[GavinMcG]

For the record, encouraging reckless driving is likely a crime wherever reckless driving itself is a crime. I am not a lawyer but encouragement is typically a basis for liability as an accomplice.

Here's Texas, for example:

Sec. 7.02. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDUCT OF ANOTHER.

(a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if:

...

(2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense;

[gruez]

Well obviously they're not going to say "drive over the posted speed limit on public roads". "too fast too furious" with a "professional driver, closed course" disclaimer at the end should be enough. After all, there's nothing wrong with being fast and furious on a racing track ;)

[dragonwriter]

> Well obviously they're not going to say "drive over the posted speed limit on public roads". "too fast too furious" with a "professional driver, closed course" disclaimer at the end should be enough.

Whether or not such a disclaimer was sufficient evidence that they lacked the intent to encourage the crime (or whether the ass-covering was instead evidence that they knew they were encouraging crime and needed to deflect liability) would be a fact question if they were criminally charged with the crime of encouraging the crime of reckless driving.

OTOH, since they are being charged with a tort (civil wrong) and not that or any other crime, both the fact that such encouragement is a crime and fact questions relevant to Snap’s criminal liability for it are mostly irrelevant.

[sebastialonso]

I feel this is exactly why in America you have to write "content might be hot" is a recipient made evidently and exclusively for hot beverages.

[hollerith]

This is a civil suit, so criminal law is a peripheral issue. In particular, in a civil suit, most defendants found liable (i.e., most defendants who lose) have comitted no crime.

[GavinMcG]

Yeah, but the commenter had asked "Since when is encouraging reckless driving a crime?"

[hollerith]

A rhetorical question offered in support of the thesis sentence, "This is absurd," where "this" refers to a civil suit.

I pointed out that whether Snap, Inc, committed a crime has little bearing on whether the civil suit under discussion is absurd.