YouTube, Meta, and Reddit are at the center of a lawsuit from a woman who wrecked a Turo rental car and went viral for it.
The woman, who’s listed as “G.P.” in her suit, was caught on dash cam texting with both hands off the wheel while driving. In the video–which was posted online by the vehicle’s owner, racked up millions of views across social media, and ended up on news outlets like Inside Edition and the New York Post–she appears to look down at the phone for long periods of time, only glancing up at the road occasionally.
G.P., who’s 37 and a nurse, claims this is because the video was edited to be “maximally humiliating,” and that in actuality, she had made “a split-second decision to glance at her phone to send a quick message about the [vehicle’s] return time,” per the suit.
Subscribe for daily Tubefilter Top Stories
While she was looking at the phone, the car drifted off the road, smashed into a mailbox, and ended up in a ditch.
The car’s owner, Jose Hernandez Arevalo, posted the footage of G.P. on Facebook because she told him another car had run her off the road, causing the accident. Then the dash cam revealed what actually happened.
G.P.’s suit explains this discrepancy away as “a combination of shock, disorientation, and a previous traumatic automobile accident from months earlier (which her mind briefly triggered).”
“Ms. G.P. formed the mistaken belief that perhaps another vehicle had forced her off the road,” the suit says.
G.P.’s complaint–reported by Law360–centers on her claim that Arevalo didn’t notify her of the dash cam or get her permission to record her (which is required by Turo’s TOS), and also that the footage showed her work badge and full name.
“Rather than handling the matter as a straightforward dispute between two adults–through Turo’s claims process, through insurance channels, or even through direct conversation with Ms. G.P. (who by then may have realized her mistake)–Arevalo made a deliberate, calculated decision to punish Ms. G.P.,” the suit claims.
Inside Edition and another media outlet, Atlanta Black Star, are also named as defendants.
“Millions of strangers worldwide saw Ms. G.P.’s face, heard her panicked voice, learned her identity, and were presented with a false and damaging narrative that she had lied and was reckless,” the suit says. “The consequences for Ms. G.P. have been profound and ongoing: severe emotional trauma, professional damage, public humiliation, social isolation, loss of her fundamental sense of safety and privacy, and the permanent commodification of her image and personal moment of vulnerability.”
The suit asks a judge to issue a court order that will force YouTube, Meta, Reddit, and news outlets to remove video of G.P. from their websites. It also seeks monetary damages from Arevalo, and cites violations of the Washington Privacy Act, the federal wiretapping law, misappropriation of her name and likeness, outrage, and defamation.
So…how likely is it that G.P. will get a judgement against YouTube, Meta, and Reddit? From where we’re standing, not very. These platforms, as you probably know, are protected by Section 230, aka the Safe Harbor law–meaning they can’t be held legally liable for content posted by users.
It’s worth noting G.P. doesn’t appear to be seeking a punitive judgment against the platforms, just wants them to pull down images of her. But even if she cites copyright laws, that could still be tricky, because in the U.S., you’re generally allowed to film people in public, as there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy. The fact that G.P. was in a car might help her case; state laws on whether cars count as public or private places vary.
What this case really speaks to, though, is the growing prevalence of filming strangers. Should G.P. have been texting and driving? No. Her behavior wasn’t legal, and the video footage Arevalo got might ensure she faces consequences for the damage to his car. However, her situation is the situation of many other people: a bad moment caught on film and preserved on the internet forever. Now that everyone has a phone in their hand and a rolodex of social media apps one tap away, we see viral videos of people’s mental health breakdowns weekly, and they’re often swiftly turned to meme fodder, then churned into the reaction content creator space so people can make 15-minute videos about it.
Sometimes, like in the case of Alex Pretti, public filming is absolutely beneficial and necessary. But where do we draw the line between filming for public good and filming for public humiliation?
