• @FiskFisk33@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    10510 months ago

    That’s ridiculous, but I think the title makes it sound a lot more ridiculous than it actually is.

    [the lawsuit] also named several private property management companies allegedly responsible for the bridge and adjoining land.

    If he could just drive off a collapsed bridge without any warnings someone has clearly not taken their responsibility.

    If there’s a lack of signage and road blocks, and the map says the road is fine, I can see how one would make such an error.

    I don’t agree google maps should be held accountable here, but if this bridge has been collapsed for a decade, I can see why someone would want to at least pose the question.

    • sylver_dragon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6010 months ago

      I would agree, however if this statement from the article can be proven:

      The lawsuit adds that Google had previously been notified about the collapse and several attempts had been made for the route information to be updated.

      Then there might be an argument that Google was negligent in not updating it’s maps. I’d agree that it’s a weak argument and that the Terms of Service likely contains a clause like “you are responsible to watch out for road conditions”. But, if the bridge has been out for a decade and multiple attempts to update Google about the collapsed bridge had been made, that may rise to the level of negligence.

      • silvershrimp0
        link
        fedilink
        2010 months ago

        I encountered this issue too. An overpass near me was demolished but Google Maps was still showing it there. I submitted an edit and included a link to the state DOT’s website about the project that clearly stated the overpass would be permanently demolished and not replaced. My edit was rejected.

        • NaN
          link
          English
          1410 months ago

          Google’s editing algorithm is atrocious.

          I’m a local guide, although I haven’t really done much in ages. Still, one day not too long ago I was standing in a new business that wasn’t on maps yet. I added the business, photos, hours, even their phone number and it was immediately rejected.

          Sometimes you can get small changes approved but change more than one or two things and it’s immediately rejected too. Doesn’t help much with saying “road isn’t here” though.

          • digitalgadget
            link
            fedilink
            810 months ago

            I tried to report a restaurant as closed. I was looking forward to eating there while out of town. It was empty, had a big CLOSED sign in the window, and was surrounded by construction equipment and road barriers. I took pictures of all of this and they still rejected my edit.

            They did approve my addition of a river access in the middle of nowhere, though.

    • @offbyone@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      2010 months ago

      Keep in mind it’s not an all or nothing thing, they’ll assign percentages of fault. It’s also important that they name name basically anybody involved because the others will try to blame Google to shift fault off of themselves.

      Effectively you want to name everybody possible so that they all fight it out.

      • Big P
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2110 months ago

        If the bridge was no longer there why wasn’t there massive unmovable concrete barriers in the road?

    • @Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      I imagine Google maps gets it’s data mostly from municipal and regional open data sources which often have downloadable road information.

      If that’s the case no one in the city’s GIS department ever disconnected the road to show it was no longer connected, as they may never have been notified since people likely don’t ever think to notify the GIS guys of unplanned changes to road systems.

    • Mx Phibb
      link
      fedilink
      -110 months ago

      This is what I was thinking, suing Google sounds like a cash grab as there’s government agencies and possibly private land owners responsible for putting up barriers and signs warning the bridge is out. Google maps is useful, but you still have to use some sense rather than blindly following it, heck, I’ve run into cases where it can’t figure out how to get to a street (that actually happened yesterday).

      • NaN
        link
        English
        510 months ago

        Directing people onto a road that has had a collapsed bridge for a decade, despite numerous reports that the bridge is collapsed, does not leave them blameless.

        • Mx Phibb
          link
          fedilink
          310 months ago

          Why, why are they under any obligation to be accurate? I"ve used them since you had to print out the directions, they’ve told me to make illegal turns, go the wrong way down one way streets, use a road with a bridge out, use roads that don’t exist and more, and while annoying, I just rolled with it, because they never promised me anything more than that the directions were prolly accurate.

    • @Syldon@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -310 months ago

      I am with you 100%. Expecting Google to be responsible for road maintenance is a frivolous. Google will sue them for legal costs.

      • @LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 months ago

        Absolutely not. Google played a part in causing this death, it might have been a minor part, but it was a party in the death. The court will decide how much.

        This isn’t a frivolous claim, this is Google not being able to maintain their maps safely. Google needs to put more resources into map maintenance, and respond when people submit safety issues with their mapping data.