dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
275
share rss forum feed


Bamafan2277

join:2008-09-20
Jeffersonville, IN

Lawsuit anyone?

I smelll a lawsuit cooking against Sprint from this poor guy.


TriForce

join:2008-05-27
Chico, CA
It's criminal harassment. No doubt Sprint should pay the man for the psychological and probably physical abuse he sustained.


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2
reply to Bamafan2277
Lawsuit will be tough without knowing what the problem is.
It could be Sprint, it could be the phone manufacturer, it could be North Las Vegas 911's data, it could be the dispatch vendor's software. Or it could be some weird combination of 2 or more of those.
If you cannot find what causes the problem, then you have no basis for a lawsuit against Sprint.

ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA
said by marigolds:

Lawsuit will be tough without knowing what the problem is.
It could be Sprint, it could be the phone manufacturer, it could be North Las Vegas 911's data, it could be the dispatch vendor's software. Or it could be some weird combination of 2 or more of those.
If you cannot find what causes the problem, then you have no basis for a lawsuit against Sprint.

Bullshit, that's not how supreme courts work! The lawsuit is totally doable, and getting the data of who's at fault is called Discovery. I'm surprised the article mentions nothing about a lawsuit; he can totally sue Sprint and probably all the other parties involved (and the process of discovery will reveal what the exact problem is and who is actually at fault). And I also smell like he can even use the device of Injunction, to have the court prevent these kinds of things from happening in the future.

Seriously, he lives in Vegas, and can't find a lawyer for these things? Don't you get their cards stuffed in your face as you walk by the strip?


PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD
reply to marigolds
Either way, someone is certainly going to eat litigation on this one.


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2
reply to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:

said by marigolds:

Lawsuit will be tough without knowing what the problem is.
It could be Sprint, it could be the phone manufacturer, it could be North Las Vegas 911's data, it could be the dispatch vendor's software. Or it could be some weird combination of 2 or more of those.
If you cannot find what causes the problem, then you have no basis for a lawsuit against Sprint.

Bullshit, that's not how supreme courts work! The lawsuit is totally doable, and getting the data of who's at fault is called Discovery. I'm surprised the article mentions nothing about a lawsuit; he can totally sue Sprint and probably all the other parties involved (and the process of discovery will reveal what the exact problem is and who is actually at fault). And I also smell like he can even use the device of Injunction, to have the court prevent these kinds of things from happening in the future.

Seriously, he lives in Vegas, and can't find a lawyer for these things? Don't you get their cards stuffed in your face as you walk by the strip?

Well, that is if you go with the belief that sprint and North Las Vegas 911 know what the problem is and are not fixing it.
If they don't know what the problem is, then discovery is not going to do you any good whatsoever.

There is zero chance that the court is going to issue an injunction that shuts down 911. None whatsoever.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to PapaMidnight
This does not need to go to court. The guy could very well not decide to press charges against Sprint and just be happy that the whole thing is over and accept whatever compensation Sprint might offer him for his trouble if Sprint determines that their network/phones really were at fault.

ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA
reply to marigolds
At the very least, the court can easily approve an injunction on Sprint offering their find-your-lost-phone service for any users in North Las Vegas area.

Also, it is entirely conceivable and reasonable to also move for an injunction that would prohibit the address in question from being served as the GPS address for 911 calls.

Also, how could Sprint not know what's going on? The code is deterministic, the people were there. If they can't figure out what's going on, it's purely because they're too lazy and don't care about this problem. So, sue them, then they'll talk.

ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA
reply to InvalidError
Yeah, right! Companies voluntarily admitting to their mistakes and providing reasonable compensation! Especially the telecoms!

LOL, a good one!


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2
reply to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:

At the very least, the court can easily approve an injunction on Sprint offering their find-your-lost-phone service for any users in North Las Vegas area.

Also, it is entirely conceivable and reasonable to also move for an injunction that would prohibit the address in question from being served as the GPS address for 911 calls.

Also, how could Sprint not know what's going on? The code is deterministic, the people were there. If they can't figure out what's going on, it's purely because they're too lazy and don't care about this problem. So, sue them, then they'll talk.

It is not Sprint offering the service. It is third party groups using a combination of Sprint and 911 geolocation.

I suppose if the owner wanted to agree that he would receive no police services that the 2nd injunction could happen. I doubt he wants that though, since then he would not be able to get the police to his house when someone shows up at the door demanding their lost phone that their third party app says is there.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher

ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA
What prohibits him from suing said third parties, or the app stores through which such apps are distributed? Besides, if all of these are Sprint users, it more sounds like it's an issue with some kind of service that Sprint offers directly.

Also, you're being very naive about the ways under which the location can be gathered during a 911 call. Nothing would preclude him from receiving police help if the above injunction of his address being GPS-blacklisted implemented at the 911 level.


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2
said by ConstantineM:

What prohibits him from suing said third parties, or the app stores through which such apps are distributed? Besides, if all of these are Sprint users, it more sounds like it's an issue with some kind of service that Sprint offers directly.

Also, you're being very naive about the ways under which the location can be gathered during a 911 call. Nothing would preclude him from receiving police help if the above injunction of his address being GPS-blacklisted implemented at the 911 level.

They could easily go after the third party apps. The problem is the sheer number of such apps. It would be a game of whack-a-mole.

This is probably not only Sprint users affected. It is just only Sprint users showing up because of sheer numbers. Sprint, T-Mobile, Clear, and a handful of others tend to exhibit the same issues because of the tower networks and common handsets that they use. We have experienced this with text message delays for emergency alerts. But the issues always show up on Sprint first because of sheer numbers.

Odds are the issue is with tower triangulation and how it interacts with the geolocation API on certain phones when going through certain networks. Eliminate those phones or change those towers and you might solve it. Eliminating the geolocation API would break a wide swath of apps besides the tracker apps, but it would be the only real way to stop the tracker apps.

I work professionally with 911 GIS data. If an address is blacklisted from the system, that means that there is no police response to that location. This is -extremely- rare. The equivalent happens occasionally with VOIP numbers (which is the company failing to enroll at address after they switch to VoIP), and it does translate into no police response to the location of that number. Of course, you can give them the physical address over the phone instead, if you are able to do that.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher

jc100

join:2002-04-10
reply to Bamafan2277
I hope he:

A) Files a complaint against the Las Vegas Police. I'd be filing a violation of civil rights complaint on the two incidences where he was forced out of his home and searched wrongfully.

B) I'd be procuring a lawyer and finding who is at fault. The mental anguish, reduction in quality of life, and sheer hell the man has endured is astounding.

C) If he can pinpoint the exact problem, be it Sprint, App Maker, Police, etc, he's in for a nice pay day.