this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
162 points (93.1% liked)

World News

32282 readers
801 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Tech company faces negligence lawsuit after Philip Paxson died from driving off a North Carolina bridge destroyed years ago

Discuss!

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] yyyesss@lemmy.world 129 points 1 year ago (11 children)

neither the destroyed bridge nor the road leading to it had any barriers or warning signs to alert drivers of the hazard.

Well it seems clear who is actually to blame here.

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Seems like most of the blame goes there but

a bridge that had collapsed nearly a decade earlier.

Lawyers for the Paxsons allege that several people have tried to flag the washed-out bridge to Google and have included email correspondence between a Hickory resident who tried to use the “suggest an edit” feature in 2020 to get the company to address the issue. Google never responded to the suggestion, allege attorneys.

It's collapsed a decade ago and they've even tried to get Google to mark it so on their maps, unsuccessfully. Google must have some responsibility to the maps and routing.

[–] ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No they don't. Christ 🤦‍♂️.

It's 100% on the local government to handle that shit. There are hundreds of sources for map data and I bet you most of them aren't up to date.

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 year ago (20 children)

Google Maps gave incorrect routing advice resulting (on their part) in a person's death. It was a decade out of date, it had been brought to their attention and they did nothing. They still used that data in their routing. Obviously they have some sort of responsibility here imo.

There are hundreds of sources for map data and I bet you most of them aren't up to date.

Idk why you think I'd think differently if it was some other company, routing provider etc. If it was a municipal roadside map that showed that you're free to drive off that bridge then it would be the same. Or even a private roadside tourism map.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

resulting (on their part) in a person’s death.

Nope.

If the bridge had collapsed a few hours ago. No one would know. Due to this being a real risk. Just like anyone reading an older paper map. The driver of any car is entirely responsible for looking where they are going. Not some 3rd party navigation source.

Evidence that google is crap. In no way shape or form makes them legally responsible for your visual attention while driving. You are.

And google has faced these cases in a number of nations. Through out the erly addoption of GPS navigation in the 2000s. We saw many cases of folks driving into lakes and rivers. Because they were stupid enouth to trust the GPS system. Rather then use the minimal common sense of watching where they are driving.

Google map quest and all others never faced and requirement to take responsibility for drivers inability to drive.

After a decade. The local authority bears responsibility for failing to signpost. Or hell fix th fucking bridge. But even then nope if your driving, how long its been down. In no way relieves you of the standard job. Of watching where the hell you are going. Just means the local auth need to lose there jobs/ 10 years ago.

Guess what. Old folks crossing the road and falling over. Can happen with little notice. But if you come around a corner. And are not paying attention to the road. The fact that a little old lady fell and knocked herself out. Guess who is legally responsible for failing to drive safly when you crush the poor ladies head.

As someone with mobility and vision issues. Who is at high risk of losing my balance when travelling. It really fucks me off how many drivers fail to realise. They are responsible for driving a multi ton potential killing machine. And share the environment with the whole of society.

As soon as they abdicate that responsibility. Thay are basically saying people like me must remain locked in our houses.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] morry040@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (4 children)

You're expectations of Google would be like demanding that the map company who printed maps must provide a free, updated map every time that the roads change. Life doesn't work that way - sometimes people need to take responsibility for their own stupidity.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Hogger85b@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If I buy a map I don't just drive down the road not looking out the window. The bridge could have washed out that night I would never expect a map to cover that a map is for planning a route...I would be pissed off that it had led me down a dead end and I had to stop and turn around so I might ask for money back on the map but the death and driving off a road is not on the map

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] morry040@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Please refer to the Google Maps Terms of Service: https://www.google.com/help/terms_maps/
By using the service, every user agrees to these terms.

Section 3:
Actual Conditions; Assumption of Risk. When you use Google Maps/Google Earth's map data, traffic, directions, and other content, you may find that actual conditions differ from the map results and content, so exercise your independent judgment and use Google Maps/Google Earth at your own risk. You’re responsible at all times for your conduct and its consequences.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Ridiculous. If you blindly drive over a bridge that isn't there because a map says so, you're an idiot. Congratulations for the Darwin Award.

[–] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Did you read the article?

neither the destroyed bridge nor the road leading to it had any barriers or warning signs to alert drivers of the hazard.

It was also raining and at night, so he likely had no way to know the bridge was gone until it would have been too late to stop.

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

Doesn’t sound like google’s fault, does it?

The article even mentions that other entities are sued but oh that sweet headline.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yeah, suing google makes as much sense as suing the car maker for not making the car fly.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

So sue the county or who ever is in charge of erecting the barriers. Still not the map's fault.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Eufalconimorph@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you can't stop within the range of visibility, you're driving faster than road conditions allow. That part is on the driver. The lack of barriers or warnings is on the municipality.

I always like to point this out.

In every single driver's manual, it states having a 4 second window of visibility, minimum. On rainy days/fog/bad weather, more if possible.

That buffer is to help avoid unknown surprises.

[–] Hogger85b@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes so this is the on the authority that owns the road if people have been telling Google about it surely the municipal or state or whoever maintains the road was informed and should have made effort to block it off or mark the road as private or whatever. If it is a private road you are still liable if it appears to be access to your property (say for delivery drivers to your mailbox)

[–] reflex@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you blindly drive over a bridge that isn’t there because a map says so, you’re an idiot.

He was thinking fourth-dimensionally.

[–] nooneescapesthelaw@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 year ago

I'm not going to talk about this from a legal standpoint because I'm not a qualified lawyer, nor do I know enough about the law.

This philip guy, as unfortunate as his death is, is not google's fault. As the driver of the car he is the highest authority and should make decisions after weighing the information. I understand that it was a dark and rainy night, however he was overriding his sight distance, which is something you are taught not to do in drivers ed.

Although his death was preventable, the blame rests on philip first of all, then the property management companies (which the family is suing), and to a much much lesser extent on google.

Would he have taken this route if not for maps? Unlikely. Does this mean that google maps deserves the blame? No.

[–] DaCrazyJamez@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago

As unhappy as I am with google these days, this one isn't on them - atleast not to any point of legal liability.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Lawyers for the Paxsons allege that several people have tried to flag the washed-out bridge to Google and have included email correspondence between a Hickory resident who tried to use the “suggest an edit” feature in 2020 to get the company to address the issue.

If Google were notified of this, and failed to act in a timely manner, they should face consequences. Obviously they're not the only people who dropped the ball, but they definitely failed this person.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's interesting but I don't think Google has a legal obligation to update all the roads in the world in a timely manner. Maybe if you could prove that they promote Google Maps as a '100% accurate, always up to date mapping solution' you could argue false advertising but I'm pretty sure they don't claim that. I'm pretty sure that instead they tell users not to trust the indications blindly and to always pay attention to the road.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not an obligation to proactively update the map, but if someone notifies them about a closure or other safety issue, in my view they have a duty of care to act.

[–] lustrum@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Absolutely. Don't know why Google is being absolved here. Yeah they're not the sole reason the car drove off the bridge but they are a contributing factor and have a duty of care.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)

When I think of the situations that occur in everyday traffic and how people behave there, completely without google being involved, I am absolutely not surprised at the level of carelessness that radiates from such events. Though it could also be my lower trust in services like google maps because I have a deeper knowledge of the technology behind it than most people. There may be people who think of google maps as some kind of authority that has proven to not be wrong at any time...

If google had enough information and time to correct such map errors and did not out of neglect, they may still be held accountable. And I think that this is a good thing.

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Safety regulations are written in blood, warning labels are written by morons (usually)

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

We had this years ago...

https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/gps-tracking-disaster-japanese-tourists-drive-straight-into-the-pacific

We do so much for stupid people that some times it feels like if we do any more, we'll lose our freedom and quality of life. There's always going to be outliers and we should just be impressed they made it as far as they did. We can't cater to them for everything.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How are you going to lose freedom or quality of life if Google is forced to maintain its services and provide you with better information?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Paxson, who was 47 and from Hickory, North Carolina (about 60 miles north-west of Charlotte), was returning home from his daughter’s ninth birthday before the accident, his mother-in-law wrote in a post on Facebook.

In addition to Google, the Paxson family’s lawsuit names a number of private property management companies who were responsible for the land where the crash happened and for surrounding plots, according to the Associated Press.

Lawyers for the Paxsons allege that several people have tried to flag the washed-out bridge to Google and have included email correspondence between a Hickory resident who tried to use the “suggest an edit” feature in 2020 to get the company to address the issue.

In 2020, an 18-year-old Russian motorist froze to death after he and a friend were stranded in a vehicle for a week after following a Google Maps route through Serbia’s “road of bones”.

In 2019, a truck driver in Jakarta, Indonesia, drove off a cliff after following a Google Maps route that was only meant for motorcycles, the Straits Times reported.

In 2015, 51-year-old Zohra Hussain died in a fiery car accident in Indiana after her husband, who was following his Nissan Sentra’s built-in GPS, drove off an unmarked toll road that led to a demolished bridge.


The original article contains 481 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 56%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] marius851000@lemmy.mariusdavid.fr 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel like it might be interested to add this. Said "bridge" on OpenStreetMap https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/35.78168/-81.28259

There’s a few photos from this article. It’s a dirt road, somewhere where you should (and he probably did) drive slowly.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

Also look at this image of the former bridge from the lawsuit: https://i.imgur.com/CuKVarO.jpg

Most of fault lies with the road/land owner for not properly blocking of that bridge and for not maintaining it. Nearby residents have also tried to get them to block/repair the bridge properly, but they haven't.

And they are luckily also getting sued in the lawsuit.

Googles should take some blame for not updating their maps for 9 years despite multiple notices from users that the bridge has collapsed.

Article + the full lawsuit: https://lawandcrime.com/lawsuit/washed-out-bridge-to-nowhere-on-google-maps-route-led-to-drivers-death-lawsuit/

Btw if you look at street view and satellite images, it clearly isn't a dirt road.

load more comments
view more: next ›