Victim Of Domestic Abuse Sues GPS Company For Helping Her Assailant

from the it's-the-tool dept

Michael Scott points us to the news of a new lawsuit that hopefully doesn't get very far, but which does highlight the frequency with which third parties are sued these days, not because they have any actual liability, but because they have money. In this case, a woman is suing a GPS vehicle tracking service, Foxtrax Vehicle Tracking, because her domestic partner used the service to figure out where she was and to attack her. It sounds as though the guy put the tracking device on the woman's car in order to stalk her. It's difficult to think that anyone could find the company liable here for the actions of the guy. I'm sure it's upsetting that the guy was able to track her, and she has every right to press all sorts of charges against the guy. But the GPS tracking company was merely the technology provider.

However, this is yet another example of what I've called "Steve Dallas lawsuits," after a Bloom County cartoon strip, I remembered from decades ago, where the character Steve Dallas (a lawyer, who gets beaten up by Sean Penn when he tried to take his photograph -- some things never change), explains why after going through all the options on who to sue, he chooses to sue the camera manufacturer, the made-up Nikolta, because it's "a major corporation with gobs of liquid cash...."

Filed Under: domestic abuse, gps, liability, third party liability
Companies: foxtrax vehicle tracking


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    lux (profile), 3 May 2010 @ 4:53pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ethics is FUN!

    Than why are you telling Dark Helmet he's wrong on the island/rape senario?

    This is a very good question, and I often struggle with this piece of Spinoza's philosophy as well. If nothing is good or bad, then who cares? Right? This gets us into Nietzsche's will to power argument. Basically, we can believe that everything means nothing (nihilism), and either 1) say screw it, and go out and loot and murder without regret (negative) or 2) take power into our own hands, and make life the way we want to, since we can do anything we want (positive). Really these are two very extremes, but stem from the same notion explained in nihilism.

    I am not saying that since everything is neither good or bad, we shouldn't care. We absolutely should care. Spinoza was ALL FOR locking up criminals, even though his philosophy basically said none of this matters!!

    I'll say this: if humans were not around, we wouldn't be having this conversation, and nothing (to us!) would matter all all. However, we are here, we are alive, and you better be damned sure that things matter to be, even when (in all reality) they will not matter in a thousand years. It really is all relative.

    Therefore, although it neither right or wrong for the woman to get attacked on the desert island, humanity is born with consciousness, and therefore the inherent notion of personal rights, which regardless of whether they are right or wrong, EXIST!

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.