Article 28251 of sci.geo.satellite-nav: Path: matra.meer.net!news.neumedia.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!ausnews.austin.ibm.com!mcinnis From: mcinnis@austin.ibm.com (McInnis) Newsgroups: sci.geo.satellite-nav Subject: New hidden garmin45 feature?? Date: 21 Nov 1996 17:26:22 GMT Organization: IBM Austin Lines: 41 Distribution: world Message-ID: <5723bu$12se@ausnews.austin.ibm.com> References: <3281BBB6.4940@ekbot.umu.se> <01bbd0dc$7290dee0$661137cf@artt1.nobeltec.com> <328E2E6C.4972@cris.com> <56mhjk$5j8@harpo.cs.ubc.ca> <328EF27A.F3@cris.com> Reply-To: mcinnis@austin.ibm.com NNTP-Posting-Host: babe01.austin.ibm.com Originator: mcinnis@babe01.austin.ibm.com Jean-Louis Longueville wrote: ... > This question has been debated here before, and I think the real answer > is that Garmin would need liability insurance with a very high premium > if the Garmin 45 were usable for aviation; if a plane crash could be > traced to a faulty GPS receiver then they could be liable for damages. > > Producing a special "aviation" version at a higher price allows them to > (a) limit the number of cases in which they might be liable for damages > (b) use the surcharge on the aviation version to pay the insurance > premium. >... Just wait until someone is flying a plane and looses electrical power and aviation instruments and can't use the "marine" GPS unit he "just happens" to be carrying to figure out where they are because of the speed limit. Then let this plane crash killing someone beacause they can't find an airport in the fog, overcast, whatever. For that matter, imagine someone who crashed a plane for other reasons who is looking for a way to blame the crash on someone else. Imagine how the lawyer for the plaintiff will state his case. He'll claim the instrument was sabotaged in order to make a big profit on aviation units. He'll claim that the plaintiff didn't have the GPS as an aircraft navigation unit, but that it should have been "sabotaged" maliciously. He'll claim that with a working GPS, even if it wasn't accurate at "high" speed, his client would have had a much better chance of finding a safe landing spot. He'll claim that his client obviously wasn't intending to misuse the GPS as an aircraft instrument, since it doesn't work in flight, etc... Imagine you're a lowlife but convincing lawyer trying to whip a jury into a frenzy over the "evil" GPS company. Imagine you're a sympathetic but technically unsophisticated juror looking for some "big" company with lots of money to help out this poor suffering person. -- Mickey McInnis - mcinnis@austin.ibm.com -- All opinions expressed are my own opinions, not my company's opinions.