|
|
|
|
|
by communtator
997 days ago
|
|
If the facts as presented are indeed true, this suit seems to hinge on the question of whether entities publishing information intended for use have any liability at all? Like if you say “here’s information you can use for X” and then someone is harmed by using that information for X, do you (well, do publishers) have any responsibility ever? Because if they do, and the facts are correct, you’d think that in this case they should. But maybe they just… never have any liability at all? And can make boatloads of cash without worrying. |
|
Can anyone try to give directions without liability for road conditions?
Should A be responsible for putting signs on a dangerous bridge that A does not own or operate?
Is this a reasonable expectation of a free maps service with a disclaimer?