a jury or a judge deciding if Apple has liability after hearing the relevant facts? If not, why do you have faith in a judge or a jury to decide whether a person is guilty of a crime that could send that person to prison or worse, to death?
     
  5. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #6
    we live in a country where suing is the only way to get anywhere.....................
     
  6. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #7
    For me the most interesting part is that Apple will be bitten in their a## by one of their BS patents......
     
  7. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #8
    Not really. A reasonable expectation is that the driver knows that a videochat - or any other tool that distracts - should not be used while driving. I don't see how Apple could be faulted for this.
     
  8. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #9
    Nah, I don't expect them to win this one.

    But either way it may make some real bad PR espcially considering Apple had the BS patent about preventing this very desaster.
     
  9. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #10
    I don't see how it could be bad PR. A driver made a very bad decision, and as a result an innocent kid died. Having a patent doesn't mean marketability or feasibility. Many cars now have automatic break systems, or at least some sort of aid to help a distracted driver. Are they at fault for not providing those features in the majority of models, especially if someone dies?
     
  10. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #11
    Even if not, Lawyers will still get paid, and there will be more encouragement to bring more frivolous law suites.


    The grief is real, but the solution is Education in schools, Public Education campaign, and even a few laws, not lawsuits.
     
  11. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #12
    After the parents will have to pay for Apple's lawyers fees this might actually bring to fewer lawsuits.

    I don't think that Education in schools is the solution in this case. I have yet to meet a single driver who doesn't know that texting while driving is dangerous. We all know it. The solution is a $500 ticket if you even touch the phone.
     
  12. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #13
    Did the article mention that it was an Apple corporate car or an Apple employee on Apples time and I miss it? Who was driving? Who was cited as the at fault party? Therein lies the answer to who was responsible.
     
  13. kobalap macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    #14
    Hmm... seems like interesting questions for authorities to explore. Wouldn't it be nice if there was an impartial group of people who could look at all the relevant facts to determine who does and does not have liability? And wouldn't it be nice if these impartial people could determine what level of liability there is based on the all of the relevant facts as opposed to some arbitrary rules written by people who know nothing about the particulars of this case?
     
  14. Gav2k thread starter macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #15
    Regardless of the persons job title the liability will be on the driver committing the act
     
  15. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #16
    So you support suing peoples/companies into bankruptcy? Of course Apple most likely already has in-house council to defend this so it doesn't really effect them too much. Now how about if it was a kitchen table programmer and the app he/she created was the last app used on the phone of the party that caused the wreck.
     
  16. Rhonindk macrumors 68020

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    Bloom County: Meadow Party
    #17
    Watched a brief talk on this and was surprised at the two predominate viewpoints.
    1. Take responsibility for your actions. You cannot expect companies to engineer in functions that cover all our bad or stupid actions.
    2. This was a documented concern at Apple. If a company recognizes a potential issue, would they engineer in controls that help prevent the issue? Should Apple have built in a lockout while driving?

    I go with number 1. Still it was an interesting take.
     
  17. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #18
    The faulty reasoning in viewpoint 2 is that it would miss the reasonable expectation test. When you're on the road, it is expected that you know the basics of driving, the laws, and the rules. That's why you have a driver license, and you have to pass two exams (written and practical). This is why you need to be of a certain age. In other words, you assume the risks. When you drive, you also assume that the person driving next to you on the road meets the reasonable expectations.
    Now, if Apple had willfully prevented the correct activity of driving, or if Apple in any way decided to damage the driver's rights on purpose, then yeah it would be at fault. In this case, the iPhone did what it is expected to do, and the car did what it is expected to do. The only part that didn't "function" properly was the driver - incidentally the entity entrusted with both the iPhone and the car - that going against every regulation, and against any reasonable expectation, decided to videochat while driving, thus hindering himself in the function of driving, a function which he willfully accepted to perform the moment he turned on the car.
     
  18. Rhonindk macrumors 68020

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    Bloom County: Meadow Party
    #19
    You just did a great argument for #1. I whole-heartedly agree.
    But... ;)
    The premise for #2 is if a company knew the risk, are they reasonably expected to "fix" it before releasing into commerce? Interesting dilemma. Makes me think back to all the safety warnings and controls we have on products....
     
  19. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #20
    It's not a risk of the product, it's a risk of the user.
    In other words, it's not like an exploding battery or something that has to do with the expected use of the object. The law itself prohibits to drive while watching a screen, so it can't be argued that it was reasonable to use Facetime while driving. It's not reasonable because it's against the law (and stupid in itself). The company does not have to put anything in the product that has to deal with the usage of another tool in combination with the object itself.
    For example, if I am drilling a hole in the wall while looking at my phone, and I injure my hand, who's to blame? Black and Decker? Apple? or the user? The user. The fact that we can implement a technology to limit this problem (for example requiring two hands to use an electric driller) doesn't mean that Black and Decker is at fault.
    Again, there's also the license particular. The driver had a license to drive and had to pass a government examination in which he agreed that he knew all the laws of the case. The phone did what the phone was supposed to do, and the car did what the car was supposed to do. All was within the laws and regulations, and there was no damage to the consumer sought by Apple or the car manufacturer. The driver decided to disobey the law, and common sense.
    The safety warnings are often stupid, but they are to clarify the expected use of a product. A microwave oven is to heat things. Microwaving a cat is "heating" something, therefore it might lie within the expected use of the product... as stupid as it might be (then we have to see how unreasonable it is).
     
  20. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #21
    Until the law starts treating being on your phone like a DUI, people are going to keep thinking they've gotten good at it. Maybe if the court costs and diversion programs start adding up to thousands of dollars and they lose their license for 6 months, then maybe people will get off their ****ing phones when they drive.

    1st offense is 6 months, 2nd is 1yr, 3rd is revocation.
     
  21. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #22
    Why do we even need new laws. I would think most states have reckless operation of a motor vehicle type laws. Which is worse putting on make-up, eating a burger, or texting? All three distract the driver.
     
  22. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #23
    Absolutely.
    Just to make it clear:

    Me.
    Texas.
    Noon.
    Summer 2015.
    In a huge parking lot.
    Empty.
    Except me.
    Parked correctly. Making a phone call.
    Alone.
    Car approaches.
    Woman on the phone drives that car.
    Car hits me.
    From the side.
    Full speed.
    My Car totaled.
    She keeps talking on the phone.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 3, 2017 ---
    Best I've seen in TX, on I-30, was a woman driving while reading a book with a cat on her shoulder.
     
  23. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #24
    What did she get cited for? I have seen the book reading on the freeway thing before.

    ETA: What do they call the interstate there? Highway, Freeway or Interstate?
     
  24. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #25
    The lady with the cat? I don't know what she got cited for, or if she got cited for anything. She was driving next to me.
     

Share This Page