Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday January 27 2017, @07:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the we-need-a-Snapchat-filter-filter dept.

A judge in the U.S. state of Georgia has dismissed a lawsuit against Snapchat Inc. (also known as Snap, Inc.) regarding its eponymous photo and video sharing app. The plaintiffs, who were injured in a two-car crash, claimed that the driver of the other car, in the words of CBS News,

[...] was trying to reach 100 mph on a highway south of Atlanta when her car hit theirs [...]

[...] while [she was] using a Snapchat filter that puts the rate at which a vehicle is traveling over an image.

The judge cited (Wikipedia link added by submitter)

[...] the immunity clause of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which says, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

As reported by WGCL-TV, a CBS affiliate in Atlanta, a motion filed by the company (PDF) asserted that the driver whose car collided with the plaintiffs' car "was not using the Snapchat application at the time of the collision" (quoted from the court filing, with emphasis removed).

Additional coverage:

Related stories:
The Company Formerly Known as Snapchat may be Worth $25 Billion
Goodbye Snapchat, Hello Snap Inc


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Friday January 27 2017, @09:45PM

    by edIII (791) on Friday January 27 2017, @09:45PM (#459723)

    That's not how I meant it. The driver is the impending Darwin Award, and yes, there was an innocent victim that got killed.

    Still, going after a company that made and supported technology the asshole was using is wrong. You go after the asshole, put them in jail, and then the victim's next of kin can sue the fuck out them civilly AND go after the insurance carrier for every single penny the insurance carrier promised on the policy.

    Considering that it should be well known and agreed how stupid the asshole was (The impending Darwin Award), I don't see how the insurance carrier is going to realistically defend themselves at all. This is the policy claim that should just be paid out, but insurance carriers always fight tooth and nail to limit payouts on policies. Otherwise they don't make the profit the greedy fucks at the top demand.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3