Elliott C. Back: Technology FTW!

Google Maps [Could Have] Killed James Kim

Posted in Google, Google Maps, Holiday, Law, News by Elliott Back on December 7th, 2006.

james-kim.jpgJames Kim, missing with his family in Oregon, has been found dead. In a heroic effort to find help for his family, he set out on foot and died from weather and the elements after an unsuccessful rescue attempt.

The route the Kim family took was allegedly from Google Maps. It took them down Bear Camp Road (BLM-34-8-36), a logging road that Wired describes as “not suitable for most vehicles and is CLOSED for all traffic during the winter. The road is not maintained, has no dividing line for oncoming traffic, is littered with potholes, and is impenetrable during the winter due to snow.”

kim-route

Mathew Ingram suggests we don’t blame Google, but I think that’s exactly what we should do. The Google Maps terms of service say that Google Maps is intended for planning trips:

Map information provided through Google is intended for planning purposes only. You may find that construction projects, traffic conditions or other events may cause road conditions to differ from the map results.

What it fails to mention is that road conditions may differ to the point of putting yourself in mortal danger. If Google Maps gave me a route from NYC to Toronto that involved driving off the Niagara Falls, would I or Google be to blame for my death? A more subtle example–If Google Maps gave me a route from NYC to Toronto that involved driving across dangerous terrain, an off road shortcut, would Google be in any way responsible for injury I sustained by taking that less optimal route? Legally, I think so.

Viewing 18 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    "If Google Maps gave me a route from NYC to Toronto that involved driving off the Niagara Falls, would I or Google be to blame for my death?"

    You would be to blame. It's this little thing called common sense and personal responsibility. Yes, it is sad that this happened, but it is absurd to blame Google Maps for this.
    • ^
    • v
    Another example is say someone uses Google Maps' satellite imagery to scope out the physical security of my property and rob me, then is Google responsible in part for the crime itself?
    • ^
    • v
    Not that I see why this matters, but for the sake of accuracy, this is from the Oregon State Police “flash” website in regards to what map they were using:

    “Clarification: Wilsonville Chamber of Commerce – information provided earlier of a tip that a person at the chamber of commerce building provided a map and recommended travel routes has been determined to not be credible. Interviews with Kati Kim revealed they chose this route after looking at a State of Oregon map.”
    • ^
    • v
    Elliott, I think that someone using Google Maps to scope out your house for a robbery still can't be blamed on Google. They are using data that is already in the public sector, but have just made it more easily accessible for the masses.
    • ^
    • v
    Elliott, your headline seems irresponsible to me. I think it's wrong on a couple of levels--first of all there is no actual evidence that the Kim family even used Google Maps to plan their route. Actually as Dominic pointed out in an earlier comment Kati Kim herself says they "chose this route after looking at a State of Oregon map.” So how is Google Maps responsible? Following that reasoning you may as well hold god legally responsible for sending down snow in the first place.

    And I'm sorry if this comes off rude but if you chose to drive off the Niagara Falls the responsibility for that would be entirely yours. No map is responsible for someone not having enough sense to drive a vehicle into a waterfall.
    • ^
    • v
    It's like the 2006 version of 'Video Killed the Radio Star'
    • ^
    • v
    "Map information provided through Google is intended for planning purposes only. You may find that construction projects, traffic conditions or other events may cause road conditions to differ from the map results."

    It says right there, other events (such as bad weather) may cause roads to be different from what is on the Google Maps screen. It's in your own post.
    • ^
    • v
    Google would be blamed for giving the information used to scope out property that was robbed. At least that how it should be...
    • ^
    • v
    DOT should have posted signs.

    Google is not accountable -- and this wasn't the Kims' fault. Finally, this was not a blind accident -- the conditions they encountered were predictable to someone.

    The Niagara Falls analogy is appropriate -- it isn't Google's fault if they give you bad information in entirely good faith; the people who use the map should act prudently; OTOH, if there is a road that ends without warning on a steep precipice above Niagara Falls, which you discover only as you are shooting off the edge of the road, and that end-of-road wasn't at that moment caused by an act of nature (like an earthquake or something), then in fact the person/s responsible for that road have indeed made a mistake. Prudent people would not be able to avoid falling into the Falls if there were no warning signs.

    Likewise, the Kims were well prepared; they acted prudently; they used some maps that were published; the road itself exists.

    My question is this: why weren't there warning signs posted on the road? Since the road is not maintained in the winter, WHY wasn't there a sign -- on the road -- saying so? By all reports, the Kims tried to turn around when they realized the road conditions were dangerous -- by then, it was too late.

    Most people would have done exactly the same thing that the Kims did. Theirs was an entirely predictable problem -- unfortunately, they did not have that information.

    Another analogy -- throughout Nevada, along the roads when one is driving through the desert, there are many signs which warn travelers of (1) the distances between exits (where there are shelter, fueling, and emergency car repair sites), and (2) the dangers (overheating engines, e.g.) which can occur on the desert roads, which are unique to those roads.

    The Kims were traveling along public roads. Communities have an obligation to provide information about unique dangers -- such as the possibility that roads are not maintained in winter and may be impassable.

    I am so sad for all the family and friends of James Kim -- what a great loss.

    And tinged with that sadness, frankly, I feel anger -- my stomach turns with anger and grief to think that someone else's carelessness may have brought about his death. I know that the consequences of this oversight were doubtless unintentional, and I feel sad for the DOT workers, too, as well as the many truly heroic volunteers who worked so hard to find and save the Kims -- still, engineers are trained to be very careful about considering possible consequences, especially where safety is involved. This was doubtless an unintended consequence, but that does not mean we should ignore the evidence of error: someone decided not to maintain the roads in winter, and a corollary discussion had to be about signage and the need to post warnings. Something went wrong. What was it? It's too late to save James Kim -- but perhaps DOT can install appropriate signage to prevent another foreseeable tragedy like this.
    • ^
    • v
    For example, here are excerpts from another website:
    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/20...

    John Rachor's hunch turned out to be right.

    "When I heard the family was lost, immediately I had a pretty good idea where they were,'' Rachor, a helicopter pilot for 10 years, said Wednesday. "It's real easy to take a wrong turn where they did. A lot of people make that mistake.''
    ...
    The logging road could easily pass for the main route where it splits off from Bear Camp Road, he said.

    "It's a major road because they did a lot of logging -- it is wider than the correct road," he said. "It has a gate, but the gate has been open all winter.''
    • ^
    • v
    Oh, here's more news. So sad!
    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/20...

    The remote logging road that James Kim and his family drove down before getting stranded deep in the Rogue River Canyon is normally blocked by a locked metal gate, but it was open the night they got lost because a vandal had cut the lock, authorities said Friday.
    ...
    An investigation is under way to find out who cut the lock.
    • ^
    • v
    When did Google become the next Al Gore? Just as Al didn't invent the Internet, Google didn't invent mapping -- let alone the fact that they purchased all the data anyway. Bear Camp Road is even on my AAA map (O6 if you must check).

    Red herring by the bucketful.
    • ^
    • v
    I have driven Bear Camp road many times myself and I know very well the exact fork in the road where the Kim's accidentally took the wrong fork. The sign at that fork is very small and VERY INADEQUATE! Also, the wrong fork actually looks more like the main road than the main road itself! It is a very dangerous intersection for that exact reason. There is also a possibility that snow on the face of the inadequately small sign may have obscured it.

    I hope this message finds its way to the right authorities who will fix this particular intersection, but I also believe that large warning signs should be posted at both ends of Bear Camp road at low elevation where snow will not obscure them. The signs should indicate mortal danger for unfamiliar travelers and life threatening hazards for any breakdowns, flat tires or wrong turns, and the possibility that snow could trap them on the road BEFORE THEY COULD ESCAPE AT EITHER END!

    Perhaps the road should just be closed for the winter on Nov 15 or so.

    SURVIVAL TIPS FOR BEAR CAMP ROAD:

    STAY OFF BEAR CAMP ROAD IF SNOW IS EVEN A REMOTE POSSIBILITY!

    Start with a full tank of gas and a good spare tire. Realize that cell phones do not work in this remote wilderness area.

    TELL SOMEONE YOU WILL BE TRAVELING THIS ROAD AND WHEN YOU EXPECT TO START AND WHEN YOU WILL BE BACK IN CELL PHONE CONTACT AT THE OTHER END (approx 3 hours)

    Bear Camp is very narrow, but it is a PAVED ROAD. If you find yourself on a dirt road YOU ARE ALREADY IN TROUBLE! STAY ON THE PAVED ROAD whether driving or walking!

    CHECK YOUR ODOMETER when you start onto Bear Camp. Keep track of your distance. End to end, Bear Camp is approx 38 miles long. If you were exactly at the 19 mile point and had to walk out in either direction, you could walk it in 6 to 8 hours IF YOU STAY ON THE ROAD! Which way should you walk? DOWNHILL

    It's a lot easier for rescuers to track and find a person or a vehicle if they are on a road where they can be seen from the air.
    • ^
    • v
    Someone died. This whole event is evidence of one thing only: the internet provides a medium in which people can be unbelievably cold-hearted and focused solely on frivolous theories and games because they are aware of facts but unaware of the human experience of events.
    • ^
    • v
    Quite a valid point. If someone used that information, and the result was that they died from it, I think Google should be as responsible for the death. It's a very plain case of product liability.

    If a website claims to provide information, and it turns out to be faulty, than they should be held fully liable for any losses that result from your reliance on that data. Any product in the physical world has the same degree of liability, the Internet should not be exempt.
    • ^
    • v
    Did he die because he used Google's map, or because he chose to take "the road less traveled" ? Did he die because he chose to leave the car and look for help or because it was cold out?

    The FACT is that is was HIS CHOICE to venture out into the bitter cold, without being properly prepared, with no way to contact his family or help. That is just plain stupid.

    The simple idea that Google could in any way be liable for his death is ubsurd, and just goes to show that in today's society, it really doesn't matter who is rightfully logically to blame, but instead who, in the chain of possible PAYORS has the deepest pockets and will most likely PAY to make it go away.

    And not that I am a religious person at all, but who is to say the the guy isn't smiling down on his family from above, wishing they had also died?

    Is DEATH such a bad thing?
    • ^
    • v
    Mr. Kim's death is a very sad thing. But having said that, I think it was very irresponsible for the family to be driving AT NIGHT, IN AN UNFAMILIAR AREA, IN BAD WEATHER. They made the decision to keep driving and driving and driving, when the road was getting worse and worse and worse, for what has been reported as at least 20 miles toward the coast once off the main highway. They should have never been on Bear Camp Road to begin with. What would have been wrong with deciding, "Hey, this road is really bad -- maybe we should just be late to our destination and go back." They were unprepared for driving in these type of conditions. There were news reports of many signs that were passed stating that heavy snow drifts were possible on the road. And as far as the gate being open, they were in over their heads before they even got to the gate. So as far as Google being responsible for providing supposedly bad information, people need to wake up and take responsibility. Just because some map tells you to take a road, a person needs to use their own eyes to see what type of driving conditions are outside and use common sense. A very sad ending, but Google or vandals cannot be blamed for the Kims' lack of common sense.
    • ^
    • v
    James Kim's death could have been avoided if Google had done one thing. Let people know that they are incorect. But when you ask Serbey Brin of 1984 Latham St. #29. Mountain View CA 94040 dob 8/21/73 he tells you that he will not correct his site. This is wrong.
 

Trackbacks

(Trackback URL)

close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus