Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Woman hit by car sues Google over directions

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Sun? What Sun? Reputation: 23
    firesnowball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    982
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Testeagle View Post
    "A LOS Angeles woman is suing web giant Google for giving her "unsafe" directions while travelling interstate.

    While in Park City, Utah, Lauren Rosenberg used her BlackBerry to ask Google Maps for walking directions to Prospector Avenue from Daly Street.

    The directions led her onto a busy highway where she was hit by a car.

    Now she is suing Google and the car's driver over the incident.

    Ms Rosenberg claims the driver, Patrick Hardwood, failed to keep a proper eye out for pedestrians, failed to keep control of the car and was speeding.

    But, she claimed in a lawsuit filed late last week, Google was also responsible for leading her onto the highway in the first place.

    "As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Google's careless, reckless, and negligent providing of unsafe directions, Plaintiff Lauren Rosenberg was led onto a dangerous highway, and was thereby stricken by a motor vehicle," the lawsuit said.

    When accessed from a computer, Google Maps displays a warning next to the walking directions to Prospector Avenue from Daly Street.

    "Use caution — This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths," the warning reads.

    However it is not clear if the warning is displayed to users who access the directions from a BlackBerry.

    The warning does not appear on an iPhone, reported the Search Engine Land blog.

    Google Australia had no comment on the case."

    Source

    "The case, Rosenberg v. Harwood, was filed in Utah, in the US District Court’s Central Division (Gary Price of ResourceShelf tipped us to it today). Harwood is Patrick Harwood, the person who actually hit Rosenberg, according to the suit. Both Harwood and Google are being sued in the same case, for damages “in excess of $100,000.”

    Original Source (Wall of text and some pics)


    Now that's pure gold, being America I wonder if she'll win or at least settle. Common would probably dictate that you use it as a "guide" not a "be all and end all", but as experience shows common sense really doesn't apply to everyone.

    I wonder what's next, "Google didn't tell me there would be a kids on the road, it's their fault I killed them"
    What does Google Australia have anything to do with this? Google US, yes. Australia, no.

  2. #2
    Manic's Maniacal Machine Reputation: 32
    Testeagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    onmypc@work.com
    Posts
    1,951
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firesnowball View Post
    What does Google Australia have anything to do with this? Google US, yes. Australia, no.
    Well the source it's from an Australian website so I would assume they just asked their local branch of Google.
    How Twilight should have ended:

    "Your opinion is like an asshole, I don't need to hear it"
    "The problem with non conformists is they’re all the same."
    Failentines: When Romance Goes Wrong
    www.testeagle.wordpress.com (WoW Blog)

  3. #3
    $$$
    Guest

    Default

    Unless the driver is drunk or homicidal, and unless you are suicidal or mentally ******ed, I really don't see how you can get hit by a car walking on the side of the road...

  4. #4
    Phantom's Freak Reputation: 107
    Espio0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Greengate
    Posts
    2,519
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    but......but.....bu-


    ah screw it, if you are this ****ing stupid, you ****ing deserve to be hit and killed by a car.

    why am i even surprised that this case hasnt been dismissed yet?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •