[talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-talk] Software goes on, brain goes off...
deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 1 01:02:21 BST 2010
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tim McNamara <paperless at timmcnamara.co.nz>
Date: 1 June 2010 09:52
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Software goes on, brain goes off...
To: Nakor <nakor.osm at gmail.com>
Cc: talk at openstreetmap.org
On 1 June 2010 09:23, Nakor <nakor.osm at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/31/2010 4:36 PM, John Smith wrote:
> Her lawyers claim Google is liable because it did not warn her
> that the route would not offer a safe place for a pedestrian to walk.
> Did Google add their notice after the fact?
> "Walking directions are in beta. Use caution – This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths."
Here's a case from NZ where something similar happened that didn't
lead to injury. Until this article was posted, Google Maps directed
people through Wellington's bus tunnel, a 1 way tunnel which barely
has enough width for buses to travel through.
At that incident Goolge's response was:
Google spokeswoman Annie Baxter said the walking directions search
function in Google Maps was still at an experimental phase.
"We clearly advise people to use caution as routes might be missing
footpaths or pedestrian-friendly paths."
This implies that they they're undertaking a responsibility to notify
people when routes are generated. I guess if the BlackBerry version
doesn't include the disclaimer, there's an argument to say that Google
didn't meet its (self-imposed?) duty of care to the consumers.
Still, even if they breached the duty of care, the injured woman will
still need to establish that the breach was a cause of her injury.
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Talk-au