We have used all Google maps to find the best route to our desired location. What originally began as a resource for drivers has since expanded to directions suggestions for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers of public transport included. Of course, this solves a number of security impact, because the pedestrians and cyclists are more and more danger than motorists streets of the city while navigating. But when a pedestrian or cyclist on the following Google violated maps directions, they should sue the Internet search mega conglomerate may be? A Utah District Court recently ruled that Google not liable is, because it not obligation debt and the company the victim a valuable public service that is typically applied for all consumers.

Visit Eric Goldman blog for a great synthesis involved the legal problems in this decision. The Court confirms Google primarily to dismiss motion because the walking directions to all users were applicable, and was not personal advice, a special relationship between Google and the plaintiffs. The Court also ruled that although Google gave the directions, they provide no input such as interaction with traffic. "It is clear that Google was not needed, assuming that a user of the Google Maps service would cross the street without looking for cars," the Court wrote, "and unlikely, that missing negligence on the part of the user would be a violation when crossing the road."

This is not to say that pedestrian victims always blame not all the dangers of the street are taken into account. In fact Rosenberg also sued this aspect of the complaint not released the driver of the car, which they meet, and the Court. But the Court decided that the Google claim was too far-fetched, because Google can be expected, warn all possible dangers, just because they provide a service to the public. Rosenberg suggested that Google should warn all potential risks, wrote including "negligent driver, drunk drivers, dangerous animals, sidewalks or roads in dilapidated, there may be lack of lighting, and other risks and other risks which only during certain times of the day," the Court.

Goldman seems agree also comments with the Court logic here, but he that would the decision probably otherwise be paid, if they GPS providers that are treated in the General Service and work on more 1: 1-based. It will be interesting to see if we find additional violations against Google or certain GPS provider you see. So for the meantime always take extra precautions while navigating streets, i.e. all road signs, under an additional second to ensure that no cars come before crossing the street, and take all appropriate safety equipment to obey.

Photo credit: GJELblogger

View the original article here