Apple, maker of the ever-popular iPhone, is being sued on allegations that its FaceTime app contributed to the highway death of a 5-year-old girl named Moriah Modisette. In Denton County, Texas, on Christmas Eve 2014, a man smashed into the Modisette family’s Toyota Camry as it stopped in traffic on southbound Interstate 35W. Police say that the driver was using the FaceTime application and never saw the brake lights ahead of him. In addition to the tragedy, father James, mother Bethany, and daughter Isabella all suffered non-fatal injuries during the crash two years ago.
The Modisette family now wants Apple to pay damages for the mishap. The family alleges the Cupertino, California-based technology company had a duty to warn motorists against using the app and that it could have used patented technology to prohibit drivers from utilizing the app.
I feel for the grieving family, of course, but this is, in no way, Apple’s fault. The only person responsible for the horrible death is the driver using Facetime, and possibly – although that’s probably quite a stretch – the person he was using FaceTime with, but that’s it.
Their lawyer is probably pushing them towards the deeper pockets. Might as well profit from the tragedy.
Less cynically, if Apple somehow prevented FaceTime on the move, this small class of accidents may not have happened.
But then, what if I’m a pasenger in a moving car, would I also be limited? I hate that some in-car GPS systems already do that.
So this might not be a solvable problem in the end anyway.
Edited 2017-01-03 22:16 UTC
You don’t need any technology to prevent you from doing something stupid. Yeah… On that one you are right.
There are actions and consequences, wich are a part of being an adult. I really do not like that world, were technology decides what is a bad move. I have a brain, and I would much like to use it. It’s kind of the same I feel about car GPS’s. They are nothing more than shit. I will find my own way, using my own logic and sence of direction. And no machine has to tell me what direction to take.
any form of distraction while driving is dangerous. It is not apple’s fault. It is the responsibility of the driver to be in control of the tonne of metal they are directing at high speeds. If they need to make/receive a call then they can pull over and take it.
This is just stupid…. No way it is Apple’s fault. They could mind as well sue the maker of that car, wich were smashed into their car. Or people suing colt or smith and wesson, if their weapons were involved in mass shooting. Or….. Well I can go on.
At the moment, companies have no disincentive not to patent every tiny ridiculous concept, because the worst that can happen is invalidation. They can’t be held liable for patenting tech which could save lives, and then extorting companies to implement it (think medical and other fields)
So.. If Apple loses, the consequences will be great for consumers. Either companies will implement safety mechanisms more rigorously (so they aren’t put at risk, which is good for safety), or they will avoid patenting safety mechanisms they don’t plan to implement which will allow their competition to implement it. Furthermore, it also introduces further potential risk to patent trolls.
The driver is an idiot, but we should be hoping that Apple loses here
Patent in question “Driver handheld computing device lock-out” (
https://www.google.com/patents/US8706143 ).
but… it wasn’t apple’s fault
The123king,
Of course not. It makes about as much sense as suing osnews for an accident I cause for being irresponsible and reading it while I’m driving.
But…
a) people don’t like taking responsibility for their own actions
b) this case is in the USA where we have a notoriously sue-happy culture that encourages litigation
c) apple’s got money.
Absolutely agree.
I can see the legal theory being that Apple was Negligent (if not Criminally Negligent) for not implementing a technology it knew would save lives. They’re certainly not saying that the one death was caused by Apple, but that Apple failed to do something it knew it could do (it had a patent about it after all) that could have saved a life.
On the plus side – if Apple loses, then companies will think twice before filing patents they don’t intend on implementing – especially if they are safety related. This is a good thing.
On the down side – it may discourage companies from investigating some of these safety aspects too out of fear that if their research became known that they may then be subject to such a suite if not implemented in their products.
So while I’d appreciate the added liability and reduced patents…I’m not really sure which way it should go. If I were the judge I would probably make a big deal of the patent being there in the final judgments, making it a requisite part of the case which should preclude the downside effect at least for the time being.
Blame placing aside, what kind of precedent would it set?
Should companies and patent trolls be allowed to sit on a patent that could save lives? Should they have a social or ethical responsibility to develop the thing?
What if a pharmaceutical company patents (or acquires a patent for) a drug that is actually effective, but chooses to develop and market an inferior drug (and block the better drug going to market) because it is more profitable for them?
————————
And the whole “it’s the driver’s fault” thing would be okay if the only person ever to suffer from the consequences of anything is themselves. Unfortunately, that is almost never the case, whether it’s driving unsafely or vaccine denial/faith healing.
Edited 2017-01-03 23:24 UTC
It already happens. Big Pharma are only interested in developing long term treatments for chronic non-fatal conditions. They have no real interest in curing any disease.
It already happens because it hasn’t been brought to court, as far as I know. Something like this could make it easier to set precedent.
Make phone users sign a waiver everytime the phone is sensing that it is moving as fast as walking speed for longer than 5 seconds.
But of course, in reality we would only get a few more paragraphs in the EULA.
There are two issues going on here.
The first, relating to the crash itself, is the driver using the phone. The only “cure” for this is that every person doing so is beaten with a clue stick until whoever is holding the clue stick bleeds.
The second, relating to the aftermath of the crash, is funding of injury recovery. Apple, unlike (presumably) the dickwit driver, actually has enough money to be worth “asking”. The only reasonable cure for this is what I believe happens in NZ – publicly funded accident compensation. Anything else is blaming the victim for being hit by someone with empty pockets.
Well…. To me, Apple are still not liable for what that driver did. Why would they? Are we talking about the auto maker of the drivers car, being liable too? Because they have not invented phone blocking signal’s, being applied to and around the drivers seat.
No… It’s the drivers fault, and if somehow the state would be a kind of middle man here. Paying whatever compensation a lawsuit would turn out in favor for the family that lost their child. And then taking the money from the drivers pocket, in return. They would get compensated. Blaming Apple is only showing how desperat the parents are. Shure I get their grief, it just does not suit them. Yeah… Every parent can resort to desperat meashures when they loose a child. This still does not suit them and the cause.
Then again… How would they cook all this up, being hit by such a tradegy? I bet there are some smart ass, and cold hearted lawyer, giving them false hope, cooking this shit up.
Edited 2017-01-04 08:30 UTC
gld59,
Well, in the US, we’re required to buy private insurance for these things in order to legally drive. Otherwise they’ll revoke your license^A(R)istration. I estimate I’ve paid $30,000 so far for required coverage and most of us are statistically unlikely to collect a dime from that pool we’re required to pay into. I believe NYS law requires coverage of $25-50k per victim up to $100k total per accident. But these limits don’t necessarily correspond to what anyone will owe if they go to court though.
Edit: “registration” was not a typo above, apparently osnews translates ampersand codes into unicode. Good to know:
& reg ; = ^A(R)
& trade ; = ^a"c
& amp ; = &
& quot ; = ”
http://www.rapidtables.com/web/html/html-codes.htm
Edited 2017-01-04 12:04 UTC
It’s terrible that someone died, whether girl or boy, 5 or 50 years of age. What’s worse is the family trying to profit monetarily from her death at the expense of justice. It’s no one’s fault but the asshole who hit her. Period. I don’t care if it’s Facetime, Hangouts, Verizon or AT&t. I’d gladly take the prick back behind the woodshed and shoot said individual myself if I were the parent, but this… this is worse than the poor girl’s death not because of who is being sued, but because of the damned cold-bloodedness of the family’s response.
Great, now they are going to limit the use of chainsaws while driving as well, since I can operate one of those while driving and they don’t have a label.
Common sense. Lawyers have destroyed the precedent for it. I hope this gets thrown out, as we really don’t need more laws. We need less laws and more thinking.
Don’t you know? Personal responsibility is dead, it’s alwlays someone else’s fault.
Does the state run any public awareness campaign about the dangers of using a mobile phone or device while driving? Is it even illegal? In the UK it’s illegal to use a hand-held phone, to send text messages or to have a video device within view of the driver and the government has run public advertising campaigns to tell people not to use these things when driving (though more texting and phoning than video). The idea of suing the manufacturers would be absurd here; it is the driver’s responsibility to make sure he/she is not distracted.
Public awareness and common sense are rapidly disappearing in this world
Yes, the state does do public awareness campaigns about the dangers of using a mobile device while driving. I’ve seen several messages on those dynamic-message signs telling people that texts can wait. It is illegal in Texas to use cell phones while driving in school zones; not anywhere else.
Edited 2017-01-05 19:38 UTC
There should be no case here. The driver was behaving recklessly, not the phone. Trying to force technology to be cellphone babysitters will go nowhere and solve nothing fast. Stupid people are going to do stupid things no matter what.
Cellphone use causes more deaths per year than drunk driving now, so as far as I’m concerned lawmakers could do the following:
Get caught using a phone (except hands-free calls) while driving, mandatory:
1st offense: $2500 fine, 1yr driving probation
2nd offense: $5000 fine, 1yr driving suspension, minimum 30days jail (can be served during weekends to prevent job loss)
3rd offense: $10000 fine, license revoked 10yr, minimum 180days jail
The 1st offense is probably enough to make most sensible people learn their lesson. The 2nd for those who have a harder time. The 3rd people get what they have coming.