5 ms·

This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. I think it's a great idea, but at 2.99 I don't think it's going to be profitable enough to take on the lawsuit ri

This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. I think it's a great idea, but at 2.99 I don't think it's going to be profitable enough to take on the lawsuit risk.

alexvr 13y ago
Yeah, I certainly hope that doesn't happen. I just wanted to make something that makes the world ever so slightly better for a few people. It's too bad if those are the consequences of making something with good intentions, ya know?
frogpelt 13y ago
EDIT: Let me preface by saying, the fact that a person could be sued for creating an app that creates a solution where few or none existed is both utterly ridiculous and highly likely. Which is why I think... ...There needs to some kind of legislation/regulation on lawsuits. Perhaps, the plaintiff must pay the legal fees for the defendant upfront, up to a maximum of 5% of the desired damages being sought. Example: If you want to sue for a $1 million, you have to pay up to $50K in legal fees for the defendant. If you win the case, the defendant's legal fees are tacked onto the damages that he must pay. If you lose the case, you lose all your money. I think this would discourage many lawsuits from happening. Only those with true merit would be pursued.
- dkrich 13y ago
  Maybe useful for some small-claims suits, but not so great for tort cases that have merit. If a negligent company continues to produce toys that hurt children, should the family have to pay 5% of the potential damages before getting a day in court? I don't think suits against game manufacturers like this necessitate any kind of legislation. Why? Simple. Like my lawyer told me when I was building my first app- "Sure you COULD get sued, but you don't have two nickels to rub together. No attorney would take a case against you." In business getting sued is a good thing. It means you're successful.
square1 13y ago
What basis do you have for this statement? 'Sounds like' and 'i don't think' are not very convincing. Any reliance on an app such as this is going to be at the risk of the user. This is a tool for assistance and is not in anyway a replacement for standard emergency protocol.
MrMeker 13y ago
What exactly would the author be sued about? I can't see anything obviously inviting a user to sue. EDIT: I think it would be a good idea to remove the language about fire alarms etc. and only mention alarm clocks and the like. It would be much harder to sue if the app didn't claim to respond to fire alarms.
- evan_ 13y ago
  If it doesn't work and someone is injured or killed.
  - dkrich 13y ago
    How exactly would you prove this? And even if you could, would suing the maker of a $2.99 game be worth your while?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- alexvr 13y ago
  Yes, I will consider removing the stuff about emergency protection unless I can make it super reliable.
  - tcheard 13y ago
    Or instead you could put a warning removing liability and stating that it is not a guaranteed protection and standard emergency protocols should still be performed. This is a helpful tool, not a be all end all guarantee of protection.

This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. I think it's a great idea, but at 2.99 I don't think it's going to be profitable enough to take on the lawsuit risk.

alexvr 13y ago

Yeah, I certainly hope that doesn't happen. I just wanted to make something that makes the world ever so slightly better for a few people. It's too bad if those are the consequences of making something with good intentions, ya know?

frogpelt 13y ago

EDIT: Let me preface by saying, the fact that a person could be sued for creating an app that creates a solution where few or none existed is both utterly ridiculous and highly likely. Which is why I think... ...There needs to some kind of legislation/regulation on lawsuits. Perhaps, the plaintiff must pay the legal fees for the defendant upfront, up to a maximum of 5% of the desired damages being sought. Example: If you want to sue for a $1 million, you have to pay up to $50K in legal fees for the defendant. If you win the case, the defendant's legal fees are tacked onto the damages that he must pay. If you lose the case, you lose all your money. I think this would discourage many lawsuits from happening. Only those with true merit would be pursued.

dkrich 13y ago
Maybe useful for some small-claims suits, but not so great for tort cases that have merit. If a negligent company continues to produce toys that hurt children, should the family have to pay 5% of the potential damages before getting a day in court? I don't think suits against game manufacturers like this necessitate any kind of legislation. Why? Simple. Like my lawyer told me when I was building my first app- "Sure you COULD get sued, but you don't have two nickels to rub together. No attorney would take a case against you." In business getting sued is a good thing. It means you're successful.

square1 13y ago

What basis do you have for this statement? 'Sounds like' and 'i don't think' are not very convincing. Any reliance on an app such as this is going to be at the risk of the user. This is a tool for assistance and is not in anyway a replacement for standard emergency protocol.

MrMeker 13y ago

What exactly would the author be sued about? I can't see anything obviously inviting a user to sue. EDIT: I think it would be a good idea to remove the language about fire alarms etc. and only mention alarm clocks and the like. It would be much harder to sue if the app didn't claim to respond to fire alarms.

evan_ 13y ago
If it doesn't work and someone is injured or killed.
- dkrich 13y ago
  How exactly would you prove this? And even if you could, would suing the maker of a $2.99 game be worth your while?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
alexvr 13y ago
Yes, I will consider removing the stuff about emergency protection unless I can make it super reliable.
- tcheard 13y ago
  Or instead you could put a warning removing liability and stating that it is not a guaranteed protection and standard emergency protocols should still be performed. This is a helpful tool, not a be all end all guarantee of protection.