Strava strife

Given the interest in the legal case filed by the family of a cyclist who killed himself trying to regain his course record on Strava, based on the claim that Strava was as least partially responsible, this piece from RedKite Prayer seemed to me that this raise at least one interesting point:

Strava and inherent risks of chasing PR's 

Those “inherent risks,” however, were not assumed by 71-year-old Sutchi Hui, who was merely walking across the street in San Francisco in March, when he was struck by 29-year-old Chris Bucchere. Bucchere was allegedly “competing” on a Strava course known as “the Castro Bomb,” when he hit Hui, who died from his injuries four days later. Bucchere has been charged with vehicular manslaughter.

If the allegations in this case are proven – either in civil or criminal court – Bucchere is clearly responsible for Hui’s death.

Is Strava? Kang suggests that the company played a role in encouraging Bucchere’s behavior and is at least partially responsible. As lawyers and law professors are prone to do, she underscores her point with an interesting hypothetical.

“Imagine how people would react if someone were to do that with cars,” she said.

Good point, counselor. Imagine a website that encouraged you to cover a certain road or stretch of highway faster than the last guy. It wouldn’t take too long – maybe minutes – before someone violated the speed limit in order to earn the “title” of being the fastest on that road. Then, in order to protect that title, one would have to start by violating the law.

We might still have the assumption-of-risk issue if a driver was killed, but I would have to believe that there might be a consensus when it came to holding the website at least partially responsible if one of those “competitors” struck and killed a pedestrian or another driver.
Kang said that Flint’s parents’ primary goal is to prevent what happened to their son from happening to someone else.

No one has filed suit in the Hui case. If they do, it’s likely they will name Strava as one of the defendants in the case. They will most certainly argue that under its current configuration, the Strava competition model actively encourages a disregard for safety and the law. Whoever handles that case will most certainly look to the outcome of Flint v. Strava for guidance.

The full article is well worth reading at:
http://redkiteprayer.com/2012/06/the-explainer-whose-risk-is-it-anyway/