[sebastialonso]

IMO this is an inconsistent approach of placing responsability. What about regular people who start viral challenges that might get people killed? Should they also be held responsible? If the answer is no (in the real world, the answer is no), then why should Snapchat should be held accountable?

I cannot help the feel that this "social incentive" argument is the adult cousin of "but everyone's doing it, mom!".

[varsketiz]

I'm not so sure the real world answer is "no". What are you basing it on? Why are organisations that promote dangerous activities (e.g. paragliding, cycling challenges) asking me to sign liability waivers? I think this is evidence against your claim in the real world.

[magikaram]

I believe the comparison to "viral challenges" is in relation to the "Tide Pod Challenge" as it was started by people of the general public - not an organization.

[varsketiz]

I'm saying organisations are making me sign liability waivers when they knowingly promote something dangerous. I wouldn't be surprised if someone sued an individual who promoted dangerous stuff and did not absolve self from liability, be it via virtual challenge or other means.