Snap can be sued for a fatal traffic accident
Snap can be sued for a fatal traffic accident

According to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Snap may be sued over Snapchat's application speed filter. While the social network is protected by public laws, the app will encourage reckless driving.

The court looked at a case that closed in 2020 and found that the company may be implicitly responsible for this behavior, even though users used filters to indicate higher vehicle speeds.

The case was brought up after a fatal accident when a Snapchatter used a filter in 2017 while driving at 190 kilometers per hour in hopes of gaining the attention and interest of his subscribers.

The accident resulted in the death of the driver and two passengers.

The parents of the two victims sued the company, claiming that the combination of obscure achievement systems and speed filters made users drive at dangerous speeds.

Parents stated that many teens believed they took a secret move at a speed of 160 kilometers per hour.

Snap responded that it provides tools for those without this power to post their own content, a process that is largely protected under Section 230 of the Communications Etiquette Act.

The court did not rule on Snap's liability, but the court found that the company was not protected under Article 230, which prohibits prosecution of user-posted websites and apps because it relates to content someone posted on Snapchat. It doesn't have to do anything, but it's related to the design of the app itself.

The court said: Snap should deal with it like any other company that manufactures products that harm consumers or could harm them, as Snap has indisputably designed the rewards system and speed filter and made these aspects available to users with these types of claims that manufacturers are obligated to exercise due diligence in Providing products that do not cause undue harm or the risk of harm to the public.

The company took legal action against the expected consequences if Snapchat was designed to encourage risky behavior.

Last year, the lower court came to a different conclusion, stating that Snapchat had warned users not to drive at high speeds, saying the lawsuit had attempted to hold Snap accountable for the unsafe behavior and statements related to it.

Speed ​​filters have a paradoxical history in court. Uber drivers and Snapchatters attempted to collide with each other at 160 kilometers per hour and filed separate lawsuits against the company in 2016.

In this case, the first instance court upheld the driver at first, but the Georgia Court of Appeals overturned the decision, saying that the Snapchat speed filter was not intended to boost the speed.

Previous Post Next Post